Chelsea Painter Davis discusses IVF, Disability, and Human Worth

“It's deeply offensive to think that a child only has value if it meets a certain profile standard that not even necessarily a parent, a purchaser sometimes is trying to find,” Chelsea Painter Davis.

IVF is sold as a hopeful shortcut to parenthood, but hope doesn’t erase the ethical math happening in the lab. This week we talk with Chelsea Painter Davis, an IVF survivor and disability advocate known as the viral Blind Mom, about why IVF can’t be treated as a value-neutral “family building” tool when embryos are created, graded, frozen, and destroyed. We wrestle with what a consistent pro-life ethic demands, how disability screening can become eugenics, and what ethical alternatives could look like for people facing infertility.

Chelsea shares her personal story, from learning she was conceived through in vitro fertilization to becoming blind after a pulmonary embolism linked to hormonal birth control. That lived experience sharpens the conversation around disability and value, especially when she describes being pushed toward termination after an abnormal ultrasound during pregnancy. We unpack how quickly “likely disability” can turn into a cultural permission slip to end a life, and why that mindset echoes inside IVF when embryos are screened for traits and “undesirable” outcomes.
 
 We also dig into the bigger picture: embryo selection and destruction, the commodification of human life, and why the word “purchaser” shows up when fertility becomes a marketplace with limited oversight. From the question of frozen embryos in cryo storage to the tension between political pragmatism and moral consistency, we try to name what’s true without treating IVF-conceived people as anything less than fully human.
 
 If you found this conversation clarifying or challenging, subscribe for more, share it with someone who cares about IVF ethics and disability, and leave a review so more people can find it. What’s the hardest question you think the IVF industry avoids?

Resources:

Chelsea's Instagram

Created to Live

Transcript

Cold Open And Why IVF Matters

Chelsea Painter Davis 0:03

It's deeply offensive to think that a child only has value if it meets a certain profile standard that not even necessarily a parent, a purchaser sometimes is trying to find.

Victor Nieves 0:20

The IVF industry intentionally destroys human embryos in vast quantities. On a good day, around 30 to 50% of fertilized embryos make it to the implantation stage. Of those embryos that are implanted, about 45 will flourish into a pregnancy, resulting in a live birth. Optimistically, a fertilized egg has roughly a 13.5% to 22.5% chance of actually being born. Welcome to Straight Talk on Life Issues. I'm Victor Nieves, president of Life Issues Institute. Today we'll be speaking with an IVF survivor, Chelsea Painter Davis. Known as the Viral Blind Mom, Chelsea is the founder of Created to Live, a global movement to heal the cultural narrative on disability and diagnosis from one of death to one of life. Well, Chelsea, welcome back to the show. It's so good to have you again.

Chelsea Painter Davis 1:11

Thank you. It is so good to be back with you.

Victor Nieves 1:23

For our listeners who may not yet be familiar with you, the amazing work that you do, and just kind of your background, I think the best place to start today, if you would, please share your story with us.

Chelsea’s Story And Disability

Chelsea Painter Davis 1:34

Absolutely. So I was conceived through Invitro fertilization. My mother was having horrific fertility challenges. And uh the best gift that my parents gave me in that is that they did not lie to me about the origin of my conception. They're very, very honest. I don't actually remember being told for the first time. It was just something I kind of always knew from a very young age. Oh, I was conceived in a petri dish. I'm like, oh, isn't that cool? I didn't know what a petri dish was. I didn't know what conception was, but it was just a language that I was accustomed to in the household. And so that really green-lit pro-life conversation. It was okay for me to research these topics about reproduction from a scientific angle. It just, it was okay because we had talked about it. It wasn't weird in our household to do so. So I got really, really into pro-life reading material, pro-life ethics. It was fascinating to me making sure that someone was safe and protected, loved from the moment of fertilization, from the moment that they got to enter this world. And then then I started to learn things about birth control, hormonal birth control that made me feel kind of uncomfortable. When I was getting married, I went to see my primary care physician, and it was what I was told was okay. I had some questions though from my reading material. I just wasn't sure how safe it would be for the baby. That was very important to me. And my primary care physician just didn't think that that mattered. She made me feel embarrassed in the appointment, actually. And I took a medication I didn't know if I could trust just because of the way that she looked at me. And unfortunately, she also downplayed heavily the side effects of hormonal birth control. And I ended up having a pulmonary embolism, losing my vision only three months after getting married. And I thought that meant God didn't have any plans for me. I thought he wasn't going to use me for anything because how could he use someone as irrelevant as me is how I felt. But when I was pregnant with my second child, I was shown by God how important that was because my son had an abnormal ultrasound. He was supposed to be very, very ill, very, very sick. And the maternal fetal medicine specialist instantly started talking to me about termination. He pushed it, pushed it, pushed it. And it was based, it was mostly on the basis of likely disability. But as a disabled woman myself, I knew that that did not affect his value. It didn't affect my value in God's eyes. And I was able to have the strength to move all of those pro-life ethics from the head knowledge to the heart knowledge and fight for my son who just had his fourth birthday and is perfectly healthy. And now I'm an advocate for life.

