"Frozen Angels"

Before I went to bed last night, I set the TiVo to record a few things. One of the shows was an episode of the PBS series Independent Lens called "Frozen Angels". The show looked at the assisted human reproduction industry at its epicenter, Los Angeles. From the broadest view, the documentary split the topic in two: it examined the industry, i.e. - what the businesses do and how they do it; it also looked at the people involved, both on the business side and the people who donate their gametes & benefit from the technology. The personal or human element was juxtaposed against some long sequences of the hustle & bustle of urban life in L.A. This involved shots of traffic jams on the freeways, cityscapes focusing on the tall buildings, etc. with music overlayed and an interviewee telling his or her story. These sequences reminded me of the work of Errol Morris, especially with the Philip Glass-like music involved.

While many people were interviewed, a select cadre of folks had the focus upon them. There was a surrogate mother & the couple who hired her, a young woman who donates ova to In Vitro Fertilization clinics, a man who was the result of IVF that used sperm from the Nobel Sperm Bank, as well as a trio of people from the industry - a bioethicist & a couple men who run businesses in L.A.

The surrogate mother and the ova donor both came across as being altruistic. There was definitely money involved but their comments regarding their motivation all centered around a desire to help people who cannot have children the old fashioned way. I like the way the filmmakers juxtaposed these sequences with others in which these women basically discount their biological roles in the process of reproduction. While they are contributing ova and the surrogate is carrying the child to term, they both came across as very business-like, they both distance themselves from the lives that result from their activities. Being a man, I'll never be able to become pregnant, but even I was a bit shocked at how the surrogate brushed off the notion of any emotional attachment to the child she was carrying. I don't mean to disparage her - I was just surprised at her lack of ambivalence.

The interviews with the ethicist & the business folks and the man who was the result of IVF introduced, among other issues, eugenics and the notion of designer children. The one thing the business folks had in common with the women I talked about above was how, well, business-like and non-chalant they were in talking about what they do. The filmmakers did not interview anyone who came out firmly against the kind of eugenics these people practice. The people in the industry were, unsurprisingly, gung-ho about the potential of being able to choose a child's traits. The ethicist, while not against the practice, urged caution and wanted people to think about the consequeces instead of just rushing headlong into profit.

Money was not brought to the fore much but it was talked about and hinted at by various people. One man did say that, when the technology comes which will give a doctor the ability to "design" a child, a couple will come to him and come to him with a very big check. Another entrepreneur described how 40% of his business comes from outside the United States. Unfortunately, I was left to ponder whether this is because of a rise in infertility or because, as it was noted, many countries are restricting this kind of technology. There is definitely a whole lotta money to be made when dealing with what is perhaps the most basic instinct we have.

More than one interviewee noted that blonde hair and blue eyes was by far the most requested genetic combination. A doctor also talked about the primacy of physical beauty when choosing a gamete donor. She noted how Harvard professors would approach her and talk about how they wanted a well-educated donor. But, when given the choice between an average-looking donor with brains and a gorgeous donor with less education, pulchritude wins out every time.

The film addressed the nature vs. nurture issue by giving a brief profile of a young man whose name I forget. His mother conceived him using the sperm of a donor to the Nobel Sperm Bank. So the guy had a huge IQ but he didn't grow up to be a physicist or a doctor. Instead he lived a bohemian lifestyle playing sitar. He came across as being very happy with his life and he emphasized in his interviews how great a role nurture has to play. While the industry is keen on letting people pay for being able to determine the gender of their child or the kid's eye color, it came across as leading people on into thinking that parents can choose everything about their child. Not just physical attributes but also temperament, intelligence, and other intangibles. Puffery, in other words. They played up the ability to have a blonde, blue-eyed girl but ignored the role of parenting and environment.

There was a general agreement that rooting out genes that cause debilitating physical maladies was a positive development of assisted reproduction. The trouble came, as one man pointed out, when you find out an embryo has the gene for mild Down Syndrome. It's not physically debilitating and only mildly mentally debilitating. What to do?

Lots of questions as we enter a brave new world.

I realized that, as I began watching, that my friend Miss Pamela in Milwaukee is due today. She and her hubby are the beneficiaries of reproductive technology. It took them about 5 years and thousands of dollars to get to this day when their child is to be born. I'm so happy for them! And they have modern reproductive technology to thank. This being the case, I certainly cannot take a position wholly against IVF and whatnot. My main concern from having watched the program was that people who want to pre-determine some traits of their child might have unreasonable expectations. By this I mean that I hope clinics inform potential parents about what their services can actually do instead of just showing them pictures of beautiful women with blonde hair and blue eyes and saying, "This could be yours!" And what is up with this blonde/blue preference?