 |
|
|
|
|
August 6th, 2010
12:40 PM ET
First U.S. test tube baby is a mom
The first woman to have been born through in-vitro fertilization in the United States became a mother herself yesterday. Elizabeth Comeau, born Elizabeth Jordan Carr, is 28 years old and works for the Boston Globe. She looks back on her experience as one of America's most famous babies ever in this piece on Boston.com today. "I had a normal conception and pregnancy despite my abnormal childhood. And early yesterday, my husband and I had a baby boy 'the normal way,' proving (I hope) that I’m just like everyone else," she writes. Friends at school knew that she was an in-vitro baby (she hates the term "test tube baby" because the process involves a petri dish, not a tube). The other kids did not tease her, but some would want to sit next to her at a homecoming game since a camera was following her around. She has been in the spotlight nearly all her life, since her birth on December 28, 1981. The photo above shows her in 2002, attending a World Infertility Month dinner at the United Nations in New York. After marrying and taking on a new last name, she had more privacy, but wanted to come out with her story now because "If my story helps couples or families learn about in-vitro fertilization, then the loss of privacy is worthwhile," she writes. The doctors who helped bring her into the world, Dr. Howard Jones and his wife Georgeanna, were more like grandparents to her, she says. Dr. Georgeanna Seeger Jones died in 2005. "It really hit me that I would never be able to say thank you to her, ever," she says in the video with her article. "How do you thank somebody for bringing you into the world? You really can't." She also notes that the pope still disapproves of IVF and so, in a sense, disapproves of her existence. "If I ever get a chance to meet him and talk with him, I'd try to set him straight, I think," she says. soundoff (1,006 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next »Leave a Reply to BrucePaumn
« Previous entryFood allergies: Your thoughts and questions
|
  About this blog
Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.
 |
|
|
|
I was a beaker baby
Ha. Dani's comments are the best. Definitely a troll. These are the same people who don't want a Mosque at the 911 site.
YUM... thanks for the laugh!! If the cat could talk I bet it would say it tastes like chicken... very salty chicken...
Being the first IVF baby, I can imagine how she's had to listen to people's opinions about IVF science vs God her whole life. Sounds to me like she has a nice life, is busy being a mom, and so it's highly improbable that she's reading some of the ridiculous posts here. IVF helps people conceive. It's like other advancements like bypass heart surgery, chemo, transplants, etc. I know several IVF children and they are no doubt God's children.
God existed today = Isareal still existed.
God created everything even the test tube.
What is ISAREAL?
Sorry but your making us Christians look bad with your grammatical errors. XD
Chips off the old block.
CNN's title is false, She is not the first test tube baby, there were 9 births before hers. The only exception is that she's the first in the United States.
And by that qualification, she's the first one anyone cared about.
Thank you ALEK.
the headline says first U.S. test tube baby dumba$$
It does appear that the article title has been changed since first posted. The link from the CNN home page still says "first test tube baby is a mom" unlike the title of the page which now includes "U.S."
I'm very happy that this IVF baby was able to conceive and give birth in the natural fashion, but I think IVF is truly playing God too much. If your body is unable to conceive or fertilize, that's nature's way of taking you out of the gene pool. If it was an accident or surgery that made you unable to conceive or fertilize, that's different, but the majority of people who are having IVF are people who are simply incompatible with pregnancy.
Nature takes creatures out of the gene pool for a reason.
Linda – You're an insensitive woman who needs her tubes tied; hopefully you don't spawn any other hateful little humans/creatures!
Using your argument then any sort of life saving medical procedure is defying nature. If you were dying from cancer would you refuse chemotherapy? If you had a heart ailment would you refuse surgery or heart medicine? Do you not take antibiotics? Refusing any of these treatments would allow nature to remove you from the gene pool. Your argument is also flawed because many women who give birth via an assisted pregnancy later go on to have children through natural conception. Sometimes the body just needs a little assistance. It is not playing God because ultimately, if God does not want the child to be born, then it will not be born.
My husband and I both hold doctorate degrees. I am a third generation physician. I have no medical problems but was not able to conceive naturally and conceived through IVF. I have an above average intelligence son thanks to IVF. Why do you think nature would want to select my genes out?
Additionally, IVF is very expensive, and without making generalizations, is restricted to people who can afford it, probably educated pople. Why would nature want to select those people out? With your logic people with chronic diseases such as diabetes should not have children, because of their "damaged" genes. Think before you speak.
So what you're saying, Linda, is that the crack whore down the street who has 5 children that are now in the system with various disabilities and hardships was "allowed" to concieve because she offers this world better genetic options? But my husband and I, contributing members of society and otherwise healthy aren't suppose to have children because it would be better for the gene pool? OK, sure, that's sound logic.
