Are children conceived by IVF different from ordinary children, and what consequences may arise in the future?

With the increasing prevalence of in vitro fertilization (IVF), many parents are curious as to whether children conceived through IVF are genetically different from children conceived naturally. There are concerns regarding the potential effects on the child’s development and health arising from the process of combining an egg and sperm outside the body and then putting the embryo into the uterus.

Concerns about whether IVF children are more likely to experience health issues or whether their development will change as they get older are common. Others are curious about any potential long-term effects that might have an impact on their adult lives. Parents’ desire for assurance regarding these possibilities is understandable.

This post will compare and contrast IVF and naturally conceived children, examining any potential long-term effects that may arise.

IVF (in vitro fertilization) and naturally conceived children are not inherently different from one another. Nonetheless, the IVF procedure may have particular effects on the kid and the family. There may be some long-term effects and risks associated with the technology, even though the majority of studies demonstrate that children born through IVF are equally healthy and develop normally. These can include a marginally increased risk of specific medical conditions or genetic problems, but overall, the improvements in IVF methods keep these risks to a minimum, giving families contemplating this option hope.

About conception

You have to start at the very beginning of conception to truly comprehend what IVF babies are like. The wide part of the fallopian tube is where the mother’s egg and the father’s sperm meet during a natural conception. The fertilized egg then enters the uterine cavity 7-9 days after fertilization. Conception happens outside of the mother’s body when using IVF. In a laboratory, the father’s sperm is used to fertilize a woman’s egg. After that, the embryo—or, more frequently, several embryos—are implanted into the uterus, and the expectant mother receives hormone therapy in tandem to ensure that the babies’ development occurs under circumstances that are as similar to those that occur naturally.

The continuation of the pregnancy following IVF is similar to a natural pregnancy if the embryo takes root, with the exception that the woman is closely monitored by her doctor. Miscarriage, multiple pregnancies, hormonal disorders, premature births, and placental pathologies are among the many risks that women face.

The development rate and growth of an embryo conceived in a test tube closely match the parameters of an embryo conceived by a parent alone, without the assistance of medical professionals.

A lot of people think that IVF goes against natural laws. Opponents of in vitro fertilization argue that doctors have no right to intervene if nature has not made provisions for men and women to procreate of their own kind. With the possible exception of the contented eyes of spouses who become parents despite their diagnoses, there is very little evidence to contradict this opinion.

IVF babies are born exactly the same as their naturally conceived counterparts in terms of height, weight, and body part sizes. These are the same infants who delight in their father’s hands and mother’s smile, and who yearn for love and affection from their parents. Where did the myths about "IVF" children originate if conception takes place in the same manner but under different circumstances?

The truth is that everything new and mysterious has always had a tendency to confound humanity. IVF has only been around for 40 years, which is essentially a second in terms of history. The belief that children conceived in a test tube are marvels, abnormalities, or even wicked is not surprising. Simply put, not enough time has passed to fully comprehend the nature of conceptions that defy the laws of nature.

In 1978, the first IVF procedure took place. Lisa Brown, an Englishwoman, was born. She is currently 40 years old, has a successful career, a good education, and children that she conceived naturally. She exhibits no unusual abilities, is not affected by any uncommon diseases, and is just like her peers.

The first IVF procedure was carried out in Moscow, USSR, in 1986. Elena Dontsova is a girl who is not that different from other girls. As of early 2018, the global count of individuals conceived in a test tube exceeded five million.

The in vitro fertilization program has received financial support from the state since the early 2000s. IVF was added to the list of medical services covered by insurance, and based on current trends, anyone can get the procedure. For this reason, the number of children born today who credit reproductive doctors with their birth is on the rise.

Therefore, IVF is fairly common in today’s society. Let us now discuss the myths surrounding children conceived in a test tube.

Religion and esotericism

Regarding IVF, many religions are unclear. For instance, it is widely acknowledged in Orthodoxy that the soul of the infant manifests almost instantly at the time of the spermatozoa and egg’s union. When a doctor selects the best quality material from multiple fertilized eggs in a test tube, it is considered a murder. This is known as Orthodoxy. Based on the Russian Orthodox Church’s teachings, the doctor ends the developing life with the permission of his parents.

