Why would you want to take a chance of having a baby in-vetro using your own sperm and egg if you are HIV positive? That makes no sense to me. Especially since there is no way to be certain that the virus won't be spread to your baby? Why not adopt? If you have money for in-vetro then you can surely afford adoption. There are many kids out there who need a good home.

But saying that I will say that they have just as much of a right to have a baby as anyone else. If they are paying for the in-vetro then who's business is it?

Cindy...Ga.

Why not adopt a kid instead? Taking the chance of passing on HIV isn't worth it.

No country will let an HIV positive couple adopt. IVF is their only option.

Adoption can be a lengthy process. Just steal one from a nursery.

The HIV is 100% removed from the sperm, so it's only a question of the pregnancy and birth.
Probably they will do a Caesarian to avoid transmission from the mother.

I can't believe Larry's suggestion!

Ruth
Martinez, CA

@ Ruth he'll give you the same pathetic excuse that he did me – it's just sarcasm – I just ignore his posts now since he doesn't add any value to the topics at hand anyway.

.5% is high. Because it's assuming things will go a certain way, such as the mother not getting sick during her pregnancy. If not everything happens right, the rate can be a whole lot higher. If I was a doctor, with those odds, I'd want them to have the baby too. I bet they have a hard time finding patients who fit into this category, for research.

As a mom who lost a son to a terminal illness (which I couldn't control), I wouldn't willingly risk putting another child in that kind of situation. I'm sorry for what's happened to them, and for it feeling that it's a "natural progression" , I understand that, and I understand wanting to have children, and not having that, but I really hope they don't risk it. And if they do risk it, I hope it turns out for the best.

I say more power to them. If you don't take the opportunities life presents, you'll always wonder what might have been. And life is just too short for what might have been. This couple shouldn't have regrets about having a baby. HIV-positive women have healthy babies all the time. This little one sounds like he or she would be blessed to be brought into a family where there is so much love for him or her. All babies should be so fortunate to have parents who want them this much.

I think the bigger question is what they would do if the baby actually contracted HIV? Why would they deliberately put that burden on an innocent child? Sounds too risky to me. The odds are already against them because they both have the virus, regardless of new procedures. Sounds more like a medical experiment to me.

Jolene, St. Joseph, MI

I disagree with the idea, I think the parent are being selfish, not giving a thought of their child life after. The researchers are not certain that the baby will be 100% free of HIV, even thought the sperm don't carry the virus.

Is it better for them to go have a baby on their own (without the science helping to remove the virus from the sperm) with a much higher chance of transmission?

You can't prevent anyone who has HIV from having kids in the first place, so why should this couple be different?

I think they have a really good chance to have a healthy baby.

Why not adopt a kid instead?

Maybe they want a kid with their own genes.

Adoption isn't the answer to everything.

The answer is – it is their choice as it should be. We can say what we would do – but many times the American way is trying to berate others and tell them what they should or should not do. ("Why don't you adopt? Why don't you do this or that or the other ?" - as if they are children and have not already considered it.)

Taking the chance of passing on HIV isn’t worth it.

You mean – to you. To them – I hope they make their decision regardless of what the rest of us think. Looks like they have a good chance of having a healthy baby..

Many mothers who have HIV now either don't know or if they do, they aren't receiving the medications they should take that reduces the possibility of transmission. So how is that different? At least this couple 1) knows of the virus and 2) is taking the steps to reduce transmission as much as possible.

I think a less than 1% chance is pretty good...

All anyone can really do or say is wish them the best.

I can't begin to put myself in this position nor will I pretend to know what's morally right or wrong.

I do have confidence that whatever their decision, all parties included it is based on what help medical science can and cannot do and not what opinions from strangers matter.

It seems obvious that this can be done with no harm to the child and yes there is risk involved in ALL pregnancies.

I wish them the best. This could not have been an easy decision.

The article didn't mention removing the HIV from the mother's eggs – is this possible and is it needed? Medical advances have made a host of things possible and if the baby can be born without HIV that would be great, but have the parents considered the possibility that they may not live long enough to raise the child and made provisions for that? I hope it works out for them and in the best interests of the child.

Annie Kate
Birmingham AL

i do believe that the new technology could allow them to have a health baby. And the baby would be loved dearly by the parents with HIV virus. But how long?

Where there is a will, there is a way. Where there is God therein lies the will and the way. I know an HIV couple, God fearing people who had a child the natural and he was born HIV free while both couple wee infected. What happens in their marriage bed is their own to decided.

If you knew your unborn child would die of leprosy would you conceive?? if you did it would be child abuse, as is this.

Without knowing the potential parents and how their bodies and they (mentally and emotionally) are handling their HIV, I can't judge.

Technology is catching-up but, until the late-90s, an HIV diagnosis was frequently a death sentence and the fallout from medications was sometimes worse than the illness itself. Some of that fallout still remains including people who contract secondary, insurmountable illnesses and SUFFER dramatically while trying to buy time. That suffering is painful and demoralizing. Imagine that when thinking about the parents and the child. I fear many of us who are commenting have never seen nor experienced this kind of HIV-related suffering, so it's hard to understand exactly how mentally and physically debilitating it can be. On the other hand, a free mind, a free spirit and the tenacity to push forward and not to succomb emotionally (and physically), to not give up, is what I wish for every person who has any kind of chronic illness.

This world has just gotten to be too much for me! On the one hand we fear the Government is getting too much control over our freedom. We wonder if one day we will even have a choice of what we'd like to eat, drink, smoke, drive, live in, purchase, or sell ! On the other hand, we wonder why our Government seems oblivious to the present decay of morals, values, justice, and christian teaching in our societies! The sanctity of human life is almost non-existent today. We kill will no remorse and create by any means possible, a mistaken creation is abated or exterminated without a thought! Sadly those paying the greatest price in our over controlled or under controlled societies are our children! Makes me wonder if God created Space Ships so he'd have somewhere to put his next creations while he rebuilds earth.