IVF Fundraisers

I have never heard of this... I don't know how I feel about it. I know IVF is expensive, but I don't know about asking people for money for it. However, I haven't been in that position so I can't say I wouldn't feel compelled to help a couple I knew well enough.

I've never seen or heard of it, but it wouldn't bother me. You don't have to donate, but I normally go with 'you won't know until you ask'. The worst that could happen is they won't raise any or enough, the best is they raise enough and end up with a baby.

Not exactly the same, but my workplace held a fundraiser for our CFO. He and his wife had been in the process of adopting from Ethiopia when the agency went bankrupt. The thousands and thousands of dollars they had put in was tied up in the bankruptcy paperwork and they couldn't get their kids home. I don't know all the details, but they needed several thousand more to keep the process going so they could finish the adoption.

This is something similar, I think. Wouldn't put me off at all. I live in the land of community fundraisers. It is very common here for local musicians to put together a benefit for families in tough circumstances. It is the community taking care of each other.

ETA: It bugs me that some people, due to the whims of biology, need thousands upon thousands of dollars to do something that comes free to the vast majority. It is intensely unfair, and if I am able to help even on a small scale, I would.

hannahq wrote:I have never heard of this... I don't know how I feel about it. I know IVF is expensive, but I don't know about asking people for money for it. However, I haven't been in that position so I can't say I wouldn't feel compelled to help a couple I knew well enough.

<br/><br/>

this entire post ^^

PaganKay wrote:Not exactly the same, but my workplace held a fundraiser for our CFO. He and his wife had been in the process of adopting from Ethiopia when the agency went bankrupt. The thousands and thousands of dollars they had put in was tied up in the bankruptcy paperwork and they couldn't get their kids home. I don't know all the details, but they needed several thousand more to keep the process going so they could finish the adoption.

This is something similar, I think. Wouldn't put me off at all. I live in the land of community fundraisers. It is very common here for local musicians to put together a benefit for families in tough circumstances. It is the community taking care of each other.

<br/><br/>

now "this" i have heard of..I know a family that is raising money to adopt a girl from ...Ethiopia...(hmm..thats a coincidence)

we also have many fundraisers for people with medical issues or have lost a home, etc.

I feel torn all around on this. I've gladly contributed to fundraisers for people in need of medical care or who lost their homes in a fire or flood, etc. But in those sorts of situations, it's like, the people involved are stuck with bills and have absolutely no choice in the matter. Not in an unsympathetic way, I think of how a couple chooses to pursue IVF, but a person diagnosed with cancer really doesn't stand much of a choice other than seek treatment or die of cancer. If I'm being honest, I'd be much more understanding of a fundraiser put into place to help defray the costs of adoption. Both IVF and adoption are very expensive processes. The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours. I personally would be up for adopting a child if I could afford it. Funny enough, I've never really viewed it that way when I've heard about a couple going through IVF, ie I've never thought, "They really should spend that money on adopting." But under normal circumstances (meaning, for example, if the person spending wads of cash doesn't owe ME money for some reason), I don't really ponder upon the things other people spend their money on. But it's one of the first things I thought of when I thought "IVF Fundraiser." My heart truly goes out to families who struggle with IF, so I don't want to come across as uncaring or downplaying the hurt of their situation. I'm just being honest that I'd probably be more apt to donate if it was a couple wanting to adopt and who needed help with the cost. I grew up with scads of foster cousins and that likely plays a role in my thought process.

My DH and I saved for several years so we could do IVF after 5 years of infertility. I would never have asked anyone for donations. However, if someone feels comfortable doing so, then go for it.

My friends brother & wife had to do IVF. While she was on vacation, her work did an in office fundraiser for them. She had no idea. It was just a jar in the break room with a note saying something to the effect of her now knowing it was being done, but it was being done to help them. He was told by people at work that they should have a fundraiser. I "donated" to them. Because I know what it's like. I knew that all the asked for for Christmas 2009 was money for IVF. So I gave my friend some money & asked that she add it to her check to them. BTW . . . she's due any day now!

