Okla-homey
7/25/2008, 07:04 AM
July 25, 1978: World's first "test tube baby" born
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/9475/ivflouisebrownbs1.jpg
30 years ago, on this day in 1978, Louise Joy Brown, the world's first baby to be conceived via in vitro fertilization (IVF) is born at Oldham and District General Hospital in Manchester, England, to parents Lesley and Peter Brown. The healthy baby was delivered shortly before midnight by caesarean section and weighed in at five pounds, 12 ounces.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/2576/ivf3208305ts1.jpg
The Browns
Before giving birth to Louise, Lesley Brown had suffered years of infertility due to blocked fallopian tubes. In November 1977, she underwent the then-experimental IVF procedure. A mature egg was removed from one of her ovaries and combined in a laboratory dish with her husband’s sperm to form an embryo.
The embryo then was implanted into her uterus a few days later. Her IVF doctors, British gynecologist Patrick Steptoe and scientist Robert Edwards, had begun their pioneering collaboration a decade earlier. Once the media learned of the pregnancy, the Browns faced intense public scrutiny. Louise’s birth made headlines around the world and raised various legal and ethical questions. In short it shocked and scared a lot of people.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/5507/ivfuchr02img0151je5.jpg
Dr. Patrick Steptoe
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/5430/ivf2nc9.jpg
The Browns had a second daughter, Natalie, several years later, also through IVF. In May 1999, Natalie became the first IVF baby to give birth to a child of her own. The child’s conception was natural, easing some concerns that female IVF babies would be unable to get pregnant naturally. In December 2006, Louise Brown, the original "test tube baby," gave birth to a boy, Cameron John Mullinder, who also was conceived naturally.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/6034/ivflouisebrownbaby228x3ku4.jpg
The Mullinder's with the first baby naturally conceived by a mom born of IVF
Today, IVF is considered a mainstream medical treatment for infertility. Hundreds of thousands of children around the world have been conceived through the procedure, in some cases with donor eggs and sperm.
Worth mentioning, they usually implant several fertilized eggs to increase the odds of success. Some people choose later to abort some if all attach successfully, leaving one or two to be born. Others just accept the multiple births.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/263/ivfbabiesri6.jpg
A lot of people who want kids go in for the procedure as evidenced by one California practitioner's website. Note the fact some of these parents have multiple births this way. The procedure is expensive, and insurance doesn't typically cover it.
Interesting legal implications:
And just in case you're wondering, in Oklahoma, as in all jurisdictions in the US, the attendent legal issues general involve paternity and maternity determinations in the area of divorce and inheritance.
In short, whether the man's stuff is used or not, if he consents to the IVF and he's married to mom, the child born to the marriage is his, and he may be compelled to pay child support on divorce. Ditto mom, whether her egg is used or not. Moreover, if mom or dad dies, that child inherits as any other "natural" child. Again, it doesn't matter if it's dad's "stuff" or mom's egg used for the procedure or not.
In contrast, a sperm donor whose sperm is used by another to concieve artificially without his express or implied consent is usually not held responsible for the child and that child can't inherit from him on his death. Moreover, that donor doesn't have standing to contest the child's subsequent adoption by another.
There have been problems for mom's who underwent IVF using a deceased husband's banked sperm. In one big case, those children were denied Social Security benefits from the deceased father because the Social Security administration, applying agency regulations, cited the lack of consent of of dad and the fact the children were born years after his death. The mom argued, pretty persuasively, that dad banked his stuff because he was diagnosed with cancer and knew he wouldn't make it yet wanted children to carry on his name. The court disagreed and the kids were denied benefits.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/9475/ivflouisebrownbs1.jpg
30 years ago, on this day in 1978, Louise Joy Brown, the world's first baby to be conceived via in vitro fertilization (IVF) is born at Oldham and District General Hospital in Manchester, England, to parents Lesley and Peter Brown. The healthy baby was delivered shortly before midnight by caesarean section and weighed in at five pounds, 12 ounces.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/2576/ivf3208305ts1.jpg
The Browns
Before giving birth to Louise, Lesley Brown had suffered years of infertility due to blocked fallopian tubes. In November 1977, she underwent the then-experimental IVF procedure. A mature egg was removed from one of her ovaries and combined in a laboratory dish with her husband’s sperm to form an embryo.
The embryo then was implanted into her uterus a few days later. Her IVF doctors, British gynecologist Patrick Steptoe and scientist Robert Edwards, had begun their pioneering collaboration a decade earlier. Once the media learned of the pregnancy, the Browns faced intense public scrutiny. Louise’s birth made headlines around the world and raised various legal and ethical questions. In short it shocked and scared a lot of people.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/5507/ivfuchr02img0151je5.jpg
Dr. Patrick Steptoe
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/5430/ivf2nc9.jpg
The Browns had a second daughter, Natalie, several years later, also through IVF. In May 1999, Natalie became the first IVF baby to give birth to a child of her own. The child’s conception was natural, easing some concerns that female IVF babies would be unable to get pregnant naturally. In December 2006, Louise Brown, the original "test tube baby," gave birth to a boy, Cameron John Mullinder, who also was conceived naturally.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/6034/ivflouisebrownbaby228x3ku4.jpg
The Mullinder's with the first baby naturally conceived by a mom born of IVF
Today, IVF is considered a mainstream medical treatment for infertility. Hundreds of thousands of children around the world have been conceived through the procedure, in some cases with donor eggs and sperm.
Worth mentioning, they usually implant several fertilized eggs to increase the odds of success. Some people choose later to abort some if all attach successfully, leaving one or two to be born. Others just accept the multiple births.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/263/ivfbabiesri6.jpg
A lot of people who want kids go in for the procedure as evidenced by one California practitioner's website. Note the fact some of these parents have multiple births this way. The procedure is expensive, and insurance doesn't typically cover it.
Interesting legal implications:
And just in case you're wondering, in Oklahoma, as in all jurisdictions in the US, the attendent legal issues general involve paternity and maternity determinations in the area of divorce and inheritance.
In short, whether the man's stuff is used or not, if he consents to the IVF and he's married to mom, the child born to the marriage is his, and he may be compelled to pay child support on divorce. Ditto mom, whether her egg is used or not. Moreover, if mom or dad dies, that child inherits as any other "natural" child. Again, it doesn't matter if it's dad's "stuff" or mom's egg used for the procedure or not.
In contrast, a sperm donor whose sperm is used by another to concieve artificially without his express or implied consent is usually not held responsible for the child and that child can't inherit from him on his death. Moreover, that donor doesn't have standing to contest the child's subsequent adoption by another.
There have been problems for mom's who underwent IVF using a deceased husband's banked sperm. In one big case, those children were denied Social Security benefits from the deceased father because the Social Security administration, applying agency regulations, cited the lack of consent of of dad and the fact the children were born years after his death. The mom argued, pretty persuasively, that dad banked his stuff because he was diagnosed with cancer and knew he wouldn't make it yet wanted children to carry on his name. The court disagreed and the kids were denied benefits.