Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!

It's no secret that Silicon Valley is a workplace that favours youth. Not just because the young have new ideas and perspectives, but also because 20-something geeks who work with all their friends have no problem putting in 60 hours a week cracking out code. Now, it seems that some of the biggest names in the business are …

[Anonymous Coward]

What...the...fuck....

I guess when you need a database of human genetics, something, or someone has to give. W.T.F!!!

So many flags raise on this issue...so many. I'm starting to fear why the government isn't stepping in on issues like these.

[Sirius Lee]

Re: What...the...fuck....

Right there with you. Because there are so many reasons why this would be a terrible scenario, my take is that this is a fake story. How would this even come up in a conversation with HR in a way that is taken seriously?

[Phil_Evans]

Re: What...the...fuck....

Yes and outside the f$cked up world of app/web/cool 2.0 you would be right. But in the hyperspace reality of tech-world, this is quite normal. It's *so* laissez-fair that I guess if you show enough front, you get away with it.

And you're probably right anyway - the programme itself is probably fluff, but it does give desperate managers a further stick, sorry, carrot to use in '360s' and Performance reviews. "Ms J S Node, have you thought about the benefits of delaying motherhood to a point where people will confuse you as grandparents of your children?'

Truth is stranger than fiction. And becoming more disturbingly so in this case.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What...the...fuck....

Dear misogynists,

Don't you see that this is a game changer ? Or, is this making you scared of competition ? Imagine a world where there is no differnece between a man and a woman. Imagine the world where a woman doesn't have to compromise her career just because the choice between kids and full career is mutually exclusive.

In fact, I strongly believe that the women who do not choose this option are doing a great disservice to other women. Women who decide to have kids early, not only they setup themselves for a less than deserved career but also re-inforce the stereotype where the wife is expected to take a break after marriage to look after the kids.

Instead _all_ women should be working towards building their career, wealth and esteem in their most productive years, just like _all_ men. This is just another step for the wronged half of humanity to get what they truly deserve.

Cheers!

[mpm]

Re: What...the...fuck....

Um no. What's needed is a workplace culture that doesn't penalise you for choosing to have kids. And that's no idealist, it's a legislated requirement here in Australia.

[Intractable Potsherd]

Re: What...the...fuck....

I'm not sure what the big fuss is about. It is not uncommon for women in several professions to freeze eggs in their early- to mid-20s so they can be implanted later. Women going into the law and medicine are particularly well-represented in this activity, at least in the UK. The biggest problem is that eggs, being very large cells, have quite a large failure rate when it comes to being viable on thawing - embryos are much easier, but have additional legal problems unless anonymous donor sperm are used (which carries its own set of emotional risks later in life).

[Michael H.F. Wilkinson]

Re: What...the...fuck....

I get this feeling that somebody out there has got themselves a white Persian cat.

[Amorous Cowherder]

Re: What...the...fuck....

Right!

So you leave the company for whatever reason, what happens to your DNA, so to speak? I take it you have 48 hours to come up with the cash or we dump your eggs in receptionist's fridge for you to come pick up!!

[Michael Thibault]

Get the butter

Popcorn. Major popcorn!

[Robin]

Re: Get the butter

The 90s called, they want their metaphor back.

Unless you do actually sit and eat popcorn while refreshing comments pages, in which case I apologise.

[AceRimmer]

@Robin Re: Get the butter

find-your-sense-of-humour.com

[Robin]

Re: @Robin Get the butter

@AceRimmer I've tried before but I get a 404 response.

Coincidentally, from where I'm sitting I can see my signed Chris Barrie picture, in Ace Rimmer get-up. Might be time to dig out the DVDs...

[Tom 38]

Re: @Robin Get the butter

Ace Rimmer is cool though... It would have worked better as a gag if you'd said it was his Gordon Brittas get-up.

[Phil_Evans]

Re: Get the butter

Ocean's Eleven Director Steven Soderbergh is on the other line - he wants to sue for plagarism.

[Neoc]

As part of a couple who appears to have waited too long to be able to have kids, let me say that I (for one) approve.

[Anonymous Coward]

As a parent I frankly disapprove

There is more to parenting than the biological part of producing a sprog.