One thing I've noticed living in a small town . . . people know when something is up and they tend to want to help. It could be that other people encouraged them to do it. It could have been a lot of things. I say, good for them! If nothing else they are being open & honest about their struggles and the more people talk openly about their battle with IF and that's good!

Oh, and I was invited to FOUR dinners for a family going on a missions trip. They were trying to raise the money. The same could be said about that. I just didn't go to the dinners. (Not that I didn't agree with their trip, but I didn't agree with the dinners, I donated other ways.)

I have been to a fund raising banquet put on by a program that helps people off set the cost of IVF. I have also been to a fair put on by the same program. I have no problem attending because I have had a few friends who have struggled with IVF.

I am leary about giving to people personally because there is no way of knowing for sure if they are using the money for IVF. If I was close friends with someone I would for sure.

I've never heard of it.

My friend paid for her own fertility treatments and the idea of a fundraiser for it never would have occurred to her. I think most people find it too personal an issue to think of having a fundraiser for it.
Adoption is expensive too, but for some reason an "adoption fund" seems like less of an invasion of privacy than an IVF fund.

I've never heard of one around here, but I wouldn't have a problem with someone trying to raise money for ivf or adoption if they couldn't afford to do it on their own.

I also find it rather annoying when people say that someone should just adopt instead. Some people would love an adopted child as much as a bio, but some just do not have that in them and feel that an adopted child would be an option below a bio child. This is a very personal thing and people who feel the need to have that bio child should not be looked down on. Just because they were unable to make a baby as easily as others does not mean they have an obligation to give a home to a baby waiting to be adopted.

I just don't understand the mentality of people who think that those who can't get pg at the drop of a hat should just give up on their (possible) dream of being pregnant with their SO's child and experiencing birth and breastfeeding (I know it can be done without birth but is very diffucult) and watching as the child grows to see who they are going to look like. I just don't get why some people seem to think they have a right to judge others for wanting some or all of these things.

I've heard of it (though usually for adoption), but I've never been invited to one. I'm not really sure how I'd feel. On one hand I think it's a little tacky, but at the same time it's so expensive just to have a child (when many people can do it so easily) that I can understand the idea behind it. I don't think I'd bother if it was someone I knew from high school and didn't have much contact beyond FB with. However, if it was my best friend I would probably donate if I could.

mommy2elijah wrote:I feel torn all around on this. I've gladly contributed to fundraisers for people in need of medical care or who lost their homes in a fire or flood, etc. But in those sorts of situations, it's like, the people involved are stuck with bills and have absolutely no choice in the matter. Not in an unsympathetic way, I think of how a couple chooses to pursue IVF, but a person diagnosed with cancer really doesn't stand much of a choice other than seek treatment or die of cancer. If I'm being honest, I'd be much more understanding of a fundraiser put into place to help defray the costs of adoption. Both IVF and adoption are very expensive processes. The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours. I personally would be up for adopting a child if I could afford it. Funny enough, I've never really viewed it that way when I've heard about a couple going through IVF, ie I've never thought, "They really should spend that money on adopting." But under normal circumstances (meaning, for example, if the person spending wads of cash doesn't owe ME money for some reason), I don't really ponder upon the things other people spend their money on. But it's one of the first things I thought of when I thought "IVF Fundraiser." My heart truly goes out to families who struggle with IF, so I don't want to come across as uncaring or downplaying the hurt of their situation. I'm just being honest that I'd probably be more apt to donate if it was a couple wanting to adopt and who needed help with the cost. I grew up with scads of foster cousins and that likely plays a role in my thought process.

I can see why someone would say that, however, I wanted to mention that adoption is either not an option or not a good option for many families for many reasons. DH and I would have loved to adopt. We still would, however, the chances of it ever happening are prohibitively low. Ailey was conceived with IUI and donor sperm because IVF was prohibitively expensive and we had to choose between giving up on DH having a biological child or giving up on having a child at all because of money.