It wasn’t too long ago that problems could occur during the baby’s baptism for parents who were foolish enough to tell the priest that their child was conceived via in vitro fertilization. Priests have the option to reject this. Nowadays, the Church has a more accommodating attitude, and priests will occasionally bless a couple using reproductive technologies. The use of donor sperm and eggs, surrogacy, and artificially selecting the strongest embryo from a pool of viable ones are all still frowned upon by the Church.

Islam does not oppose IVF; however, its adherents are forbidden from using donor biomaterial or surrogate mother services. Only the husband and wife’s cells should be used in the IVF procedure. Muslims do not oppose the artificial selection and rejection of embryos because they hold the belief that the soul enters the child only four months after fertilization.

Jews consider all methods of reproduction to be acceptable and justified. IVF is viewed with composure and balance, and surrogacy is permitted in some circumstances. All innovations are always welcomed by Buddhists, even those related to reproduction. Buddhists believe that life can be given in any way; what matters is that the child’s parents love him and that he was happy and desired when he entered the world.

Individuals who assert that offspring conceived through in vitro fertilization lack a soul, possess an altered aura, or possess a distinct energy, are gravely misguided. Some zealots have always been willing to accuse others of being on a "witch hunt," and their "victims" are typically people who are at least somewhat unlike them. The aura and energy of "eco" babies are the unpersuasive arguments of those who cannot think of anything else, and the only difference between them is how they were conceived.

IVF-born babies are not biorobots, nor are they androids, nor are they humanoid beings without feelings or life experiences. Their birth should not be mysterious because they are exactly the same children as everyone else.

It is best to speak with a priest if you are unsure about your religious or spiritual beliefs; he will help allay your concerns.

Infertility

It was long thought that children born via reproductive technologies would almost certainly experience difficulties becoming pregnant as adults. Infertility is nothing to be afraid of. The original "IVF" children, who are now in their 30s and 40s, demonstrated through their own example that they are able to procreate. Natural processes lead to conception.

The majority of couples actually experience infertility, which is a sign that extracorporeal fertilization is necessary. Put another way, a man or woman’s infertility has been caused by illnesses, side effects, wounds, or infections. Their capacity for reproduction was normal at birth.

The genetic information reflected in the main characteristics is carried by the sperm and egg. Only if the spouses’ infertility is due to a congenital genetic anomaly can it be assumed that the child conceived through IVF will be infertile. These kinds of anomalies are uncommon. Furthermore, the geneticist will undoubtedly alert you to them prior to IVF, and donor biomaterial may be used in the process.

Thus, offspring born following IVF are possible. It is by no means a given that the child will inherit one spouse’s infertility, even if it is genetic. Similarly, not all genetic abnormalities are inherited by sons and daughters, and healthy parents do not guarantee a healthy child. This also applies to naturally conceived children.

They get sick more often and live shorter?

For some reason, the health anomalies of the baby are also thought to conceal the long-term effects of in vitro fertilization on the child and his parents. The mantra that all opponents of reproductive medicine use is the same: a conception that goes against God’s and nature’s will cannot be healthy. Because abnormal embryos are simply "weeded out" at the initial stage, proponents of IVF contend that the preliminary selection of embryos for implantation is the factor that virtually guarantees the birth of a healthy child.

You can debate incessantly. The arguments between the two sides will probably go on for many more years. Referring to medical statistics is worthwhile. Naturally conceived, "eco-children" experience childhood illness on par with their peers. They have every common "childhood" disease. These are typically ENT conditions, viral infections, and allergy disorders.

Compared to naturally conceived children, congenital abnormalities in IVF children are 45% less common. This is where preimplantation selection has its merit.

It is not feasible to produce statistics with greater detail. Research was done on specific groups only. A comprehensive analysis of the health of all five million people conceived in a test tube is not feasible.

Regarding developmental characteristics, offspring born with the assistance of reproductive physicians exhibit minimal differences from their contemporaries. There are virtually no disagreements among psychologists regarding this matter: emotional and mental development is not problematic. If there are exceptions, then typical children also experience them frequently. Because they are always desired and long-awaited, receive more care, and are not born by accident, babies born through IVF have a higher chance of developing into more fully formed adults. This implies that they will receive care and opportunities for growth within the family.