Yeah, sure, go on, wait until your "succeed in you career". Then, do not complain that you can never experience going out to kick a ball, throw some hoops, hike across a mountain range or just plain silly go downhill on mountain bikes with your kids. It is not just a matter of dragging your oxygen bottle behind you. It is also a matter of attitude and aptitude - excuse me, but I do not quite see Victor Meldrew actively engaged in parenting.

So you may be alive while your kids are still growing up due to the miracles of modern medicine and the general increase in life expectancy. You will not be able to quite make it as a parent though. Not all the way either.

As far as companies like Apple and F**book providing this as a service, I do not see this as a service. I see this as a pressure to do that. I would much rather see them offering a proper set of maternity benefits, a proper holiday allowance and a proper accounting for time in lew.

[Joseph Eoff]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

As a parent, I approve.

My observation is that older people make better parents - not 60 years old with 2 year old kids, granted.

The folks I've seen where the parents had children early seem to turn out worse. The parents themselves are still maturing, and often don't have a really stable life and aren't really all that well prepared to be parents. They end up doing a poor job of raising the little ones because their own immaturity gets in the way.

Thing is, of course, people mature at different rates. Some folks will be good in their twenties, while others may stay immature doofuses until they land in the grave.

If this helps get better parents, then I'm for it.

[Ross K]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

As a parent, I approve.

My observation is that older people make better parents - not 60 years old with 2 year old kids, granted.

You're talking absolute rubbish. Age ≠ Maturity.

In once sentence you say that "The folks I've seen where the parents had children early seem to turn out worse. "

The next sentence you#re saying "Some folks will be good in their twenties, while others may stay immature doofuses until they land in the grave."

Which is it?

Back on topic - If somebody's that much of a workaholic that they're swung by a job that offers egg freezing as a perk, they might want to rethink the whole parent thing. If you don't have time for kids when you're in your 20s or 30s, what makes you think you'll have time when you're in your 40's or later?

[alwarming]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

> You're talking absolute rubbish. Age ≠ Maturity.

Obviously. And there is no proven corelation either. If anything its negative.

[David Roberts]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

As a 'mature' person who can still kick a ball, walk in mountains, and ride a bike long distance I am wondering quite how old you think these delayed parents will be?

Also your measures of what consists of good parenting seem amazingly shallow.

My parents were older than most when I was born. My mother was 40 and my father over 50.

I lost them sooner than most of my contemporaries but that doesn't make them bad parents.

In their case they waited to see who won the 2nd World War before trying for children.

So help to plan parenthood as part of your career seems a valid part of a health package, as do all the other measures to help address the declining fertiliy which the developed nations seem to be suffering.

Given that people are expected to work until 75 now to avoid a pension crisis it seems reasonable to be able to plan when in your career you start a family.

My kids and their friends seem to have had a much longer ' childhood' - that is being responsible only for themselves instead of rushing into reproducing - than my baby boomer generation. Paint me jealous. I'm trying to catch up now.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

@David Roberts

Freezing eggs for career (not medical, such as chemo) reasons means mother age 40+ and more likely 45+.

So even in the most "optimistic" case you are looking at parents which will be retirement age before their children graduate from school. Probably older. That is 2+ generations difference. It is difficult enough to comprehend your average teenager with 1 generation difference. Try comprehending it once you have reached the Meldrew stage.

Just to make it clear - I am not advocating teenagers pushing prams either. We actually owned a house and had stable jobs, etc by the time we got around to the kids "item". We did have them before the risk curve shoots up though and definitely before the need to even consider freezing.

[Tom 38]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

Freezing eggs for career (not medical, such as chemo) reasons means mother age 40+ and more likely 45+.

Conjecture? Many women in their 30s have difficulty conceiving, both my sisters waited until they were early 30s to try and have kids, then found out it wasn't that straight-forward and it took multiple miscarriages before I met my first nephew. If they had had eggs saved in their 20s, it would have been easier to conceive, and they would probably have had children earlier rather than later.

[JEDIDIAH]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

Once you hit 30, you have an increasingly greater risk of conceiving a genetically defective child. In some professions, you're barely going to be established by that age. In the US, you will likely be bogged down by student loans until that age (if not later).

Preserving the fresh eggs rather than trying to make do with the spoiled ones makes a lot of sense medically.