"Nature takes creatures out of the gene pool for a reason."
Yes, and rest assured your time is coming.
pity nature didnt take you out of the gene pool. looks like your will pass along your stupidity genes to your children to continue the dumbification of america.
If she was born in 1981, can she really be 28 ?
Uh....yeah. Her birthday just hasn't come up yet this year.
Are you serious? Were you a test tubeless baby?
I am 38 was born 10/10/71
Congrats, you have won clueless question of the week!
Wow...just wow.
come on... I don't believe this story for a minute... youtube wasn't even around in 1981... oh, wait, *test*tube... I feel so foolish... but it would be cool to be the first youtube baby...
that's awesome!!!
GOD IS SOON TO RETURN... ITS HEAVEN OR HELL NO MIDDLE ... SO IF YOU DONT KNOW GOD YOU SHOULD GET TO KNOW HIM. YOU CAN ARGUE THE YOUR OPINION ALL DAY LONG BUT IN THE END GOD IS REAL.
PRAIZE JEBUS!
I love that song but I think you have a typo... it's not "It's Heaven or Hell"... it's "It's Heaven and Hell... I can tell" Then a little white shape looked down on me and said "Heaven is where you ought to be" then a Big black shape looked up at me and said "come with me, and I'll give you desire... but first, you've got to burn, burn, burn, burn in fire!" – RJD, side A, song 1...
god is an imaginary friend for adults... sorry to burst your bubble its a cute story and all but gimme a break!! "I belive this because someone told me to not because there is actual fact!!" smart one.
Lol, suuuure. You know they've been saying that for hundreds of years now, right? Longer, really. And which god? Your little magical sky fairy is only one of literally thousands of gods which have been worshiped throughout human history. Lots of those gods are supposedly going to come back to Earth someday, so you might want to be a bit more specific about which imaginary friend you're talking about.
Are you a Fundementalist Christian version of the Taliban?
Obviously you are a BRAINIAC!
How does every commentary on a newspaper article always turn into a heated discussion about God?
My thoughts exactly!
Because that is how he gets his message out in the 21st century... I've always heard he works in strange ways... Personally, I think he likes to watch us all, sort of like I enjoy Seinfeld (a show about nothing... with a lot of humor)... of course, God didn't like that show what with the whole Jewish community not believing he has a kid...
I'm not sure either, but it must be Obama's fault somehow.
Agreed!!!
IVF Dad – Haha! That was funny on more than a few levels. Sardonic & wry with near perfect delivery and [as I read] timing. That you chose this hive of frothy – dogma spewing arm-chair activists as your audience, pure genious sir!
To the rest of you – Just because IVF Dad weakly relies on the availability heuristic in concluding the increased likelyhood of stupid test tube babies dosn't necessarily prove he's incorrect. Ignoring the fact thit was clearly a joke – Does someone care to bring a sound and humerously superior and counter-argument?
Hey Toolshed,
How long did it take you to write that little witty commentary.
"Look at the big brain on BRAD!"
Do you even understand what you are saying..? UGH.... it all sounds something like: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....
Is it just me or is that woman fat? Dont hate on me, but i have seen this trend, a couple of friends f mine have IVF kids, they re normal, but almost all of them are fat. well u may sa the parents are fat so are the children, but they arent! Maybe parents need to put IVF kids on a diet?
They're fat because they're Americans. Most of us are fat.
Maybe you need to kill yourself. I thank you in advance on behalf of the gene pool.
If God didn't want us to use the brains he gave us to make lives better, we would all still be running around whacking each other with clubs and wearing animal skins.
I still wear animal skins. And I sometimes whack people.
I just want to know one thing...
what came first the chicken or the EGG?
No need to clap folks; I'll be here all night!
Too bad IVF doesn't always work. The doctors still take your money, though...
I don't wear pants when I eat nachos.
He's not joking, I know his kids, they're idiots...
Nicole – lmao! Most of the kids I've met generally don't seem to know much of anything.
I wont speak to the religious take on IVF – but from a societal standpoint, it's a little frustrating. There are lots of kids who need homes and lots of parents unable to naturally create kids of their own (either for medical reasions, or because they are gay). It just seems like an obvious solution, adoption...rather than invitro. Most people are just too selfish to want to do adoption – "it's not the same". Of course not, but why does it have to be?
It is the most basic instinct for humans to need to pass on their own genes. But I do agree with the need for adoption, perhaps we need to find a way to make adoption easier & less expensive.
