Before I read the article I assumed the tradeoff would be that the egg freezing is free but the company tries to upsell you on other, more expensive services as part of the process.
Instead, the deal is that you only get to keep half the eggs and the company gets to share or sell the eggs to other people.
They use a quiz to profile female donors for desirable traits such as musical ability and try to market the eggs to prospective parents.
It's kind of like a mix of Uber and Tinder, except with eggs instead of cars and baby making instead of baby making.
Like most reproductive health care it seems to be completely unregulated (or at least, the article doesn't mention any form of regulation).
It's up to the tech bro (tech sis?) founder to decide what the rules should be and also to enforce them, so you have to fully trust that their personal integrity will trump profit motive.
Seems exploitive of people who may not be able to afford the traditional route to freeze eggs. They could be selling your genetic material for a premium. I’d fear it wouldn’t just be to prospective couples either, I’m too cynical to believe this won’t go south.
I've spent a lot of time researching donor gametes and this sounds like a terrible idea. Financial coercion for egg donation is extremely unethical, and a lot of DCP are pretty against it.
I remember getting fliers during my time at grad school - $10k for eggs. This was back in 2007-08 when I was at an Ivy League. I guess people want eggs from women at top universities. I gave it a thought, then realized it was a terrible idea.
I’ve talked to the CEO. They do actually have to comply with a lot of regulations - same as any IVF clinic in terms of pathogens, genetic testing, disclosure etc. Egg banks are pretty well known and regulated quantities at this point. Screening protocols were in place well prior to this company. The big difference with cofertility is that they’re connecting people who have desirable eggs but no money with people who have no money and a need for eggs. A huge difference is that their donors are not paid the way that a traditional egg bank does. One of the biggest challenges for a donor conceived child is the fact that the motivation for the donor was money, and not a desire that the person exists. This actually changes that aspect and takes money out of the equation in a way that helps the kids. They are also screening for people who are open for a relationship with a donor conceived child. All in all I think it’s a far better model if they can make the business model work.
I don’t really. It’s kind of a long story, but I was on a zoom call with her and a friend who does a lot of work in reproductive studies to talk about cofertility’s model. So I talked with her for about an hour and a half. She seems very genuine. Definitely a CEO of a startup, but is doing what she’s doing because she cares.
I'm saying this as kindly as possible, but please talk to more DCP because fertility clinics aren't that regulated as far as the details that impact the children who grow to be adults (and fertility fraud isn't even illegal in all states.)
You mention they're connecting people with desirable eggs but no money...this is still a financial motive and doesn't change that aspect.
Yeah, it’s true - all the details about the egg donor are self reported by the donor, minus the genetic screening info, from what I understand.
I’m not saying it isn’t a financial motive, but in this model the motive from the donors perspective is to have kids without paying for the procedure, and the motive from the recipients perspective is to have kids by paying for the procedure. The money is a way to make that all happen, but everyone wants the children to exist.
Also, do you mean Egg Banks, or Fertility Clinics?
This company is nottttt good as someone who is actively researching and beginning the process of freezing their eggs. Thank you for posting OP, I’ve been keeping my eye on this company for a while.
i’ve gotta be honest, i didn’t quite see the issue here and sue seems a little unhinged. i could see the angle where it feels predatory but generally i feel like the whole fertility industry is a little predatory.
I agree about Sue. She’s arguably the main focus of this article, but I was left confused and doubting her motives. The ethical and other issues raised are important, but Sue did not come across well. She wanted to investigate so she handed over more of her genetic material? It seems like she was fine at the end of the day to continue using the egg freezing services as well.
> Sue found the proposal preposterous. Her instrument is the viola, not the piano, as anyone who read her file would know.
Between this and the excessive aversion to smiley faces, I'm having a hard time taking her crusade seriously. I might have inquired after her mental health as well if I was the on the Cofertility side of that relationship.
BaconJovial | 6 hours ago
Before I read the article I assumed the tradeoff would be that the egg freezing is free but the company tries to upsell you on other, more expensive services as part of the process.
Instead, the deal is that you only get to keep half the eggs and the company gets to share or sell the eggs to other people. They use a quiz to profile female donors for desirable traits such as musical ability and try to market the eggs to prospective parents.
It's kind of like a mix of Uber and Tinder, except with eggs instead of cars and baby making instead of baby making.
Like most reproductive health care it seems to be completely unregulated (or at least, the article doesn't mention any form of regulation).
It's up to the tech bro (tech sis?) founder to decide what the rules should be and also to enforce them, so you have to fully trust that their personal integrity will trump profit motive.