[JDX]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

People at 60 today are often as healthy as 45-year-olds were in the past. However menopause has not moved and is now relatively earlier in a woman's life.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: As a parent I frankly disapprove

Sounds like a cliche but you do decide to have kids from your heart, not your head. We all have to make a choice one way or the other, my wife and I chose to and I'm glad we chose to. It's not for everybody, my two cousins, both women in their mid 40's have decided not to have any kids and just enjoy life with their partners. They get the freedom to travel and enjoy financial freedom that parents may not. You have to decide your own priorities, it's far better you make a choice based on what you feel and that you do not feel pressured into making a stupid decision, these are new human lives you're dealing with it's not like buying a new sofa!

[Chairo]

That's not how it works

On the more cynical side, it could also benefit the employer as female employees would be under less pressure to have children earlier in their lives and as such could put in a few more years of long hours and heavy productivity for their company before starting a family.

Unfortunately the main limiting factor are not the eggs, it is the uterus. After reaching 40 or so, the chance that an egg nests in, decreases dramatically. Where it might help, however is to conceive healthy children, as the risk for a genetic defect increases with age. So this program might help people to get children later, but not by a huge margin.

And let's face the facts - one of the reasons for the low birth rate in developed countries is, that the family planning of many people often doesn't fit with the biological clock. Many seem to suddenly have a child wish when they reach middle age (part of the mid-life crisis?) and then it is just a bit too late and risky to conceive. If this program helps people to get healthy children and be happy, why should anyone be against it?

That said, yes, this can only be one small part of the package. Proper maternity benefits, child care support, etc. are certainly more important.

[the_curious_orange]

Re: That's not how it works

I'm not sure where you got your information from, but that's not quite right. Female fertility drops off dramatically after 40 years old due to the decreasing quality of eggs. Thar's the reason why the eggs don't "nest" -- the embryos are rejected because they're not viable. In fact, the uterus is still usable even when women are into their menopause. Hence the increasing number of over fifties giving birth using donor eggs and hormones to restart menstruation.

[Roland6]

Re: That's not how it works

"Unfortunately the main limiting factor are not the eggs, it is the uterus. After reaching 40 or so, the chance that an egg nests in, decreases dramatically."

I just love the fact that everyone seems to be forgetting the elephant in the room... male fertility!

The biological clock is ticking just as much for men as it is for women. It many surprise some here that one of the major reasons why a couple receives IVF treatment isn't because of the woman but because of the male firing blanks!

[frank ly]

"Unfortunately the main limiting factor are not the eggs, it is the uterus. After reaching 40 or so, ...."

Yes, but read on .....

"We also offer an Adoption Assistance program, where Apple reimburses eligible expenses associated with the legal adoption of a child."

This would cover the 'rent a womb' arrangements that happen, with associated legal issues. You can see where this is going.

[MrDamage]

You are confused.

Surrogacy is not adoption.

[frank ly]

Re: You are confused.

I know that surrogacy is not adoption. Note that I said "... would cover ..." and "... associated legal issues ..." and " ... where this is going ...". I'm trying to imply a future scenario ....... don't you get it?

[Ross K]

"We also offer an Adoption Assistance program, where Apple reimburses eligible expenses associated with the legal adoption of a child."

This would cover the 'rent a womb' arrangements that happen, with associated legal issues. You can see where this is going.

Possibly, or on a more down-to-earth level this would help to attract LGBT staff.

[Dick]

New sub-contract with Foxconn?

[returnmyjedi]

How many birthdays are they expecting their fairer gender employees to wait until they pop out a sprog? Freezing eggs would surely only be of benefit of they were going to use a surrogate or wait until the 'change' has kicked in, otherwise standard IVF and harvesting of the eggs at room temperature would be preferable.

[JDX]

Women who are set on children know they need to leave a safety margin to have a strong chance, so that's basically early-mid 30s. Leaving it until early 40s, many women can have kids but the level of risk/doubt is much higher so you wouldn't do that. Knowing you can confidently get pregnant at that age might well mean many wait an extra 5-7 years, and those are quite possibly your most valuable years - you're an expert in your field, doing something quite senior. And yet you're still pretty young and healthy.

[Anonymous Coward]

DR policy

Backup media multiple off site (complete)

Material for regeneration of workforce. (almost complete)

New host planet (in negotiation)

[Metrognome]

Hold on a minute

Guys,

Suspend your otherwise healthy cynicism and just look at the benefits without the names of the companies.

