The Pros And Cons Of In Vitro Fertilization

Today, over 7.4 million women suffer from infertility. Depending on their location, their options may be widespread, or very limited. In Vitro Fertilization is by far the most developed and successful treatment for women who are unable to conceive children. In Vitro Fertilization is an assisted reproductive technology that was initially introduced to treat female infertility caused by damaged or blocked fallopian tubes. In this procedure, the sperm and egg are fertilized outside of the body, in a laboratory. This technology has become a major breakthrough in embryo research and has provided large numbers of women the possibility of becoming pregnant, and subsequent advances that have dramatically increased their chances (Zhu, 2013). Despite

Marcin Goettig, a Reuters correspondent in Warsaw, believes that there are many alternatives to In Vitro Fertilization and that they should be explored. He challenges the claim that In Vitro Fertilization should always be presented as an option in clinics, because alternatives may be more ethical or less risky. He presents the ethical argument by the Roman Catholic Clergy, “freezing of embryos, which is often done during the In Vitro Fertilization process, amounts to freezing of human beings (Goettig 2015).” The source itself uses quantitative statistics and quotes which improves accuracy of source. However, a weakness would be a fallacy in the ethical argument. The Roman Catholic clergy said freezing embryos is the same as freezing a human being, which is a false analogy because they are actually more different than they are similar. The author, Marcin Goettig, has previous experience on issues in Poland, he has many past articles about the country. However, the sources used to produce this article were not cited and it is unknown whether the author has the expertise about In Vitro Fertilization to write this article on his own. Therefore, the reliability of what the author is saying may be questionable. This source’s goal was to justify that money should not be spent on In Vitro Fertilization, and while this goal was not fully

The Chief Editor of the NLCATP, writes many articles for this organization, nevertheless, there is little to no information known about them. They support the claim that In Vitro Fertilization should always be presented as an option in clinics because it greatly beneficial and is safe than past techniques for encouraging fertility and come from an American perspective. The Editor argues that a “great benefit of in vitro fertilization is that it replaces pre-existing techniques for pregnancy that were significantly more harmful.” She reasons that if In-Vitro is advanced by further usage, then it will become more safe and less invasive (Editor 2015). Although she supports In Vitro Fertilization, she also includes the argument that “in vitro fertilization increases the likelihood of complications that come from multiple births.” She elaborates on his, explaining how families would struggle with supporting more than one child, therefore In Vitro Fertilization may not be the best option for those who are financially unstable. The argument made presents both the “pros and cons” of In Vitro Fertilization and they are weighed out against each other, making the reasoning more neutral rather than completely bias toward one side. Nonetheless, the author commits the false dilemma fallacy when she suggests either parents would welcome