I hope you're adopting. Because all orphan children deserve homes. Don't put the responsibility on infertile couples just because it's easier. Adoption shouldn't be a consolation prize. You have to want to adopt. it's a huge and very important commitment that should NOT be looked upon as an easy solution for infertility.
And for the record, the adoption process, especially in this country, is very judgmental and rigid. And international adoption makes IVF look cheap. For many people, fertility treatments are the only option.
And don't call us selfish without knowing who we are. My husband and I tried to adopt, but because I have chosen to have no contact with my abusive parents, we were turned down. My husband and I will make good parents. I will not repeat that pattern of abuse. But the social worker had her rigid rules about what makes a good family and decided that anyone who's been n therapy shouldn't be a parent. Because of her narrow-mindedness, we couldn't become adoptive parents.
Know what you're talking about before you speak.
Cristina, my reply isn't about whether you should have adopted or tried ivf because there's no reason why i would know which is better for you. i was just surprised you wanted to adopt and let one social worker say no to you - there are so very many adoption agencies with different requirements and protocols.
So your point is that it's infertile couples JOB to take care of the orphans of the world, not yours? If you're worried about them being adopted, YOU DO IT.
Sickenning sad to hear this from a female. This is one opinion you need to keep to yourself.
I would have to agree with Jessica – every day we see kids that, for the most part, are wonderful and need adoptive homes. Their biggest drawback in many prospective parents eyes is their age or their race. In others, it's developmental or possibly inherited mental problems. They are not perfect, they may never be perfect, but they all deserve to be loved and cared for.
Of course, it's natural to want a child the shares your genetic inheritance. It's a natural instinct. Where I am , we are blessed with many foster parents that are doing just that. They become foster parents first and almost without exception, they go on to become adoptive parents as well. In many cases, they also have children born to them both naturally conceived and through artificial means. They will be the first to tell you – there's no difference. They love them all.
If you're undecided as to whether to adopt or try other means – become a foster parent. It's a wonderful way to help a child while deciding on your course of action. Don't let the guidelines of one agency or caseworker deny you that chance. There are plenty of foster and adoptive parents out there that have suffered abuse at the hands of family members. In our agency's opinion, Cristina, you having had therapy and choosing to cut contact with the abuser would make you an excellent foster and adoptive parent. So please, don't give up, if adopting is what you really want to do, find a caseworker and agency that is more open-minded. We are out there.
I would have to agree with Jessica – every day we see kids that, for the most part, are wonderful and need adoptive homes. Their biggest drawback in many prospective parents eyes is their age or their race. In others, it's developmental or possibly inherited mental problems. They are not perfect, they may never be perfect, but they all deserve to be loved and cared for.
Of course, it's natural to want a child the shares your genetic inheritance. It's a natural instinct. Where I am , we are blessed with many foster parents that are doing just that. They become foster parents first and almost without exception, they go on to become adoptive parents as well. In many cases, they also have children born to them both naturally conceived and through artificial means. They will be the first to tell you – there's no difference. They love them all.
If you're undecided as to whether to adopt or try other means – become a foster parent. It's a wonderful way to help a child while deciding on your course of action. Don't let the guidelines of one agency or caseworker deny you that chance. There are plenty of foster and adoptive parents out there that have suffered abuse at the hands of family members. In our agency's opinion, Cristina, you having had therapy and choosing to cut contact with the abuser would make you an excellent foster and adoptive parent. So please, don't give up, if adopting is what you really want to do, find a caseworker and agency that is more open-minded. We are out there.
social worker
My husband and I have several biological children and several adoptive children, ages tot to teen... including a large sibling group from Social Services. Yes, it is tough to adopt. You are at the social worker's mercy, and many of them dont' return calls, don't set up appointments in a timely manner, we even had a social worker hold on to our homestudy for over 8 weeks without doing anything with it, paper work was lost by a worker, DHEC will give your home the white-glove test.
Having children in your home, who are not biologically yours, is also a challenge. Since you have not raised them for the first part of their lives, you need to work out many behavioral isses, some that might drive you up a wall. Since they have usually been in several foster homes, they have emotional issues and attachment issues, and fears of being taken away yet again. Since they didn't have a stable home life, they will be leery of you and afraid to love you, scared that they will lose you, too. You will hear heart-wrenching stories of what the children have been through, what they have seen, what they have heard, what they have experienced, and your heart will ache for them as you console them the best you can while they still might not view you as "mom" and "dad". There are many challenges to adopting an older child or a sibling group... it takes a very strong person to do so, and when we started the journey I didn't realize how tough it truly would be, but I thank God that we stuck with it. The easiest part was falling in love with the children... everything else was *more* than a headache! Adoption is NOT for everyone, and there are people who start the adoption process, only to realize that it wasn't really for them... and that's nothing to condemn them for. As I said, it is VERY tough.