Victor Nieves 4:10

So, Chelsea, as we debate, you know, across the country about the ethics of IVF, it's a topic which I truly believe not many people have given enough thought to. But you mentioned you've done a lot of research, of course, with your background. This is relevant. What are some of the things that you found when you were digging into IVF as someone created through IVF? And I do think just really quickly, it's worth mentioning, we all are friends with people. We know people who were created in IVF. So as we debate the ethics of that itself, that's in no way an indictment on you. It's in no way an indictment on the people, our friends, our family members that were created through the process of IVF. We just should be asking real questions, ethical questions about the process, about is this pro-life? What's going on here? So when you sought that out and you researched the ethics of it, what did you find that stood out to you?

Chelsea Painter Davis 5:02

That is a very, very good point. At this point, I was just attending

Ultrasound Diagnosis And Pressure To Terminate

Chelsea Painter Davis 5:06

a seminar the other day about IVF by Dr. Lauren Rubal. And she was citing that about two of children born now are born because of IVF technology. So it is no longer a niche thing. It's starting to be very, very common. And these people, I mean, I'd like to think so about myself, are very, very valuable. And that is the pro-life perspective that I like to take into my IVF research. Human life is extremely valuable. It should be protected from the moment of fertilization. The problem with IVF is it doesn't do that at all. It does not take personhood into consideration because the embryos that are fertilized in the laboratory immediately become products. And it is about a between 2% and 5% rate that that embryo will be able to be born alive. The vast majority of these embryos are being thrown out with the garbage because they don't meet some standard that the embryologist or the technician is searching for. They are recently discovering that that standard they have been using to grade the embryos, to put it bluntly, complete crap. It's not been scientific at all. They've basically been guessing on bad science. And now they're realizing that many of these embryos they've said would have health problems do not have health problems, in fact, at all. Aside from that, though, as a disabled person, I would like to say, what does it matter? It's the human life. It deserves respect. And the IVF clinics are there to produce a product. So when they don't like an embryo, when they have too many embryos, when they drop one on the floor, when they accidentally swap spouses with the wrong spouse, when they accidentally put the wrong embryo in the wrong woman. They're not looking at this through the lens of, oh my goodness, what

IVF Ethics: Embryo Grading And Disposal

Chelsea Painter Davis 6:50

have we done to this child? How have we endangered their life? How have we prevented their safety? What have we done to this family dynamic? They're looking at it like, no, we had a problem on the assembly line. I guess maybe we can give someone a voucher, or I hope you bought the insurance on your family creation plan. And maybe we can give you a $1,000 apology, but only if you bought the insurance. Otherwise, this isn't really our problem because these aren't people, these are products. And that is what I find very deeply offensive about IVF.

Victor Nieves 7:23

Well, and as you're saying that, I mean, it's pretty obvious. There's a few things that I'd like us to unpack, but it's very obvious that this is the commodification of human life. This is turning human beings into something that human beings were never meant to be, which is a product, which, like you said, it's almost like they just treat it like it's an assembly line. I mean, do you think it's a fair thing to say that this is kind of becoming the commodification of people?

Chelsea Painter Davis 7:48

I think it's 100% commodifying people. It's it's deeply offensive to think that a child only has value if it meets a certain profile standard that not even necessarily a parent, a purchaser sometimes is trying to find. It's very strange. It's very weird. The plan for disability through IVF is to just wipe it out completely. Many might misunderstand. When you are eliminating an embryo in an IVF clinic or you're eliminating a trait or disability, you're not healing the embryo. You didn't like pick one up and say, oh, this embryo has retinitis pigmentosa. I'm going to give it a little shot and now it's going to be healthy. No, you're finding the ones that are likely testing for some kind of feature that the purchasing party is not fond of, whether that be gender selection, race. Now they're testing for conditions such as likelihood for heart disease. And then you're saying, mm, I don't want that one. And you're dousing it in a chemical and throwing it in the trash.