Requiredmetrics | 2 hours ago
Seems exploitive of people who may not be able to afford the traditional route to freeze eggs. They could be selling your genetic material for a premium. I’d fear it wouldn’t just be to prospective couples either, I’m too cynical to believe this won’t go south.
iridescent-shimmer | 2 hours ago
I've spent a lot of time researching donor gametes and this sounds like a terrible idea. Financial coercion for egg donation is extremely unethical, and a lot of DCP are pretty against it.
SlowerThanTurtleInPB | an hour ago
I remember getting fliers during my time at grad school - $10k for eggs. This was back in 2007-08 when I was at an Ivy League. I guess people want eggs from women at top universities. I gave it a thought, then realized it was a terrible idea.
svaldbardseedvault | 4 hours ago
I’ve talked to the CEO. They do actually have to comply with a lot of regulations - same as any IVF clinic in terms of pathogens, genetic testing, disclosure etc. Egg banks are pretty well known and regulated quantities at this point. Screening protocols were in place well prior to this company. The big difference with cofertility is that they’re connecting people who have desirable eggs but no money with people who have no money and a need for eggs. A huge difference is that their donors are not paid the way that a traditional egg bank does. One of the biggest challenges for a donor conceived child is the fact that the motivation for the donor was money, and not a desire that the person exists. This actually changes that aspect and takes money out of the equation in a way that helps the kids. They are also screening for people who are open for a relationship with a donor conceived child. All in all I think it’s a far better model if they can make the business model work.
NotYourGa1Friday | 3 hours ago
That’s interesting. How do you know the CEO?
svaldbardseedvault | 3 hours ago
I don’t really. It’s kind of a long story, but I was on a zoom call with her and a friend who does a lot of work in reproductive studies to talk about cofertility’s model. So I talked with her for about an hour and a half. She seems very genuine. Definitely a CEO of a startup, but is doing what she’s doing because she cares.
iridescent-shimmer | 2 hours ago
I'm saying this as kindly as possible, but please talk to more DCP because fertility clinics aren't that regulated as far as the details that impact the children who grow to be adults (and fertility fraud isn't even illegal in all states.)
You mention they're connecting people with desirable eggs but no money...this is still a financial motive and doesn't change that aspect.
svaldbardseedvault | an hour ago
Yeah, it’s true - all the details about the egg donor are self reported by the donor, minus the genetic screening info, from what I understand.
I’m not saying it isn’t a financial motive, but in this model the motive from the donors perspective is to have kids without paying for the procedure, and the motive from the recipients perspective is to have kids by paying for the procedure. The money is a way to make that all happen, but everyone wants the children to exist.
Also, do you mean Egg Banks, or Fertility Clinics?
Dizzy_Tea_7582 | 6 hours ago
loved this part of the article
> The Big Story is exclusive to subscribers.
[OP] EternalMoonChild | 5 hours ago
I don’t subscribe and didn’t have that issue, but here is the archive link.
Dizzy_Tea_7582 | 5 hours ago
Thanks!
imnottdoingthat | 4 hours ago
This company is nottttt good as someone who is actively researching and beginning the process of freezing their eggs. Thank you for posting OP, I’ve been keeping my eye on this company for a while.
skitheweest | 2 hours ago
Why isn’t it good?
tiragooen | 4 hours ago
If you're not paying for the product, you are the product.
I wonder if the company will start refusing women with undesirable traits or if they don't have enough accomplishments.
PurpleCarrot5069 | 5 hours ago
i’ve gotta be honest, i didn’t quite see the issue here and sue seems a little unhinged. i could see the angle where it feels predatory but generally i feel like the whole fertility industry is a little predatory.
[OP] EternalMoonChild | 5 hours ago
I agree about Sue. She’s arguably the main focus of this article, but I was left confused and doubting her motives. The ethical and other issues raised are important, but Sue did not come across well. She wanted to investigate so she handed over more of her genetic material? It seems like she was fine at the end of the day to continue using the egg freezing services as well.
PurePerfection_ | 3 hours ago
> Sue found the proposal preposterous. Her instrument is the viola, not the piano, as anyone who read her file would know.
Between this and the excessive aversion to smiley faces, I'm having a hard time taking her crusade seriously. I might have inquired after her mental health as well if I was the on the Cofertility side of that relationship.
Nervous_Insect5976 | 3 hours ago
My wife and I are about to pursue fertility treatments and there's a lot of shadiness in fertility, surrogacy, and adoption. It sucks.