Since from your post, it is clear that you are writing your first thoughts on the subject and not being judgemental, I just wanted to mention that perspective for the board (rather than targetted) since it's something not many people think about. I can say that someone struggling with IF has probably looked at all of their options and decided which to pursue based on a variety of considerations of which people outside of the situation are most likely not fully aware. It is very rarely as simple as choosing to create a new life instead of caring for another and I would generally caution against framing it in terms that simple or assuming what motivates someone else in their choice about how to handle IF.

I've never heard of anyone doing this and it wouldn't have occurred to us to do it. Perhaps because dealing with IF is a very isolating process that it seems a bit strange to think of asking for help in this way.

However, so long as it's done tastefully (not a lot of pressure, etc). I have no more problem with it than with fundraising for other personal causes or life circumstances that come up and would probably attend and donate if I were invited to an event like this and financially able.

rglg14 wrote:

mommy2elijah wrote:I feel torn all around on this. I've gladly contributed to fundraisers for people in need of medical care or who lost their homes in a fire or flood, etc. But in those sorts of situations, it's like, the people involved are stuck with bills and have absolutely no choice in the matter. Not in an unsympathetic way, I think of how a couple chooses to pursue IVF, but a person diagnosed with cancer really doesn't stand much of a choice other than seek treatment or die of cancer. If I'm being honest, I'd be much more understanding of a fundraiser put into place to help defray the costs of adoption. Both IVF and adoption are very expensive processes. The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours. I personally would be up for adopting a child if I could afford it. Funny enough, I've never really viewed it that way when I've heard about a couple going through IVF, ie I've never thought, "They really should spend that money on adopting." But under normal circumstances (meaning, for example, if the person spending wads of cash doesn't owe ME money for some reason), I don't really ponder upon the things other people spend their money on. But it's one of the first things I thought of when I thought "IVF Fundraiser." My heart truly goes out to families who struggle with IF, so I don't want to come across as uncaring or downplaying the hurt of their situation. I'm just being honest that I'd probably be more apt to donate if it was a couple wanting to adopt and who needed help with the cost. I grew up with scads of foster cousins and that likely plays a role in my thought process.

I can see why someone would say that, however, I wanted to mention that adoption is either not an option or not a good option for many families for many reasons. DH and I would have loved to adopt. We still would, however, the chances of it ever happening are prohibitively low. Ailey was conceived with IUI and donor sperm because IVF was prohibitively expensive and we had to choose between giving up on DH having a biological child or giving up on having a child at all because of money.

Since from your post, it is clear that you are writing your first thoughts on the subject and not being judgemental, I just wanted to mention that perspective for the board (rather than targetted) since it's something not many people think about. I can say that someone struggling with IF has probably looked at all of their options and decided which to pursue based on a variety of considerations of which people outside of the situation are most likely not fully aware. It is very rarely as simple as choosing to create a new life instead of caring for another and I would generally caution against framing it in terms that simple or assuming what motivates someone else in their choice about how to handle IF.

<br/><br/>

With all due respect, I assumed nothing about why people choose the way they do. I simply stated that because of my own personal background, I would be more inclined to help a couple seeking to adopt. Your background may have you inclined otherwise. I did try to make it clear that I'm not unsympathetic to the situation of IF and I certainly didn't imply that people arrive at their decisions willy nilly. It's been my own experience that 100% of the people I know who have gone through IVF have done so because it was their preference to have a biological child. I have honestly never before thought anything of that. However, if they can't afford IVF and host a charity to help with that, since I am then asked to be involved in their lives in that way, it did occur to me that I'd be more sympathetic toward an Adoption Charity. Being raised very closely with so many children who were removed from bad homes and then raised by the foster system, and now being married to a lawyer who handles very many abuse and neglect cases, as well as adoptions, I am close to that heartache - the heartache of these children. I'm just hard-wired to have a bleeding heart for children in that way.