But it's the right thing for us, and I wouldn't have it any other way. All of my children are MY children, whether they came through birth or adoption.
Saying that people who can't conceive should adopt, is cruel. When you feel it in you heart that you want a child, to carry that child and feel it growing inside of you, and to give birth to that child, adoption cannot even begin to fulfill that. We have been blessed with children by birth and through adoption, and I thank God for each and every one of them. Nobody should tell anyone else how to add to their family.
Just wanted to share our story in the hopes it might help someone else.
Does that make this baby a test tube baby's test baby?
Funny how the story is so inaccurate about the 1st IVF baby being American. This is not true. PLEASE will someone fact check LOUISE BROWN.
Ernie:
Louise Brown was the world's first IVF baby. She was born in the UK not the US.
This story is about the first American IVF baby, not that the first IVF baby was American.
Louise Brown was the first IVF baby ever. She was born in the UK. This article clearly states that this woman was the first American IVF baby.
The article says she was the first one in the US, not the first one ever.
"First U.S. test tube baby is a mom" another non-reader.
"Funny how the story is so inaccurate..."
The not-so-bright often provide their own amusement. And amusement for everyone else too.
Congratulations on your baby! Infertility is a hard road to be on. Your parents were pioneers and for that I appreciate them! I needed help getting pregnant and did not have the full support of my Catholic church which really upset me as recently as 2004. I can understand your frustration and I hope you do in fact get to meet the Pope some day! With that, I have come to peace with it. My oldest daughter starts kindergarten in 2 wks at Catholic school. Anyway, God created us all. The doctors who have developed the science to help those of us who need it. He wouldn't have given them those skills if he didn't support bringing new life to those that want it and need help.
Enjoy your baby boy!! He too is a miracle!
I don't think the point is who God puts or keeps on this earth, this earth is crap. Its who He takes with him.....
She's obviously a lesbian and very unattractive.
You're obviously a moron and completely useless.
Lets post your face and let the world judge you.
I'd like to see what effect on future history her lineage will have since she, without in-vitro, would otherwise not have been. In-vitro has litterally changed our future.
Really? Don't you think tequila's done far more to change our future than IVF???
It's sad that the article says since the pope disapproves of IVF that she feels he in essence disapproves of her existence.
I have to say that if any of us could trace our family tree back to day one, I bet most of us can say the same.Given adultery and incest and fornication and all the other ways kids come onto the earth..I think most of us might have come about through some disapproved of situation that happened In the past.. Just trace the tree back far enough~!
So I have to say, I don't think I would allow the pope to make me feel I needed to prove anything..
We all are who we are..And 'here,' no matter what did or did not happen to cause that.
That she feels the pope disapproves of her existence is her own unsupported opinion and a personal crack at the pope; as though she sought a faint moment of pity for herself (no i am not Catholic). i respected her throughout the whole article until said something she could not know that was off the point of the article anyway. If she does get to meet him face-to-face i hope he sets her straight - i doubt he has any ill feeling toward her existance at all. She just has it toward him.
I think that it is wrong sorry...now were playng god dosent seem like we should be able to do this
Improving a couple's chances of conceiving a child is no more playing God than administering antibiotics or doing a kidney transplant. If you believe in God, then you believe life cannot exist without his blessing. This is as true of children conceived through IVF as it is of any other human being on the planet. In the end, that life is still God's decision.
You lady, are a demon spawn. Stay off of my property.
Elite sack of ????
Putting asider all of the references to God... The original Roe-vs-Wade decision referenced the viability of the fetus as a critical determination on when abortions could be performed. The technology of the early 70s did not make a fetus truly viable until about 3rd trimester. A test tube baby, and one that has now given birth, essentially proves the fetus is viable at conception...
Wow, you are really, really not bright.
They don't grow the whole baby in the petri dish, moron. The eggs are implanted within a few days.
Well said, Steve. Mark C does not know the concept of conception. It starts when the two (sperm and egg) gets together.
This is so stupid, I can't even find the words.
The article states that the "Pope" does not approve of IVF, as if his beliefs on this issue were a personal whim. The Catholic Church as a whole decries IVF as unnatural and inhumane. See this article: http://www.catholicinsight.com/online/church/vatican/article_475.shtml
And if the Pope said something different tomorrow, the whole Church would be obliged to believe something different.
did they write the doctrine while while raping a choir boy?