Why is it risible that a company shares in the (often considerable) expenses of adoption?

Similarly egg storage is not just used when females are "otherwise engaged" but very frequently in all sorts of fertility treatments that don't just spring from the female but also from the male.

At the end of the day, every government and medical council has established a code of ethics when it comes to these things and no employer's sponsorship can change these. If you must have a go at someone at least point do it at the right direction.

[Ye Gads]

I think this tells us something about these companies expectations on its female staff

It sends a huge signal that this is not a company where people with children are going to be happy. If you have a family or want to start a family, don't work here.

It's also signalling that it wants people who put career and job ahead of their personal life. This is a very strong "your job is your life if you work here" message. They're asking people to put off one of the most important decisions of their lives until it's convenient for the company.

And finally, it's a huge con. How many of these people are still going to be working at Apple and Facebook in 10 years, given how workers tend to job-hop. They're saying "don't have kids on our watch".

[foo_bar_baz]

Re: I think this tells us something about these companies expectations on its female staff

My thoughts exactly. It puts additional pressure on women not to take maternity leave. The peer pressure against maternity leave can be hard as it is already.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I think this tells us something about these companies expectations on its female staff

Perhaps it is more sane then to think women should be making babies and leave the real work to men, instead of trying to adapt the environment to better suit their needs at the expense of male co-workers?

[Fab De Marco]

Is there a ransom

They will happily freeze the eggs for them, but surely there is an ongoing cost to the company that stores the eggs to. So if they leave their job does the plug get pulled on their eggs?

You can leave but if you do we will kill your unborn hyperthetical children

[Alan_Peery]

Re: Is there a ransom

When leaving a job, benefits go away. So the departing lady would be offered the choice of paying what would be a small refrigeration charge, or letting the eggs go and going back to the standard biological course.

Why do you see this as a problem, unless it is badly administered and choice is not presented to the employee?

[El_Fev]

Hmmmmm

Think about it this way...."Do overtime .... or we pull the pull on the freezer"

.

.

.

too cynical??

[alwarming]

Re: Hmmmmm

Freezing Egg is a choice. It's a technology that was always available, which is now it's subsidized by your company. I see little wrong with anyone making that choice as long as its deemed medically safe for the new borns. While you and I can always question another person's priorities in life, but then aren't we all snowflakes ?

But the big problem I see (and I guess that's what OP is alluding to) is for the employees who do NOT elect this option. Now their bosses can say, "Hey, you are fired/demoted because you did not elect the company-provided-procreate-later option". Or, even worse, suddenly the media would label women who do not chose this option as "holding back progress".

A slightly better way for this provision would be: (1) The eager companies should cover this under the medical insurance plan. And do it quietly without talking about your employees' unfertilized eggs in the media. That way, it stays a "personal user choice" and the "employer" is out of the equation. (2) Media should avoid a "manufacturing consent" drive to make this the "progressive choice".

[CCCP]

It's just creepy

This puts a big black boot across the line of what it is appropriate for any company to get involved with. When to have children is a very personal decision than a company, or the state for that matter, should not have an opinion on. This is saying "we prefer you to have children later, please".

I'm sure this is filed under Innovative HR Policies whereas it should be chucked in the Inappropriate basket.

[CatW]

The State of Code

I just read the first paragraph - that was as far as I got.

The trouble with 20-something programmers is that they have no real world experience. I've heard this time and again in real business; That computers solve problems by creating more.

Simple example: Windows7 *Still* seem incapable of remembering that the task bar is supposed to be on a GUI layer above any window. The mouse pointer doesn't vanish behind things. If they can't get this right, and the two items are programmed by virtual community teams who have never met, then do I really want this system trying to produce a lush, and secure, web 2.0 experience?

"Age and experience will always overcome youth and enthusiasm" except it seems in programming where the most brain dead, fashionista web designer twat has 100% say over how the whole world has to interface with essential systems.

If we took out all the non-essential crap out of Windows, we'd need two less nuclear power stations on the planet.

[YetAnotherPasswordToRemeber]

Re: The State of Code

Perhaps you should have read more than the first paragraph as the article is nothing to do with writing code

[Spleen]

I assume freezing your eggs has an ongoing cost. (The first website I glanced at says $500 a year.) So imagine you're 35-40, you want to leave Facebook, you don't have enough saved up to meet the cost yourself until you find a new job - or when you get a new job, you won't have the disposable income to pay the egg company --- it's basically "work for Facebook and do whatever we say or we'll kill your babies".

