If I were getting IVF and had six embryos to choose from, you bet your ass I would choose the healthiest of the six to implant. You aren't going to implant all of them - so why not choose the healthiest one?

FWIW: I had CVS done (like amnio, but with the placenta and not the amniotic fluid) and found out my fetus is healthy. BUT: My husband and I had decided that if the baby had Downs, Ty Sachs, or what have you, we would abort. This was not an easy decision to come to and I felt terrible guilt over it - not because I thought it was the wrong choice - but because of the fact that I thought people would shame me about it. Reading these comments makes me see that I was right. I figured I would tell people I had a miscarriage if it ended up being that we aborted. Part of the reason for the CVS was to do it as early as possible. As far as I am concerned, the earlier the better.

 Reply

However, as someone who has suffered from depression and anxiety, I would jump at the chance to ensure that an embryo I am carrying will not carry a high risk of that. I want kids, but feel severely conflicted about bringing a child into the world who may end up miserable for 90% of their life.

 Reply

1) All cancers are genetic in origin. The ones that run in families, however, are GERMLINE mutations, meaning you inherit the bad genes from your parents. That means the mutation is present in all of the cells in your body. This drastically increases your chance to develop that particular cancer, since all of your cells are ticking time bombs rather than just a handful.

2) People with the BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation have an 80% chance of developing breast AND ovarian cancer in their lifetimes. This risk has been well documented and studied and is in no way controversial or a "guess".

3) Even when the genetic risk is known and women go in for checkups regularly, ovarian cancer is usually not caught until Stage IV, when it is 90% FATAL. The only preventative treatment is a full hysterectomy, which causes the early onset of menopause and makes you sterile. This generally has to be performed by your late 20's, since the disease strikes early in BRCA gene carriers.

4) While breast cancer has a high cure rate, those women with the most intractable forms are those who carry BRCA mutations. These women generally do NOT have spectacular remissions after a single phase of treatment and usually relapse within 5 years, again because ALL of their cells carry the fundamental mutation.

5) Young women who discover they have one of these genes often choose to have double mastectomies and full hysterectomies immediately. Most of them have watched their mothers, aunts, and grandmothers succumb to the disease and believe that chopping off their breasts, becoming sterile, and undergoing menopause would be less painful.

So everyone who's saying it's "only" an 80% risk? That most breast cancer patients survive so it's "no big deal"? I beg to differ.

 Reply

I'm thinking strictly hypothetically here, because this is scientifically impossible, but here goes: If, in some magical unicorn wonder imaginary land, there was a noninvasive, inexpensive procedure to ensure that my hypothetical imaginary children wouldn't have the genetic propensity for certain types of cancer, I can't say I wouldn't be tempted.

 Reply

Disclaimer: I'm NOT IN ANY WAY doing an abortion is wrong argument. I'm pro choice, FWIW.

 Reply

I know some survivors who would strongly beg to differ.

 Reply

So many questions... not enough coffee.

 Reply

*I wish I could quote actual statistics, but I've seen the same article in so many women's magazines I barely bother to read it anymore. Isn't that awful?

 Reply