Wow! Some of these posts are beyond belief. They kinda follow the logic "God gave us horses so cars are evil"
Duh, BrianW. Cars ARE evil. Haven't you ever seen 'Christine' or 'The Car'? These movies PROVED that cars are evil. Even PAul Newman in Disney's 'Cars' was creepy.
Only God can create life. The doctors start with something that already exist and already has life – a sperm and an egg. All these doctors did was do things a little differently. I don't think God cares how it happens as long as it happens. He said be fruitful and multiply. Who cares how you multiply...just multiply!
there is so much stupidity on the board its mind boggling. you are correct though. a sperm and an egg are both already living cells. they are alive. the only thing the doctor does is hook them up. a doctor is nothing more but a chaperone. the doctor is the ultimate match-maker. that's it. science provides the technology for the doctor to get two living cells (sperm and egg) together. nature takes care of the rest with cell division and embryogenesis.
Awesome story, and I love the subtle shot taken at the pope (intentional or not) for his stance on the issue by the failure to capitalize "the pope."
Not capitalizing "the pope" is correct. It is only capitalized when used as a title, as in "Pope Pedophile Protector III".
Boy, girl or vial?
"I have as much religious authority as the pope, just not as many people who believe it."
Assuming you've never protected pedophiles, you have more.
It is interesting how quick people jump on the anti-catholic bandwagon with the comment she makes about the Pope (which really it is the entire church's belief, not just one man) disapproving of IVF. Disapproving of IVF does not negate nor dismiss her existence or God's love in creating her. Amazing how things get twisted so people can bash others. Regaedless of your fertility beliefs, stick to the subject and not extrapolate that Catholics would look down upon her or her existence – utter nonsense and the antithesis of Christian love.
If that "one man" changed his mind tomorrow, the "entire church" would be obligated to agree with him or risk excommunication.
For the most part alot of you have gotten off the subject, she was merely talking about being the first test tube baby and now at 28 years old having a baby. As far as "God" none of us would be here regardless how we were conceived.
It is interesting how quick people jump on the anti-catholic bandwagon with the comment she makes about the Pope (which really it is the entire church's belief, not just one man) disapproving of IVF. Disapproving of IVF does not negate nor dismiss her existence or God's love in creating her. Amazing how things get twisted so people can bash others. Regaedless of your fertility beliefs, stick to the subject and not extrapolate that Catholics would look down upon her or her existence – utter nonsense and the antithesis of Christian love.
no comment
If God didn't want us to do this, why did he give us the capacity to?
It's called freewill – you can do as you choose. We have the capacity to commit many atrocities. When it cmes to procreation, there will always be a large number of people that believe its best not to let science intervene in the natural order of life.
Yes, being a baby machine does prove you are like everyone else. Congrats.
My daughter was a "test tube baby" after 5 years of heartbreak she was born a year ago. I really think the struggle has made me a better mom, I don't take her for granted. I am horrified by the pope's stance is it fair that I should't be a mom just becuase my body doesn't work the way I want it to? How dare he.
Again, with the Catholic/Pope bashing. No one is judging YOU! Life and its complicated issues are not solely about YOU. Catholics believe that procreation of children is not meant to be messed with – period. Catholics do not think ill of you becaseu you believe in that and you are a valid loving human being like everyone else. People (especially Americans) need to quit thinking that someone else's beliefs are a condemnation of others and attack.
No, he simply thinks that you should have adopted one of the millions of kids who need homes instead of spending years and tens of thousands of dollars to avoid it. I can't say I blame him.
Here's a hint, Floris: we DON'T CARE what he thinks. He should worry more about the child-molesting priests he has protected and less about how people choose to have their children.
i find it funny to read the stupidity from people like Floris. if you need help getting pregnant you are a vile human because it is your burden to adopt children. what a joke. i
great another fat, overweight American slob. congratulations.
ha, you probably havent had sex in a long time so you take it out on women who are beyond your reach.
I like popsicles
I wouldn't be too worried about what the Pope thinks ... What could he possibly know about fertilization? ... unless he's been lying to us all of these years!
Nah, it's hard to fertilize 8-year-old boys.
he's tried. he was upset to find out that boys dont have eggs in their butts.
Louise Brown was always considered the first "test tube" baby born in 1978. http://history1900s.about.com/od/medicaladvancesissues/a/testtubebaby.htm
and now we change the course of evolution... what once could not reproduce and strive can now reproduce passing on bad genes...
Ironically, the title and main page link to this article use the term "test tube baby" despite a petri dish being used as well as the subject's disdain for the term.