Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Opinion

Judge orders 2-year-old IVF baby to be given to biological parents despite being raised by birth mom

Published

9 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Nancy Flanders

With the rising popularity of IVF, egg donation, sperm donation, and surrogacy, Americans have been fed the marketing line that biology isn’t what makes a family. Yet in cases like Sophia’s, it becomes obvious that biology certainly matters when the adults say it matters.

According to Haaretz, an Israeli court on Sunday ordered that, following a lengthy legal battle over an IVF mix-up, a woman who gave birth to a daughter and raised her for two years must now give the girl to her biological parents.

The woman and her partner underwent IVF treatment at Assuta Medical Center in Rishon Letzion, but as she neared the end of her pregnancy, she underwent testing after it was discovered that the preborn baby had medical concerns. During that testing, it was revealed that the baby she was carrying had no biological connection to her or her partner. She had been implanted with someone else’s embryo.

report on the situation found that the error was likely due to the heavy workload staff are facing at the fertility clinic following the government’s decision to move fertility treatments to private hospital settings – a move considered a financial benefit to the Health Ministry, hospitals, and doctors, but one that put patients at risk of errors.

Now, two years later, a judge has ordered the woman to hand the child, Sophia, who has a heart condition and developmental delays, over to her biological parents.

Benefits vs. damage

Judge Oved Elias of the Rishon Letzion Family Court said the girl should be given to her biological parents on the recommendation of Dr. Daniel Gottlieb, a psychologist appointed to the case, but against an affidavit from Welfare Ministry social workers and the head of Israel’s Child Protective Service. That affidavit advised that the girl should remain with the woman who gave birth to her, and her partner who have been raising her.

Elias determined that being given to her biological parents was in the child’s best interest because they are her natural parents. “The benefits that will arise from handing the girl over to her genetic parents and her life with them overcome the damage that will be caused by disconnecting her from the parents who have been raising her. The benefits of life with the genetic parents are, among others, in her future identity, connecting her to the family’s genealogy, a shared family story, and matching psychologies and family values,” he said.

He’s not wrong. Research has shown that children who live in a home with their married, biological parents are healthier both physically and mentally.

However, the removal of the child from the only parents she has known both inside and outside of the womb is likely to cause significant trauma. Studies have shown that taking babies from their birth mothers – whether they are biologically related or not – causes immense trauma for the child and can permanently alter her adult brain function later in life. While adoption seeks to heal the trauma that results when a birth mother feels unable to raise her child and lovingly selects a family to raise her baby, artificial reproductive technologies (such as surrogacy) deliberately create a trauma, with a child knowingly created and intended to be separated from his or her birth mother.

Birth parents and biological parents speak out

“Given that there was a major error in the IVF process, and given that, with cooperation and in a planned, monitored way it can be rectified with minimum harm, I cannot accept the stance that what’s done is done,” the judge wrote.

The birth parents argued that the biological parents do not know how to care for the child and her health needs properly, and that the situation should be left as is because “the family unit embraces the baby.”

“As a mother, I don’t understand how they can tear my daughter from me after I birthed her with blood, sweat, and tears? She is the fruit of my womb and I’ve been raising her for more than two years. As far as I’m concerned, I’ll wait until justice is done at the High Court of Justice,” said Sophia’s birth mother, who feels as though she’s been reduced to the status of a surrogate.

“I am Sophia’s mother, and she is a sweet girl who only months ago underwent a third life-threatening surgery. I’m not a womb for rent, and with all my grief for the woman who gave the egg, she didn’t make the child. I was implanted with the embryo, carried her, and gave birth to her, and I will not allow my daughter to be uprooted from me. It’s inhumane. I won’t lend a hand in risking my daughter’s life.”

Sophia’s biological parents, however, said that Elias’ decision “rectified” the mistake made by the IVF clinic. That mistake was determined to be that both women were at the clinic at the same time and had been called back for an embryo transfer in the wrong order.

“She is coming home to live with the family she was supposed to be born into. Everything was done to try to protect her privacy and allow her to be raised in peace. We are overjoyed and waiting for the moment we will finally be able to hug our daughter and be hugged by her, which is something we’ve been waiting for for so long,” they said.

Sophia’s birth parents have appealed the decision to the District Court.

Sophia’s case shines a light on the potentially serious harms of IVF and sperm and egg donation. The fertility industry treats children like commodities to be created and destroyed at will with adults as the clients, making decisions that are in the adults’ best interest, not the child’s. With the rising popularity of IVF, egg donation, sperm donation, and surrogacy, Americans have been fed the marketing line that biology isn’t what makes a family. Yet in cases like Sophia’s, it becomes obvious that biology certainly matters when the adults say it matters.

“[…] #BigFertility routinely implants someone else’s biological children into an intended mother or surrogate via donor sperm, egg, or embryos,” said Katie Breckenridge of the organization Them Before Us. “When adults choose to separate a child from their biological parents at conception, we shower those adults with congratulations and often call it ‘progress.’ Only when it’s a case of an IVF mix up is it a problem that babies go home with genetic strangers. In other words, biology matters only when adults want it to matter.”

Reprinted with permission from Live Action.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Health

Ivermectin & Fenbendazole Cancer Secrets Revealed

Published on

Vigilant News

Remarkable success stories are pouring in from people using Ivermectin and Fenbendazole to combat cancer.

Mel Gibson dropped a bombshell on Joe Rogan’s podcast, revealing that three of his friends had “stage four cancer,” and now “all three of them don’t have cancer right now at all.”

“And they had some serious stuff going on,” Gibson emphasized.

