I really hope some of you want to discuss this .

Good for you! I sooooo would have sold my eggs if that sort of thing was going on when I was age desirable. The hormones might have some bad effects down the road but so does life in general.

Thanks JL Davis. I'm all fired up!

Thanks Ablonde! The hormones...the money...that's the thing. Fertility is for sale, so please don't tell us what we can or can't do!

Personally I wouldn't sell or donate my eggs, my mother died when I was very young,and due to a series of family breakdowns am now unable to get any information about her and thus my genetic history, I wouldn't intentionaly inflict that on another, and would not want to give away any child geneticaly mine.
I don't think however there is a difference!, if somone wants to take a different decision it's entirely up to them

Now this should be an interesting topic! People have been going back and forth on this one on the stem cell research issue. So much automatic support for helping mothers conceive through artificial insemination, even from abortion opponents - do they think the eggs will be kept forever? Would they prefer doctors to discard them at some point? If they had a relative (as I do!) with a frightening, degenerative disease, would they still oppose the stem cell research that might save them?

If someone is going to fork over 20k for some of your eggs you better believe they want your medical history and college transcripts and IQ scores too.

no diiference at all...and as far as AT's blog...if there are so called "bad" reasons for an abortion, it stands to reason there are "good" ones, hence the need for freedom of CHOICE

I haven't followed the discussion elsewhere on OS, but I have a couple of thoughts:

First, a lot of people make a distinction between fertilized and unfertilized eggs, viewing the former as human beings and the latter not. Since the eggs that are sold aren't fertilized, the eggs-are-human-beings people might not see the same ethical issues as applying.

Second, my understanding is that the sale of body parts (not eggs) raises tricky medical ethics issues. I'd guess that one reason such sales are problematic is that it's to the detriment of the donor; he or she is missing a kidney or whatever afterwards, and some believe it's unethical to pose that choice to the poor or desperate. Aside from hormone shots and such, donating eggs, in contrast, doesn't seem to pose those same health risks, so it's not as much a point of disagreement.

For what it's worth to the discussion.

fertilized or unfertilized - ah, I guess there's a difference.

But what's for sale, and how does it impact my ability to make a choice?

(And thank you, everyone, who has come over to my blog to talk about this. I reaally appreciate all your thoughts and comments.)

"...my mother died when I was very young,and due to a series of family breakdowns am now unable to get any information about her and thus my genetic history, I wouldn't intentionaly inflict that on another..."

I'm adopted, from before the open adoption laws. I don't know my genetic history. The vast majority of people throughout history have not known their genetic history, yet managed to live perfectly happy lives. If you are that curious, you can have your genome sequenced for $399. Life without knowledge of your risks for this or that is fine. The difference between a 2.5% and 7.5% risk is 300%! In real life, it is almost meaningless.

Also, Rob - my eggs are worth much more than a woman of color's eggs. It's a free market. I can pad my resume and sell eggs. (well, not anymore.)
I just want to know how selling eggs to be fertilized is in any way changing the view that I can do what I choose to do with my fertilized or unfertilized eggs.

Also, I don't want to seem insensitive to anyone who has been adopted. This whole thing might speak to you in a way that I don't neccesarily understand.
But it's happening, and...yeah, there are going to be a lot of donor egg babies. Which is different from a birth mother choosing adoption as her recourse.
I don't even pretend to understand any of the repercussions.
I'm so glad people are talking here.

My point, my only point is: if I can sell it, I control it. Nobody can tell me what to do with my eggs.

My point, my only point is: if I can sell it, I control it. Nobody can tell me what to do with my eggs.

The flip side should also be true: If you control it, you can sell it. You should be able to sell a kidney, or part of your liver. As long as you know the risks, who is anyone else to tell you that you should not be able to sell a kidney for $50k? What if that could stave off bankruptcy or foreclosure? It should be your choice to do what you will with your body.

Well, there is a difference. Eggs are a different commodity because they can be produced sort of at will. I can't keep producing kidneys or livers or lungs. I sure wish I could!

I don't want to get too much into ethics because I don't have a grasp on it - and it's a different subject, I think. But I would love to participate in a discussion about ethics.

I guess we can talk about the ethics of selling eggs. I'll probably go legalese about it.
But, y'know, I really hope people feel like they can say what they want here.

Wish I could comment intelligently on this matter, but as a male, I feel I am unqualified to talk about it. About all I know about abortion in America is that it was legal in all of the Colonies and in all of the states until roughly the 1830s. Somehow, the moralists began to pressure local governments to ban it. My own personal opinion is that it is a matter for the woman to decide and not the government or the religionists. Probably not much of a contribution, but that's roughly all I feel qualified to speak about. Anyway, this is good conversational thread. Thanks, aim, for bringing it up. rated. cy

Cyclopic- shut up about your being a man means you can't really comment yadadadada.
You just informed me, and a whole bunch of others, I hope, about an untold history of abortion.
Thanks!

aim

Your post reminded me of a paradox, so I thought this would be a great place to bring it up.

Judea-Christianity teaches us that their god is omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipotent and omni everything else. Hell, this person is even apparently omni-omni. When circumstances beyond our control happen, the reasoning so often, so detestably often given when it involves tragedy is that "God did this/allowed it to happen because he has a plan for us or a reason. When a life is snuffed out by a senseless act of crime, god has a plan. When a person is maimed in an accident, yes, God has a good and holy reason.

Now, if you take into consideration, God's omnipotence, or his power to control all within the universe he created, you must factor in the confusing paradox of abortion. If God says abortion is not right, it is not following my teachings, God must therefore make an exception to his rules for himself?? And that he does, on a daily basis. Apparently his rules, teachings and laws don't apply to him. Apparently he can adhere to whatever laws he wants or not adhere to whatever of his laws he doesn't particularly like.

Not convinced that this is his mantra? When a human being has an abortion, for whatever reason, that human is committing a heinous act against God. Yet, when a person has a miscarriage (remember, god has absolute control over his universe - he is omnipotent, therefore God is not only knowingly allowing an abortion to take place, since he is the power behind his universe, he is actually performing that abortion; is he not?

Omnipotence carries responsibilities, the need for continuity and consequences. God can't just claim it and use it at will for whatever circumstances arise, whenever it suits him.

Bob- That paradox is interesting. As a PK (preachers kid) I have certainly thought a lot about what the heck God is doing, or not doing.
I'd love to talk to you more about your wonderful comment, but this isn't the place. I'm trying hard to NOT talk about any of this in terms of religion.
Thank you for stopping by!