The life expectancy of "eco" babies is hard to predict. The first of these children are only forty years old, and far too little time has passed. It remains to be seen what will transpire next, but they are still alive and well. These individuals have acquired "senile" diseases; their aging characteristics and the most common causes of death remain a mystery.

From a donor cell – someone else"s?

Only half of this statement is true. This child will be genetically and blood related to one of the spouses. It should be mentioned that the spouses are informed beforehand of the potential risks involved in using donor tissue for fertilization. Whether they are prepared to raise a child who is only 50% their biological relative can only be determined by them. It should be mentioned that not everyone is deterred by this fact.

It is extremely uncommon for a doctor to advise using donor tissue. They attempt to use spouses’ oocytes and sperm the most frequently. A woman is only offered donation in the most dire circumstances—that is, if she is devoid of both ovaries and eggs.

An infertile man’s sperm typically retain some genetic material, even in the most extreme cases. The most crucial component of the sperm is its head, which contains the genetic material, even though it may become non-viable or lose mobility. It is taken out and inserted into the egg if needed. In just 1% of cases is donor sperm required.

Pregnancy and childbirth

IVF-accredited pregnancies do carry a slightly higher risk of miscarriage than naturally occurring pregnancies, but modern medicine is more than capable of preserving and extending the time before childbirth.

During IVF, multiple embryos are inserted into the uterus to enhance the chance of pregnancy. For this reason, following a successful IVF cycle, parents receive two or three babies at once in 45% of cases. One could argue that the only side effect of IVF is the possibility of multiple pregnancies.

Premature births are common among "IVF" babies. When there are multiple pregnancies, this is quite typical. When a single fetus is pregnant, delivery typically takes place between 37 and 39 weeks.

The baby is delivered via cesarean section most of the time in order to protect its health.

Children of celebrities

If none of the aforementioned arguments and proof are convincing enough for you, try looking for "10 differences" between your friends’ regular kids and their famous kids who were conceived in a lab. A brief list of mothers who underwent IVF and are raising these children is as follows:

• Julia Roberts – actress;
• Kristina Orbakaite – singer and actress (IVF was with Mikhail Zemtsov);
• Alla Pugacheva – singer (IVF in marriage with Maxim Galkin);
• Zhanna Friske – singer (IVF with Dmitry Shepelev);
• Yulia Dzherbinova – actress (IVF in marriage with Evgeny Dyatlov);
• Elena Borshcheva – actress, host, KVN-player.

Aspect	IVF Children
Genetic Differences	No inherent genetic differences compared to naturally conceived children.
Health Outcomes	Generally similar, but may have slightly higher risks of certain conditions, which are often due to underlying factors rather than the IVF process itself.
Development	Developmental milestones are usually met at similar rates as children conceived naturally.
Long-term Effects	Current research shows no significant long-term health issues unique to IVF children.
Psychological Impact	Studies indicate IVF children have similar psychological well-being as their peers, though family dynamics can vary.

The development, health, or abilities of children conceived through IVF are not essentially different from those conceived naturally. With their own personalities and potential, they develop just like any other child.

But because in vitro fertilization (IVF) is a medical procedure, parents should be aware of any potential risks or issues that may arise, such as low birth weight or premature birth. These are frequently associated with multiple pregnancies, of which IVF may occasionally raise the likelihood.

There isn’t any conclusive evidence that IVF has a different long-term impact on a child’s wellbeing than natural conception. IVF families go through the same joys and difficulties as any other family, and technological advancements keep the process safe and successful for both parents and kids.

Video on the topic

CHILDREN WITHOUT A SOUL documentary about IVF by Nadezhda Alyokhina

IVF CHILDREN: How are they different from ORDINARY? The impact of IVF on children"s health

How IVF children differ from ordinary children?

IVF children are infertile? Genesis Clinic Dnepr | Perelygin I.V

IVF children: what"s wrong with them

IVF CHILDREN | Are IVF children different from other children

IVF children – consequences in the future. How IVF children differ from ordinary children?

🔴 Children after IVF and normal children: what is the difference?