Now obviously I am being hyperbolic. Quite frankly it shouldn't be that hard to make sure you can meet $500 a year out of your own pocket, a lot of people could find that simply by not going to Starbucks every day. But these days people spend everything that comes in and if they need something they put it on the credit card. Which means they are not able to meet the cost of a lost company perk, and I can see company-funded egg freezing creating a real personal crisis if that person leaves or is sacked.

[gnasher729]

Surely if you had your eggs frozen to proceed in your career, and at the age of 35-40 you haven't even got the cash to pay $500 a year for a few years, then you are doing something very, very, very wrong. Now imagine you had made the opposite decision, having a child at 25 which is now ten years old. If you didn't even manage to save a few thousand while holding a full time job, how would have raised and fed a child?

[Erik4872]

Ongoing cost - check!

"I assume freezing your eggs has an ongoing cost."

Oh, indeed it does, as does everything infertility related. This is the US experience I'm talking about so it may be different elsewhere. Fertility treatments are similar to cosmetic surgery - the cost is extremely high, demand is high, and insurance coverage is spotty or sometimes nonexistent. In our case, my wife's insurance plan covered parts of the whole IVF adventure but we still had to pay many thousands of dollars out of pocket. Because it's an elective procedure, and self-selecting for the affluent types, like plastic surgeons, fertility docs charge whatever their rockstar reputations bear. The clinic we selected was actually decent and did a great job, but you could tell they were clearing millions a year. Our doc was pretty up front about it -- he told me there are a lot of couples like us who have a flat budget and just want to see if they can fix a problem, but he also sees a ton of early-40s women who spent the last 20 years being lawyers, executives, etc. and now all of a sudden want a kid to add to the accessory closet. And that's where the majority of the clinic's income comes from -- the richer clientele will just keep trying and trying even after they've been advised that their probability of success is low. Less affluent folks will give it a couple of tries until their money and insurance coverage runs out.

So the moral of the story for all the 20something hard charging potential moms out there is that it's not a simple click of the "freeze/unfreeze" radio button on a web form. There are huge costs when you want to go turn those eggs into little dudes and dudettes!

[Mage]

Does this make medical sense

If there is going to be Chemotherapy etc ... Maybe. Otherwise isn't this a ploy to delude women into thinking they can put off having a family and purely benefiting the company that wants to own people?

Motherhood is much more than the age of the eggs. Also are artificially implanted pregnancies as safe as the ordinary natural kind?

[Anonymous Coward]

How is this good for women

I don't get how this is good for women, its another way of saying "you should not have kids" / "don't get pregnant"... there is plenty of time for that after you have moved on to another company.

[A J Stiles]

Next: Immortality

I fully expect that as soon as a viable immortality treatment is available, it will be offered as part of some tech company's private medical care package -- free, as long as you continue working for the company that is providing it.

[mrfill]

Re: Next: Immortality

If they offered the men penis extensions, would that balance things?

[Do Not Fold Spindle Mutilate]

Men will be paid less than women

Since men cannot receive this benefit this is discrimination against men. The employer must pay equal money for equal work. Women who choose while young not to have children will also not benefit and thus will receive fewer benefits.

[Jes.e]

Re: Men will be paid less than women

Men can avail themselves of this offer also. Coupled with a mandatory vasectomy, the cryogenic storage can be provided for free!

No more unplanned pregnancies!

[mpm]

Re: Men will be paid less than women

Right, except that men get paid more than women to start with. It's a terrible program, but your objection to it disregards the evidence.

[Erik4872]

Family Friendly workplace!

Speaking as the husband of someone who had to go through the IVF process later in life, for reasons other than working 80 hours a week in some Web 2.0 startup, those female employees might want to think about this. Pregnancies are higher risk when you're older, the work involved to unfreeze, fertilize and transfer those eggs back is expensive and painful, we got 2 awesome kids out of the deal, but what a pain in the butt it was.

Also this is a little different from the "lean in" SV female executive -- most Apple and Facebook employees aren't 45 year old millionaires who go to a fertility doc, write a $200k check and say "Give me a baby!" This is a company telling its workers that they are better off slaving away on code and putting off that messy childbearing thing until later.