Victor Nieves 8:48

So eugenics. What you've just described is definitionally literally eugenics, is it not?

Chelsea Painter Davis 8:54

It is absolutely eugenics. And at least before in eugenics, it was wasn't always direct killing, but this is one of the most nastiest forms of eugenics, yes.

Victor Nieves 9:04

Chelsea, you you mentioned something there. I want to park on it for just a second. You said not necessarily even a parent, but a purchaser. What do you mean by that?

Chelsea Painter Davis 9:12

From my understanding, no federal regulations of IVF. America is the least regulated of the IVF industries. And then there's state by state. Alabama is the most loosey-goosey now. But what that means is that in the case of adoption, so when you're viewing a child as, you know, a child, you're going to make decisions about which family that child is going to go to based on what's best for the child. So typically that's going to be a two-parent, heterosexual household that is married, can really invest in the child in a way that's going to benefit them. Everything's about what is good for this child. But in IVF, it's about who ordered this product. So that can be anyone. That can be two dads, two moms, a thruple. That can be a single man who is a child molester. It doesn't matter to these IVF clinics enough for them to even check.

Victor Nieves 10:05

That's something that should shake people to their core. And I'm glad that you mentioned that. I'm glad that we had the chance to talk about it. People are, oh my goodness, that is undeniably the buying and selling of children. And that should absolutely terrify people. Chelsea, as a survivor of IVF, as somebody who was created in this process, again, redundantly, we're very glad that you are alive. We're very appreciative of you and your story. And I have friends that were created through IVF. You have a unique perspective. And I think it's safe to say, not enough people are asking those who are survivors of IVF what their thoughts are on IVF. What was it like for you? You mentioned that from a young age, so young that you don't even remember the first day that you found out about petri dishes and things like that. From a young age, you knew that you were created through IVF. But as you learned more about this process, what was it like for you on a personal level?

Chelsea Painter Davis 11:00

It can be very different for different people. So for example, I thought it was very cool. I thought it was interesting. I like the science aspect of anatomy. Just as cool as I think it's amazing that when sperm meets egg, a whole human comes into existence. That's very cool. I like that. I like that women who could not get pregnant are now pregnant. That's amazing to me. That's very interesting. But where the excitement stops for me is when we're starting to abuse human beings. I really don't like that. And suddenly it's not so cool anymore. It's not so interesting anymore to me. I have a strong faith foundation. So even though my body was manufactured in a laboratory, I know that my life was created by God. So I do not feel any othering by the IVF. I don't allow myself to feel that. I'm not an alien. I'm not a freak. I'm not a science experiment. I am a person. God created me. I just came into my literal physical body a little different than other people do. So I have come to terms with that. I'm okay with who God created me to be. I'm not okay with the abuse that's happening in these clinics. I'm not okay with that at all. But for some children who are conceived through IVF, it can make them to be blunt. It can make them feel like freaks. It can be very uncomfortable for them. They don't like it. It embarrasses them for some reason. And I think that those feelings are valid. It's not okay to just slap a label on them and say, well, don't you appreciate how much your parents paid to have you? It's still a child with feelings and emotions, and they're valid however they respond to finding out that they're conceived through IVF, especially the children who are being brought into unideal family structures intentionally. Those feelings need to be taken extremely seriously because not only were they robbed of their personhood in an IVF clinic by being treated like a product that had to pass a grade to get to live, they're also having intentional family structure breakdown. So it's another hurt on top of the being commodified in the first place. But I think that the pro-life movement is really amazing in noticing that these people are people, as we do with abortion, as we do with euthanasia. But we do have to be very careful in our language and remind these children of IVF, these survivors of IVF, that they do have value. They are created by God, they do mean something. And the world owes them something. I think that often we have a poor phrasing when people say, What are we supposed to do with all the leftover abandoned embryos in IVF clinics? Well, they're not items. You don't, what do I do with them? No, what can we do for them? And even that kind of language shows what kind of personhood is attached to every single one of these embryos because they are persons.

Victor Nieves 13:50

Absolutely. Chelsea, is it ever difficult in your experience or in the experience of others that you know who survived IVF that it's difficult when they think of siblings who either may have been, and it's case by case, but may have been frozen, may have been intentionally destroyed. Is that an aspect that is uh difficult as a survivor?