mommy2elijah wrote:

rglg14 wrote:

mommy2elijah wrote:I feel torn all around on this. I've gladly contributed to fundraisers for people in need of medical care or who lost their homes in a fire or flood, etc. But in those sorts of situations, it's like, the people involved are stuck with bills and have absolutely no choice in the matter. Not in an unsympathetic way, I think of how a couple chooses to pursue IVF, but a person diagnosed with cancer really doesn't stand much of a choice other than seek treatment or die of cancer. If I'm being honest, I'd be much more understanding of a fundraiser put into place to help defray the costs of adoption. Both IVF and adoption are very expensive processes. The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours. I personally would be up for adopting a child if I could afford it. Funny enough, I've never really viewed it that way when I've heard about a couple going through IVF, ie I've never thought, "They really should spend that money on adopting." But under normal circumstances (meaning, for example, if the person spending wads of cash doesn't owe ME money for some reason), I don't really ponder upon the things other people spend their money on. But it's one of the first things I thought of when I thought "IVF Fundraiser." My heart truly goes out to families who struggle with IF, so I don't want to come across as uncaring or downplaying the hurt of their situation. I'm just being honest that I'd probably be more apt to donate if it was a couple wanting to adopt and who needed help with the cost. I grew up with scads of foster cousins and that likely plays a role in my thought process.

I can see why someone would say that, however, I wanted to mention that adoption is either not an option or not a good option for many families for many reasons. DH and I would have loved to adopt. We still would, however, the chances of it ever happening are prohibitively low. Ailey was conceived with IUI and donor sperm because IVF was prohibitively expensive and we had to choose between giving up on DH having a biological child or giving up on having a child at all because of money.

Since from your post, it is clear that you are writing your first thoughts on the subject and not being judgemental, I just wanted to mention that perspective for the board (rather than targetted) since it's something not many people think about. I can say that someone struggling with IF has probably looked at all of their options and decided which to pursue based on a variety of considerations of which people outside of the situation are most likely not fully aware. It is very rarely as simple as choosing to create a new life instead of caring for another and I would generally caution against framing it in terms that simple or assuming what motivates someone else in their choice about how to handle IF.

<br/><br/>

With all due respect, I assumed nothing about why people choose the way they do. I simply stated that because of my own personal background, I would be more inclined to help a couple seeking to adopt. Your background may have you inclined otherwise. I did try to make it clear that I'm not unsympathetic to the situation of IF and I certainly didn't imply that people arrive at their decisions willy nilly. It's been my own experience that 100% of the people I know who have gone through IVF have done so because it was their preference to have a biological child. I have honestly never before thought anything of that. However, if they can't afford IVF and host a charity to help with that, since I am then asked to be involved in their lives in that way, it did occur to me that I'd be more sympathetic toward an Adoption Charity. Being raised very closely with so many children who were removed from bad homes and then raised by the foster system, and now being married to a lawyer who handles very many abuse and neglect cases, as well as adoptions, I am close to that heartache - the heartache of these children. I'm just hard-wired to have a bleeding heart for children in that way.

With all due respect, usually when someone says that, it is intended to be the furthest thing from respectful. I was careful not to be rude to you in my reply and did not deserve that.

I said as clearly as I know to say it that I didn't think you were being judgemental, but speaking from your perspective to a topic that you'd not thought about before (which is what you wrote in your PP, so I took you at your word) and that I could see why someone from who had not dealt with IF, could in coming from a different background reach your conclusion. I also wrote as clearly as I know how that my response was intended to share another perspective on a general issue with the board as a whole rather than as any sort of attack or comment on you or your post.

However, a statement that you would support one method of building a family over another does imply a belief that there is there is always a choice and that one choice is superior to the other (which is why one is more worthy of support then the other) and it is entirely fair to mention in a general sense that this is not always the case, which is all I did. I suspect that since another PP also commented on the assumption that infertile couples should adopt and you were the only one who had mentioned being more likely to support adoption than medical intervention to that point, I am left with the assumption that I am not the only person who picked up on that implication.