Dr. William Makis, who treated one of Gibson’s friends, has been rigorously researching the anti-cancer potential of Ivermectin and Fenbendazole over the past two years. During that time, he discovered, “There are over 100 papers on the success of Ivermectin and cancer.”

“Ivermectin can actually kill cancer stem cells,” Dr. Makis explained, noting that it targets the cells “that chemo can’t kill.” He added, “It can also reverse resistance that cancer cells develop to certain types of chemotherapy.”

The benefits extend further. “It [Ivermectin] makes cancer cells susceptible to radiation treatment as well. And so it’s a radiosensitizer,” he shared.

Yet, research into these applications has been neglected. “Big Pharma has completely abandoned it. Ivermectin is off-patent. No one’s going to make money on it,” Dr. Makis pointed out.

Taking action where others haven’t, Dr. Makis applied his findings to his practice. “I have over 1,000 cancer patients who are on either a combination of Ivermectin and Fenbendazole or Ivermectin and Mebendazole,” he shared.

Some of his patients were “given a terminal diagnosis” but are now “cancer-free” or have their “cancer under control.”

“Patients, for example, who are taking combinations of chemo and Ivermectin or radiation and Ivermectin are seeing dramatic results that oncologists have never seen, that radiation oncologists have never seen,” Dr. Makis shared.

“Tumors shrinking down to almost nothing, liver metastases disappearing, brain metastases disappearing.”

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of testimonials” documenting the success stories of Ivermectin and Fenbendazole, Dr. Makis added, offering hope to patients seeking alternatives.

He strongly believes that “the future of cancer care is in repurposed drugs.”

For more information on the use of Ivermectin and Fenbendazole for cancer,

follow Dr. William Makis MD on Substack.

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Like Administrative Arson, California’s Bad Ideas Spread Like Wildfires

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Frank Ricci

California’s wildfire crisis is a result of a mix of poor public policy, excuses and administrative overreach. This crisis is not solely due to natural phenomena but is exacerbated by years of misguided priorities and policy mismanagement.

In California, regulation has often been elevated to a near-religious status, where compliance with progressive ideals sometimes comes at the expense of public safety. This regulatory environment turns practical solutions into bureaucratic nightmares, where even simple tasks require navigating an endless maze of permissions and paperwork.

The result is a state where water resources are mismanaged, from inadequate retention to failing to have sound contingency plans for pumping when power is out or ensuring the system is designed to handle the fire load.

There is an overemphasis on environmentally friendly policies without adequately balancing the needs of the population or accurately measuring their impact and effectiveness.

When your home is on fire, you need a quick, competent response, properly supported by staffing, resources and clear lines of authority.

The prioritization of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) over merit-based hiring is evident in places like the Los Angeles Fire Department under Chief Kristin Crowley. Her commitment to DEI is often highlighted, leading one to question if this has potentially compromised operational readiness.

The primary focus of fire departments should be on the priority of life safety, incident stabilization and property conservation. When diversity overshadows meritocracy, there’s a shift from equal opportunity to equal outcomes.

Across blue states, there is a trend where HR managers focus more on diversity and soft quotas than ensuring applicants have the necessary physical strength, mechanical aptitude and cognitive ability for the job, regardless of immutable characteristics.

LAFD Assistant Chief Kristine Larson, in a recorded statement, responded to a query about her ability to rescue someone from a fire by saying, “Am I able to carry your husband out of a fire? Well, my response is he got himself in the wrong place if I have to carry him out of a fire.”

In the same clip, she focused on the racial composition of firefighters rather than their competence.

Merit should be blind to race or sex; it is about ensuring that firefighters or officers can master the skills, knowledge and ability needed to do the job.

Victor Davis Hanson has commented: “It was a total systems collapse from the idea of not spending money on irrigation, storage, water, fire prevention, force management, a viable insurance industry, a DEI hierarchy. You put it all together and it’s something like a DEI-Green New Deal hydrogen bomb.”

Moreover, fire departments in cities like Los Angeles, Seattle and New York are still dealing with the aftermath of the pandemic. There is a call for the reinstatement of firefighters who were dismissed for not being vaccinated, suggesting this was an opportunity to purge viewpoint diversity.

Elected officials should not socially engineer fire departments. True diversity comes from educational opportunities like school choice, opportunity scholarships and breaking the stranglehold of teachers’ unions while holding superintendents accountable.

Qualified personnel and proper water management alone won’t mitigate fires. Congress and California need to untangle the web of conflicting government agencies in wildland fire and forest management, ensuring clear lines of authority for public safety.

Environmentally friendly logging and cooperation with fire services for forest management could provide jobs, create fire lines, and ensure quicker response times.

Advanced technology for early detection, such as sensing fire towers, drones and satellites, should be utilized to direct air assets, allowing for a rapid response with helicopters or fixed-wing aircraft to stop or slow the spread of fire from the onset.

America does not have enough staffed air assets stationed, properly geographically deployed and on alert to respond at a moment’s notice. This means deploying air assets throughout the West Coast and in some cases changing policy to allow flying at night and ensuring availability seven days a week. The same applies to bulldozers and other heavy equipment; they must be pre-approved and ready to respond before any incident occurs, cutting through the red tape.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D) and the federal government have not met expectations, offering excuses rather than solutions. The public demands accountability not just promises. It is time for California to adopt common-sense wildfire management, focus on merit, manage natural resources wisely and reduce the bureaucratic hurdles that hinder effective action.

Only then can we address this crisis with the urgency and efficiency it demands.

Frank Ricci is a Fellow at Yankee Institute and was the lead plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case Ricci v Destefano. He retired as a Battalion Chief in New Haven CT. He has testified before Congress and is the author of the book, Command Presence.

Continue Reading

Trending

X