Chelsea Painter Davis 14:09

It

Eugenics And Buying Children Without Oversight

Chelsea Painter Davis 14:10

is very painful for a lot of people. I don't want to speak for other friends of mine specifically, but in my situation, it feels like my life, my being allowed to live is random. I've lost five or six siblings to IVF to intentional destruction. And others have been lost because they didn't meet some quote viability standard of the clinic. Another was miscarried, and those are real people, those are real lives. That is sad. There has been a loss to this world because I don't think that God creates life on accident. I think that it's all intentional. And it also personally offends me because I don't like the idea that I have a right to life randomly. That seems very gross to me. I think that every person's right to life is natural, deliberate, intentional, and they deserve it. It shouldn't be some kind of weird Shirley Jackson lottery where we see, oh, 2% are gonna make it to birth. That's really is disturbing to me. But I wouldn't say that I have a survivor's guilt for being here. I have more of a survivor's responsibility. And I'm very grateful for my life, but I'm grateful to God for my life. I'm not grateful to an IVF clinic that abused my situation.

Victor Nieves 15:26

Chelsea, we've heard some who will say that IVF is pro-life, that it's an extension of the pro-life movement. I think I can probably guess your stance on that position. What do you say to those who maybe genuinely, I don't want to attribute any kind of malice in that. They may just hear about IVF, they don't know a ton about it, and they think, oh, well, this is bringing in more babies. That's a pro-life thing to do. We want there to be more babies, which, you know, we do want there to be more babies, but if they don't know much about it and they think IVF is pro-life, what do you say to them?

Chelsea Painter Davis 15:59

You're 100% correct that you have to assess why they're saying IVF is pro-life. Do they just mean that they love babies? I love babies too. But do you know what pro-life people really, really hate when someone kills a baby? That makes us very, very upset. And right now the IVF industry is killing about three to four times the abortion industry is in the US. That's significant. And all of our focus, rightfully, is on Planned Parenthood, is on the abortions that we're trying to stop right now. I get that. But trying to pretend away these other lives because we just like it when moms come home with babies, that's not okay. It's not right. It's because these are lives that this is not okay. And pro-life is about saving lives, making sure that every human being has a right to life, is respected and valued. It's not just about seeing more pictures of cute babies.

Victor Nieves 16:55

Well, and Chelsea, you know, I think to your point, the position that you hold on IVF is effectively something of a litmus test on your pro-life beliefs, because the true foundation of the pro-life position, obviously, is that it's wrong to kill innocent people, that murder is wrong. So long as you really believe that murder is wrong, you ought to be pro-life. But it's a question of when does life begin. And the pro-life position has always been, and the science backs this up, embryology backs this up, that human life begins at the moment of fertilization. And we'll say that all day long, and people in the pro-life space will agree, as you know, you pretty much have to. And then we bring in IVF. And now that statement becomes a little bit more interesting because now there are teeth to the idea that life begins at the moment of fertilization, because now we have all of these babies. As you just pointed out, we have around the country, we've heard estimates in the millions of babies who are frozen in cryo storage that were created through IVF. And so that does, it kind of tests the metal. And Chelsea, do you think it's fair to say that? It kind of tests how seriously you take your pro-life ethic, your stance that human life truly does begin at the moment of fertilization. Well, if that's true, if you're going to be consistent in your views, that doesn't mean that you have hate in your heart for anyone who's done IVF. That doesn't mean that you, you know, wish that people who are, you know, who were created in that way didn't live. It doesn't mean any of those things. It just means that you're holding a consistent pro-life ethic.

Chelsea Painter Davis 18:21

Yes, I think this might be a little controversial to say, but I was just speaking to a woman the other day who was conceived after sexual assault. Expecting me to defend the IVF process just because I'm a creation of the IVF process is like expecting her to defend sexual assault. It's ridiculous and preposterous. I'm not gonna defend murder just because the clinic that murdered my siblings also put my body together. That's insane. And you're right, it is inconvenient to be against the IVF process. It is not fun. I have lots of hate mail on my social media from people who didn't even realize that I'm conceived in IVF. They just heard that I opposed it and they wanted to tell me all about their loved ones who are created through IVF. And all I can say is, yes, I agree with you. Those loved ones have value. But why is it only your loved one that has value? Why is it not every single loved one who is created through IVF? They all have value. And if we're going to follow the science of embryology like every pro-lifer should, we have to say some things that make us very deeply unpopular with the public. But the

Survivor Lens On Value And Siblings

Chelsea Painter Davis 19:35

public consensus does not determine truth. The science, the morality, the philosophy that determines what truth is. And we have to follow that because otherwise, what are we even doing?