Finally, for the board, I want to be as clear as possible that I am in no way saying that there is anything wrong with adoption. I would support someone seeking help in that process as well and think it's a great way to build families. However, and I cannot stress enough that this is intended as a general statement, I reject the assertions that a) it is an option for all infertile couples, b) couples choosing IF treatment instead of adoption are doing so because of an inherent preference for a biological child over an adopted child and c) adoption is always a superior option or more deserving of support than other paths to parenthood.

rglg14 wrote:

mommy2elijah wrote:

rglg14 wrote:

mommy2elijah wrote:I feel torn all around on this. I've gladly contributed to fundraisers for people in need of medical care or who lost their homes in a fire or flood, etc. But in those sorts of situations, it's like, the people involved are stuck with bills and have absolutely no choice in the matter. Not in an unsympathetic way, I think of how a couple chooses to pursue IVF, but a person diagnosed with cancer really doesn't stand much of a choice other than seek treatment or die of cancer. If I'm being honest, I'd be much more understanding of a fundraiser put into place to help defray the costs of adoption. Both IVF and adoption are very expensive processes. The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours. I personally would be up for adopting a child if I could afford it. Funny enough, I've never really viewed it that way when I've heard about a couple going through IVF, ie I've never thought, "They really should spend that money on adopting." But under normal circumstances (meaning, for example, if the person spending wads of cash doesn't owe ME money for some reason), I don't really ponder upon the things other people spend their money on. But it's one of the first things I thought of when I thought "IVF Fundraiser." My heart truly goes out to families who struggle with IF, so I don't want to come across as uncaring or downplaying the hurt of their situation. I'm just being honest that I'd probably be more apt to donate if it was a couple wanting to adopt and who needed help with the cost. I grew up with scads of foster cousins and that likely plays a role in my thought process.

I can see why someone would say that, however, I wanted to mention that adoption is either not an option or not a good option for many families for many reasons. DH and I would have loved to adopt. We still would, however, the chances of it ever happening are prohibitively low. Ailey was conceived with IUI and donor sperm because IVF was prohibitively expensive and we had to choose between giving up on DH having a biological child or giving up on having a child at all because of money.

Since from your post, it is clear that you are writing your first thoughts on the subject and not being judgemental, I just wanted to mention that perspective for the board (rather than targetted) since it's something not many people think about. I can say that someone struggling with IF has probably looked at all of their options and decided which to pursue based on a variety of considerations of which people outside of the situation are most likely not fully aware. It is very rarely as simple as choosing to create a new life instead of caring for another and I would generally caution against framing it in terms that simple or assuming what motivates someone else in their choice about how to handle IF.

<br/><br/>

With all due respect, I assumed nothing about why people choose the way they do. I simply stated that because of my own personal background, I would be more inclined to help a couple seeking to adopt. Your background may have you inclined otherwise. I did try to make it clear that I'm not unsympathetic to the situation of IF and I certainly didn't imply that people arrive at their decisions willy nilly. It's been my own experience that 100% of the people I know who have gone through IVF have done so because it was their preference to have a biological child. I have honestly never before thought anything of that. However, if they can't afford IVF and host a charity to help with that, since I am then asked to be involved in their lives in that way, it did occur to me that I'd be more sympathetic toward an Adoption Charity. Being raised very closely with so many children who were removed from bad homes and then raised by the foster system, and now being married to a lawyer who handles very many abuse and neglect cases, as well as adoptions, I am close to that heartache - the heartache of these children. I'm just hard-wired to have a bleeding heart for children in that way.

With all due respect, usually when someone says that, it is intended to be the furthest thing from respectful. I was careful not to be rude to you in my reply and did not deserve that.

