Let me try and explain a bit more
I know, I know, mine is not the popular point of view. To try and explain myself further with regards to your comments Enzyme:

Yes, nature is a wanker. But I believe nature should always be allowed to run it's course without interference, to a certain degree. Now cures for cancer etc etc I'm fine with. But I stand by my point that if you are unable to conceive naturally then consider adoption. I know it's not an easy route to take, but I think it's a better one than IVF.

I'm fairly sure they did not 'fit the requirements' for IVF in their home county.

I mean I find her attitude is 'Disturbing and wrong'. Not just hers, but all these women who have a craving for a child and nothing will stop them (we've seen a few stories about this on here as it is). I don't mean it in a nasty sense, I mean it in a 'I really don't understand it' sense. Being a bloke, I don't think I ever will.

As for my 'what kind of life will it have' comment, I'm thinking if nothing changes, she is going to have to take care of a child, pretty much on her own. I'm not saying it's impossible to take care of newborn baby in a wheelchair, but, say the babies on the floor, how do you get it? What happens if there is an emergency, such as a house fire? Now the two people I've known with MS are able to look after themselves perfectly well, but do still need help with certain things.

But I know this isn't going to happen. I know Mr Friend is going to have to give up a career he loves because the woman he loves wants a child.

And to make myself absolutely clear, yes, with the world currently the way it is, I do not believe infertile people should be given IVF.
(Big Smurf Brush me daddy-O, Wed 23 Apr 2008, 12:29, Reply)