Victor Nieves 19:47

Absolutely. Chelsea, what would you say to some who might take a hyper pragmatic stance? And they might say, well, behind closed doors, very quietly, Chelsea, very quietly, I'll agree with you. I'll I'll say, well, you know, IVF is bad, but that's a fish to fry on another day. We'll get to that maybe when the culture is ready. We'll get to that. Or we'll ignore it for now, basically. We'll kind of just sweep this one under the rug in the immediate, and then at some point, you know, down the line in the future, we'll address it. What do you think about that strategy?

Chelsea Painter Davis 20:17

Oh my goodness. So I have to admit, I was just part of Live Action's North Star Summit, a fellowship, and we were debating this very thing. Like, what if we can only save one baby? How do we have to compromise ourselves, though, if we're only going to save one type of baby, but we're not going to save another type of baby? And oh my goodness, it is really hard. It's really hard to decide what to do because I see consequences on both sides. The consequence of Alabama saying truthfully that these lives are lives was that legislative backlash was to give IVF a free pass to do anything they wanted without consequences. That cost lives to tell the truth. But also, when you pass legislation that says, okay, these babies passed a certain gestation are allowed to live. But if you're younger than that, you don't have a right to life, and it's okay if people murder you, or if you have a disability, it's okay if people murder you, or if you've been conceived after sexual assault, we don't care anymore. That's unjust. That's wrong. And it really weakens our position as pro-lifers when we say things like, well, we're only going to pick the favorites and we're not going to fight for everybody. This is really tough because now we're talking about how we're going to push forward these protections and encode them in law. And I honestly go back and forth on what we should do legally, but I don't have any question about what we should do ourselves, what we should say is true, what we should advocate for. I do not think that we should be participating in in vitro fertilization. And as painful as that is for people to say, it's not fun to say, it's not fun to hear, it's not fun. To see people's heartbreaking responses to what that means because I care about families, I care about women, I care about children. I don't want to see a woman who genuinely has no way of having children except for IVF, be told, I'm sorry, there's nothing we can do for you because we're unwilling to kill children on your behalf. That's a really hard truth to share. But I'm hopeful that what the pro-life movement can do is raise a lot of awareness about restorative reproductive medicine. I enjoyed so much hearing from Dr. Lauren Rubal at the North Star Fellowship. Just talk about all the things that we can do that IVF tries to bypass in healing the root cause of a woman's infertility. And the reason that everyone has been doing that in medicine is because IVF makes a lot more money, because once again, there's product involved. But restorative reproductive medicine is a much more ethical way to heal these families because we're actually healing women's fertility. And that's the path that I think we need to take.

Victor Nieves 23:01

I think it's important, Chelsea, as you're talking about that, that we once again mention just very overtly, no one, especially no one in the pro-life world, wants families to struggle with infertility. Nobody wants a family to be told you just don't have another option. No one wants anyone to be in that difficult position. I can only imagine how heartbreaking that would be to be struggling with it. And there are so many people, Chelsea, who are struggling with infertility. We're seeing the rates on the rise in North America and in really all of the Western world. We're seeing people who more and more now than ever are struggling with infertility. And so our heart breaks too. I think I can comfortably speak on your behalf, though I don't want to do that often. I think that you share my heart in this, that we don't want people to be struggling with this. We just want to make sure that the answer to something very difficult isn't something immoral. And so that's where this all kind of circles back. I want to ask, going back to you and your personal story, your personal experience, what was it like when you really processed and you really realized and then took the stance that you are not in favor of IVF? What was it like for your relationship with your parents? Was there struggle there? Were they very understanding? How did that play out?

Chelsea Painter Davis 24:15

It is really tricky because I love my parents. I love my parents so much. And my mother is one of those women who, if she didn't have IVF, would not be a parent. My mother, when she was 19 years old, she had her appendix rupture. It damaged and scarred her fallopian tubes. They tried surgery to correct it. It actually made it worse. It was impossible for an egg to make it down to her uterus. It was not going to happen with the technology that they had at the time. She also had sperm antibodies. So sperm couldn't make it to the egg either. It was a really horrific situation. But I am so grateful that my parents have the same faith foundation as me. So they know that we don't dictate our own morality. Christ does. And so, as painful as it is to say things like, I don't think my sibling should have been destroyed in an IVF clinic. It hurts me that I just as easily could have been. That's not a fun conversation with my parents. It's not something we try to talk about all

Better Paths: Restorative Care And Adoption

Chelsea Painter Davis 25:18

the time, but it is true. And I like to think of truth, it's a sword, right? That means you have to be very careful how you use it. You can use it to cut away disease, to correct something that's broken, or you can use it to hurt people. And we have to be very, very delicate when we're balancing that sword of truth because these people matter. My parents matter just as much as my siblings matter. And we have to be very careful in delivering truth in love.