I said as clearly as I know to say it that I didn't think you were being judgemental, but speaking from your perspective to a topic that you'd not thought about before (which is what you wrote in your PP, so I took you at your word) and that I could see why someone from who had not dealt with IF, could in coming from a different background reach your conclusion. I also wrote as clearly as I know how that my response was intended to share another perspective on a general issue with the board as a whole rather than as any sort of attack or comment on you or your post.

However, a statement that you would support one method of building a family over another does imply a belief that there is there is always a choice and that one choice is superior to the other (which is why one is more worthy of support then the other) and it is entirely fair to mention in a general sense that this is not always the case, which is all I did. I suspect that since another PP also commented on the assumption that infertile couples should adopt and you were the only one who had mentioned being more likely to support adoption than medical intervention to that point, I am left with the assumption that I am not the only person who picked up on that implication.

Finally, for the board, I want to be as clear as possible that I am in no way saying that there is anything wrong with adoption. I would support someone seeking help in that process as well and think it's a great way to build families. However, and I cannot stress enough that this is intended as a general statement, I reject the assertions that a) it is an option for all infertile couples, b) couples choosing IF treatment instead of adoption are doing so because of an inherent preference for a biological child over an adopted child and c) adoption is always a superior option or more deserving of support than other paths to parenthood.

<br/><br/>

And again, I said that it is my background that causes me to be more apt to donate money toward adoption than IVF. I never insinuated that it is "superior" to IVF. I even said that it never has entered my mind to form an opinion one way or the other until I pondered my feelings toward IVF Fundraisers, how or why they would be different from any other fundraiser, if at all, and whether or not I would be willing to contribute. If I didn't know the couple, I absolutely would not contribute just because I like to trust where the money is going and to what kind of household. When I drew that conclusion, and in thinking of other similar fundraisers, I thought of the cost of adoption and where I - let me stress *I* - would stand on that. Again, your history influences you and my history influences me. I'm more apt to support adoption not because I think it's more noble, but because my heart reaches out more to children than it does to IF couples. It's not that I'm not sympathetic toward IF couples because I really and truly am. I haven't dealt with IF, but I have dealt with problems staying pg, as well as a personal situation that prevented us from growing our family for several years. This was the statement you made that I found offensive:

"It is very rarely as simple as choosing to create a new life instead of caring for another and I would generally caution against framing it in terms that simple or assuming what motivates someone else in their choice about how to handle IF."

I genuinely felt that in the same breath you took to caution me against assuming, you were making assumptions about me, as well as accusing me of over-simplifying IF. Admittedly, beyond the scope of cost and perhaps the long waits often associated with adoption, I don't know what would prohibit someone from going that route. That said, I don't pretend that any one thing is the universal fit for every family, so it was never my intention to imply that adoption is the cure-all for IF problems. I was just stating that an IVF fundraiser felt weird to me, but an Adoption Fundraiser would feel less so.

ETA - Rest assured, you can take me at my word. If I use a phrase such as, "With all due respect," then that's exactly what I mean. I'm not one to sugarcoat or be passive-aggressive. You may feel as though you weren't rude, but as the recipient of your post, it came across as chastising. I honestly barely got the impression that you were simply giving a flip point of view so much as you were making assumptions about where I was coming from. If you say you weren't, I take *you* at *your* word and leave it at that. I'm just telling you that sometimes we mean to convey one thing, but send across another. That's especially true in a message board format.

Okay. I am going to take a step back, assume that we both read each other's posts differently than intended and try this again.

Starting with the simple part:

Rest assured, you can take me at my word. If I use a phrase such as, "With all due respect," then that's exactly what I mean. I'm not one to sugarcoat or be passive-aggressive.

Fair enough. I accept that and apologize if I read something that wasn't intended.

You may feel as though you weren't rude, but as the recipient of your post, it came across as chastising. I honestly barely got the impression that you were simply giving a flip point of view so much as you were making assumptions about where I was coming from. If you say you weren't, I take *you* at *your* word and leave it at that.