I know the Millenial trend is towards fewer or no kids. In one sense this is good because people don't need children for a farm labor force anymore, and there's less chance of needing "spares" due to fewer childhood illnesses. But a policy like this should send up a huge red flag for any woman working at Apple or Facebook. I think they mean well, but I read this as "We'll do anything it takes to keep you on the 90 hour treadmill. Anyone who wants to enter the baby club will be subtly told that there are 500 other suckers waiting for your job." It reminds me of EA and other video game shops exploiting the legions of kids coming out of school willing to be abused so they can bresk into the exciting world of game development.

[Stevie]

Bah!

My hat is off to these organizations. They have finally found a way to get people to put their genetic information into the cloud and place it into the hands of those who have a history of treating other peoples data as their own.

When can we look forward to the Facebook Femclone* army duking it out with the Apple Femclone army for control of America, nay the World?

*Assuming they go the direct-to-haploid route here and don't get all icky with Zuckerjizz and Jobsjuice first.

[Gartal]

I feel it is all a bit spooky.

I want to get the house/car/career bit done before I have kids is all very well, it is a personal choice.

The "Let's Have Decent Working Conditions" is fine too, it is a possible draw card for those employers wealthy enough to offer it and thereby attract talent which they might not otherwise have access to.

The bit that spooks me is what happens when you sign a contract which has within it a clause that states that the party offering the contract may alter the terms and conditions of said contract at any time without notifying the person affected by that contract. Just like they do now.

Maybe I am just being a little/middle/lot paranoid but I find the idea of companies with as much dosh as Apull and Farcebook who are always looking TNBT holding onto a load of human ova just a bit scary.

Picture this:

Apull and Farcebook et al have a store of human ova. They are constantly on the lookout for The Next Big Thing. Everyone knows or should know that wearable computer technology is just a bit of fluff. A wrist watch is early Twentieth Century. Courtesy of writers like William Gibson and more to the point Neal Asher, the idea of implanted access to the internet and Clod computing is the only really logical step.

However, we know that data can be stored in DNA, something like 50Kb. Many countries now allow patenting of genes, to my mind a reprehensible practice. What is to stop a high tech company with a vested interest in on going revenue and with a large store of human ova performing an "Oops, sorry Mrs/Ms Hematemesis, the fridge broke down and your eggs are cooked." and growing a legion of Company owned people? People with "This person is the patented property of (Name Your Company)" written into it's DNA?

I can see it happening and creating a whole group of Slaves. Or something akin to the society shown in the original Rollerball in which Everything is run by a couple of large corporations but in which the drones are the property of that corporation, also a bit like Brave New World but with the conditioning determined genetically rather than behaviourally.

Maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing, after all, we have animals for specific purposes and have done for thousands of years. We breed bovines for meat and cheese, ovines for meat and clothes and politicines for target practice. Would it be a bad idea to breed keyboard operators with extra resilient wrists which are immune to RSI and brains which are immune to drudgery? Or people who find the greatest joy in cleaning the bog? What if you didn't have to do the housework because you were able to go to Apull and buy a person running IOS V27 with the Happy with Housework and a Bit of Slap and Tickle app? You wouldn't have to have manufactories to turn out robots, you could engineer these people to subsist one something somewhat sludgy and brown and made from toxic waste a la Robocop and because they are running the "I am Happy No Matter What" app with the "Incurable Optimism Under The Most Stressful Of Circumstances" and "I am Satisfied With My Lot" plugins, there would be no whinging from the lower orders.

We could bring back the Good Old Days of The Ole South without having to worry. No one would be unhappy with their lot, Apull shares would be off the planet and the Alphas would be free to pursue that typist with the pneumatic tits.

[ButlerInstitute]

Don't do it !

Don't do it ....

If only freezing were guaranteed to work.

And IVF is only at about 20%. (and that doesn't mean "do it five times and it'll work")

And ladies, egg donation is *not* as straightforward an activity as sperm donation for us gentlemen - you really, really won't enjoy it....

And then in x years time - "now I'd like to conceive I find I can't, and the eggs that the company paid for me to have extracted and frozen (and have paid for the storage of) turn out not to be viable - how much can I sue for ?"