I am so impressed with this ten-year-old Entrepreneur check her out
She has some innovative and creative ideas and It’s good to see so many young girls and women given opportunities in the workplace, however; with more opportunities comes more personal decisions to make. For instance, do I balance a career while raising a family or do I work solely at my career and have children later in life? According to NBC, both Apple and Facebook will begin to cover the cost of freezing their female employees eggs up to $20,000. This “benefit”, gives women an incentive to work in place of having children and it may seem generous and begin to trend with other companies, but is this a good idea? I mean, “would some woman see this as a sign that the company they work for thinks that working there, and pregnancy are incompatible?”Could this so called “benefit” be a disguised attack on women and families? I mean it sounds good, but is it really?
Let’s look at this more closely. There is a risk involved in later in life pregnancy, even with younger eggs. The same holds true if your eggs are young and your mate’s sperm is old. From a Catholic moral standpoint, I give you Dignitas Personae
Theoretically, freezing human eggs is not intrinsically evil, since one can conceive of some clinical settings in which a woman might benefit from such technique (say, for example, to evaluate some aspect of her fertility that is otherwise impossible to ascertain). That is why, in making its moral evaluation, DP focuses on the intention for freezing a human egg. If the purpose is for in vitro fertilization (IVF), then the procedure is morally tainted. In the words of DP, “In this regard it needs to be stated that cryopreservation of oocytes for the purpose of being used in artificial procreation is to be considered morally unacceptable.” (No. 20, emphasis in the original)
In addition, there are serious risks involved to the woman seeking to freeze her eggs: ovarian hyperstimulation and egg retrieval are dangerous―and at times even fatal. They can only be justified for extremely grave reasons. There is also the danger that women will be exploited for their eggs through financial incentives.
In a normal IVF procedure, typically three to four embryos (blastocysts) are inserted into the woman’s uterus; on average, only one implants. The other two or three are discarded by her body. There are times, however, when two, three, four or even more of the embryos implant. As the woman or couple only wanted one child, they are offered the choice to terminate the “excess” embryos. In order to make an informed choice, the embryos or fetuses in her womb are tested for genetic defects and for gender. She can then select to abort the ones that might be carrying some genetic defect or are the the ‘wrong’ gender.
To intentionally kill a human being ―no matter how early in development―is a grave moral evil. When this is done on the basis of the intentional selection of inheritable traits, this is called eugenics, and has serious consequences for all of society. In the words of DP, “From the ethical point of view, embryo reduction is an intentional selective abortion. It is in fact the deliberate and direct elimination of one or more innocent human beings in the initial phase of their existence and as such it always constitutes a grave moral disorder.” (DP No. 21, emphasis in the original)
Although our culture is changing the age of what is considered child bearing years? I’ve noticed that since I entered my fifth decade of life my patience has run thin, my energy is lower, and my desires have shifted. When my grandchild leaves after a visit, I am exhausted and when she sleeps over I usually don’t sleep much. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule, but I believe this is the natural cycle of life. I wonder are there any statistic on women who have saved their eggs and then felt the aging process and changed their minds about having children? Are there statistics on what may be the emotional affects from remorse and guilt of choosing a career over having children? And what then happens to their frozen eggs? It’s recommended to save at least 20 eggs, and statistics shows an increase of women freezing their eggs. Women are having “egg freezing parties”; that’s a lot of eggs.
Maybe, this seemingly wonderful optional benefit is not as beneficial as we may think. Could it be yet another disguised attack to potential families by appearing to increase them down the road when in reality decreasing them? I would rather see companies put that kind of financial backing into giving women in the workplace the best opportunities in child care. Educational bonuses into private schools for their children. Family vacation packages for more quality time and more opportunities to work from home.
What are your thoughts on the subject?