The point of prefacing the statement that you said offended you with the following sentence:

Since from your post, it is clear that you are writing your first thoughts on the subject and not being judgemental, I just wanted to mention that perspective for the board (rather than targetted) since it's something not many people think about.

was to make a distinction between responding in an antagonistic way to your post specifically, and what I intended to be a more general statement (bold added to make it clear what I am talking about). That is also why I made a point of using the word *generally* in the quote you included above.

I'm just telling you that sometimes we mean to convey one thing, but send across another. That's especially true in a message board format.

I couldn't agree more and am glad you wrote back in so that we could talk through this more reasonably.

And again, I said that it is my background that causes me to be more apt to donate money toward adoption than IVF. I never insinuated that it is "superior" to IVF.

This was the statement from your first post that I took issue with and felt included that inmplication:

The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours.

By in the same breath stating that you would probably support an adoption fundraiser, but not and IVF fundraiser, and that in one case you are "choosing" to save a life, there is an implication that 1) per your words it is always a choice and 2) by your choice to support one choice and not the other, you consider the first choice more worthy of support (i.e. better, superior, etc).

Since you pointed out the part of my post that was problematic for you, I felt that in the interest of understanding, I should do the same so that we can both approach these topics in a more constructive way in the future.

Admittedly, beyond the scope of cost and perhaps the long waits often associated with adoption, I don't know what would prohibit someone from going that route.

For us, it was the balance of a lot of issues. We had a tremendous amount of difficulty finding an agency that would work with us based on initial requirements. Many would not accept mixed faith or minority religious families. Many had age requirements that we would never meet at the same time as one another. There was issue after issue that were not directly related to our parenting ability, but were related to the specific agency's views of what ideal parents would look like. After having ruled out agency adoption as a practical option for us, we also considered pursuing a private adoption, but at that point ran into an equally long process (still with a good chance of never bringing home a child), expense nearly as high as IVF which we had already ruled out due to cost and ethical issues, and a lower level of comfort around potential impacts on other families compared to having a reputable agency to work through. In the end, we came to the conclusion, that the greatest likelihood in pursuing an adoption was that we would end up childless, and without the time and money that we invested in the process and could instead have put into IF treatment which would likely result in a child. I would still adopt if we had any indication that it was at all realistic. It is not, and not by my choice, so I decided to pursue another route to parenthood. I am sure that there are other similar situations that even I haven't thought of as to why adoption is barred to other potential parents, but would not start out assuming that it was a preference for biological children or necessarily the wait or expense. I am not saying that you are saying that, just mentioning another reason. I also want to be clear that I don't view the wait and expense as being bad reasons to look at other options, they are very real concerns for many people that create an inability to adopt.

That said, I don't pretend that any one thing is the universal fit for every family, so it was never my intention to imply that adoption is the cure-all for IF problems. I was just stating that an IVF fundraiser felt weird to me, but an Adoption Fundraiser would feel less so.

I guess what I still don't understand and perhaps you could explain it, because I would like to is why there would need to be a difference. If you knew the couple (as you said you would need to do in any case) and felt comfortable with them becoming parents, why would the path they chose make a difference in terms of the level of support you would be willing to offer?

Anyhow, I hoped that helped to make what I was trying to say a bit clearer and am sorry if it wasn't clear in the first place.

Again, thank you for writing in to clarify your PPs.

This type of thing must be becoming more common. I also received an invitation to a fundraiser event for a couple raising money for IVF. I went to high school with them and they sent the invite to everyone via facebook. I felt a little uncomfortable about the whole thing, because I haven't seen or spoken to them in over 15 years. I'm not sure how I would feel if it were someone I was close to. I guess to each their own, but I wouldn't do it.

mommy2elijah wrote:The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours. I personally would be up for adopting a child if I could afford it.