Victor Nieves 25:51

Chelsea, I'm curious your thoughts. We have in the past, we've spoken a program known as Snowflake Adoption. I'm not sure if you're familiar with it, but it's embryo adoption. So couples who are struggling with infertility or just want to adopt in this way, they have the opportunity to give these frozen babies a chance at the fullness of life to be born. And so, what are your thoughts on programs like that, who are striving, in my opinion, to address some of the issues, I suppose, that come with IVF? Obviously, it doesn't seem feasible that uh every single frozen baby could be adopted through this process, but it does seem to be offering a chance. Almost in my head, I would liken it to lifeboats, you know, where they're giving people a chance. They're giving some of these babies a chance. What do you think about programs that allow for embryo adoption?

Chelsea Painter Davis 26:41

I personally am very pro-embryo adoption. I know that I've heard some different opinions within the natural law standpoint. I'm honestly still trying to explore and understand that point of view a little bit more. But natural law, I'm learning the more I read about it, is actually very difficult for me to understand. But I'm working on it the best that I can to really understand where the people who oppose embryo adoption are coming from. So I don't want to paint them with too broad of a brush. But for me personally, in this moment, I do believe we owe something to these embryos. I don't think it's okay to just be left in a freezer because you don't have womb privilege. You weren't conceived just like everybody else. I think your life is just as valuable. So I do think that they are owed. I say we because I'm one of them. We're owed the best that we can be given. And as of this moment, I don't see how embryo adoption is a problem. I don't know what else we can do that's better.

Victor Nieves 27:43

That sort of segues into my next and final question, Chelsea. What can we do better? Broadly speaking, as we talk about IVF, as we look at legislation about IVF, as somebody who is a survivor of IVF, I think that it's only fair that you have the stage, that uh that you have the mic on this conversation. What would you like to see us do better?

Chelsea Painter Davis 28:04

Well, the ideal in morality, I believe there is a right to life in the 14th Amendment. I believe that all persons cannot be deprived of life without due process. And I don't know what crime an embryo in an IVF clinic has committed. That would mean that they don't have this equal protection under the law anymore. But that is really hard. That is really hard to get to. But that is what is owed to these embryos. But in the meantime, what we can do is be honest about this situation. We can hold ourselves, our own personal life to this moral standard that I believe is true. I believe is fair. And we can keep talking about this as unpopular as it is politically right now, as uninterested as the Republican Party is in making sure that these embryos have an equal right to life, just as everyone else. We have to keep pushing for it. We have to keep sharing the truth because that is the only way we are ever going to save these babies.

Victor Nieves 29:03

Chelsea, thank you so much for joining us and thank you for the great work that you do.

Chelsea Painter Davis 29:07

Thank you so much.

Closing Resources And Next Week

Victor Nieves 29:19

Hearing from Chelsea has been a really unique opportunity in this conversation. It's like we mentioned, I think the whole process of IVF, the ethics behind IVF and the crossroads where they meet the pro-life position is probably something that most people have never really thought a lot about. There are certainly many who have, but to hear from somebody who survived IVF, it's not lost on me that if Chelsea's advocacy were to come to total fruition, well, that would mean that Chelsea herself would not have existed. So when she speaks, she carries a tremendous amount of weight on this topic. And she does so out of love, not out of any kind of hatred, not out of any kind of malice toward those who have pursued IVF. Her parents, her own parents, pursued IVF, and she's very grateful, no doubt, for her life. It's more so out of respect for her siblings, out of respect for the others who unfortunately were not able to enjoy the fullness of life because their life was taken from them in a petri dish. And so I'm so appreciative to hear from Chelsea to get her unique perspective. If you'd like to learn more, I encourage you to visit our website, lifeissues.org. We'll have more information, more resources, and we'll be able to connect you with Chelsea on her socials so you can learn more from her. Again, that's available at lifeissues.org. Be sure to tune in next week for another straight talk on life issues.