I seem to recall reading before that couples who are adopting are cautioned to not view it as them 'saving' a child. They are encouraged to view it as building their family, period. Most people go overseas for adoption due to the fact that there are children available for adoption sooner than there are here. If they viewed themselves as some guardian angels coming in to save a helpless child from a life of squalor, then they would be going into it with a chip on their shoulders that would inevitably interfere with the bonding process, IMO.

mommy2elijah wrote:I feel torn all around on this. I've gladly contributed to fundraisers for people in need of medical care or who lost their homes in a fire or flood, etc. But in those sorts of situations, it's like, the people involved are stuck with bills and have absolutely no choice in the matter. Not in an unsympathetic way, I think of how a couple chooses to pursue IVF, but a person diagnosed with cancer really doesn't stand much of a choice other than seek treatment or die of cancer. If I'm being honest, I'd be much more understanding of a fundraiser put into place to help defray the costs of adoption. Both IVF and adoption are very expensive processes. The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours. I personally would be up for adopting a child if I could afford it. Funny enough, I've never really viewed it that way when I've heard about a couple going through IVF, ie I've never thought, "They really should spend that money on adopting." But under normal circumstances (meaning, for example, if the person spending wads of cash doesn't owe ME money for some reason), I don't really ponder upon the things other people spend their money on. But it's one of the first things I thought of when I thought "IVF Fundraiser." My heart truly goes out to families who struggle with IF, so I don't want to come across as uncaring or downplaying the hurt of their situation. I'm just being honest that I'd probably be more apt to donate if it was a couple wanting to adopt and who needed help with the cost. I grew up with scads of foster cousins and that likely plays a role in my thought process.

I, too, do not understand why you would give your money to help a family be created through one means and not the other. When anyone donates money to anyone for any reason, we NEVER know what they are truly going to do with it. If we are to DONATE, we are to give and the end result will be a family, who are we to judge how that came about? I donated money to a girl i went to high school with (this Christmas) because she needed toys for her children and couldn't afford them. I gave her a gift card, but I can't be sure that she didn't go to WalMart and blow the whole gift card on ice cream. Once the donation is out of my hands, then I don't have a say in how it is spent. Not to say that we should give to causes in which we do not believe, but what if you were donating to this family for IVF so they could have a child and they ended up deciding to adopt? I don't understand how that distinction would make a difference in whether or not you give.

You said you would "personally be up for adopting if you could afford it" ...so if you are so interested in saving these children, why haven't you foster-adopted? That doesn't have much of a cost (if any) in my state. Private adoption or international adoption is very expensive, but there are ways to adopt that are practically free.

Personally I have never heard of a fund-raiser for IVF or adoption, perhaps it is regional. I wouldn't be opposed to donating...to me, it's kind of like a baby shower beforehand. We don't mind giving tons of gifts to parents so they won't have to buy essentials for their baby and help defray some of the diaper costs, etc.. so why not help pay for the baby? (not intended to imply that IVF or adoption is "buying" a baby.)

PaganKay wrote:

mommy2elijah wrote:The difference is that, when you choose to adopt, you're saving a life already created and in need of a home just like yours. I personally would be up for adopting a child if I could afford it.

I seem to recall reading before that couples who are adopting are cautioned to not view it as them 'saving' a child. They are encouraged to view it as building their family, period. Most people go overseas for adoption due to the fact that there are children available for adoption sooner than there are here. If they viewed themselves as some guardian angels coming in to save a helpless child from a life of squalor, then they would be going into it with a chip on their shoulders that would inevitably interfere with the bonding process, IMO.

absolutely. ITA completely

I would gladly donate should I have crossed paths with a fundraiser such as this.

My own journey becoming a mother and with my kids have been such an incredible blessing. It has filled my life in the most amazing way.

To know that I could help someone who is struggling to get what I have would make my heart very happy.

I see no issue with this. People raise money for all sorts of things all the time. I have donated to cheerleaders going on a school trip, to a local teem youth group going on their church competition trip, and to all sorts of things beyond food boxes and charities.

I find giving, even a little, to be greatly rewarding.

I do not find any less reason to help in this sort of struggle than many others people help with.

Mary

I would definitely donate.