Trump pushes IVF to help families — but it ‘kills more babies than abortion’



President Donald Trump has announced initiatives to expand access to in vitro fertilization and reduce associated costs — as each round of IVF can cost $12,000 to $25,000 — and one round is often not all it takes.

“In the Trump administration, we want to make it easier for all couples to have babies, raise children,” Trump said at the White House on October 16.

“That’s why today I’m pleased to announce that after extensive negotiations, EMD Serrano, the largest fertility drug manufacturer in the world, has agreed to provide massive discounts to all fertility drugs they sell in the United States, including the most popular drug of all, the IVF drug,” he continued.

While many Republicans have cheered Trump’s announcement, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey is not on the same page.


“Trump says that, you know, he’s unaware of conservative religious objections to IVF, but IVF is inherently pro-life. And I’ll just say it doesn’t surprise me at all that Trump has this position. IVF is extremely popular, even among Republicans, and he represents the position that a lot of people have,” Stuckey says.

“But let me just explain something,” she continues. “The pro-life position is not just ‘more babies.’ We want more babies that are conceived in loving marriages between a man and a woman. Being pro-life doesn’t mean that we are pro every form of conception. Obviously, we can agree, right, that not every form of conception is moral and ethical.”

“There is a cost to IVF. In fact, most babies, most embryos that are made via IVF, the vast majority of those embryos will never be transferred and will never make it to a live birth. In fact, the IVF industry kills more babies every year than the abortion industry does,” she explains.

“If we really believe in our pro-life ethics, that a life is a life no matter how small, that human life starts at conception, then how we treat those embryos that are created in a lab that are frozen indefinitely, that are very often eugenically discarded because they’re the wrong gender or they have Down syndrome or they have some other kind of disability or they were just that unlucky extra guy that was created and their parents don’t want them anymore,” she says.

“All of that really matters. It’s not only about not killing a baby inside the womb. It’s about not discarding and mistreating life that has been created,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Trump’s Desire For More American Babies Is Good. His Newest IVF Plan Is Not

President Donald Trump’s newest plan to expand IVF is a prime example of good intentions gone wrong.

Women’s infertility is Big Pharma’s cash cow



Falling birth rates have become a national obsession — for good reason. The U.S. fertility rate has plunged to 1.6 births per woman, well below the 2.1 replacement rate.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration floated proposals to reverse that trend — a $5,000 one-time “baby bonus,” expanded IVF funding, and fertility education classes. But while the high cost of having and raising children demands attention, a deeper, avoidable crisis hangs over women’s fertility — one under-addressed by doctors, nearly ignored in research, and scorned by the mainstream media.

If America is serious about reversing demographic decline, it must start with reproductive health at its root.

Millions of American women long to bear children but wrestle with infertility caused by conditions that doctors too often write off or treat only with drugs. Doctors prescribed “the pill” to teens to regulate cycles rather than investigate root causes of their irregularity; now, they too often rely on medications as default treatment instead of exploring environmental, nutritional, or lifestyle interventions. One glaring example is polycystic ovary syndrome.

Underdiagnosed, underfunded

Polycystic ovary syndrome remains the most common cause of female anovulation (absence of ovulation) and one of the leading causes of infertility in the world, affecting up to 13% of reproductive-age women. It disrupts ovulation, floods the body with androgens, like testosterone, increases the risk of miscarriages, and plagues women with irregular cycles — yet up to 70% remain undiagnosed.

PCOS research funding remains woefully low. From 2016 to 2022, PCOS received about $31.8 million annually — versus $262 million for rheumatoid arthritis or $420 million for lupus, “despite similar degrees of morbidity and similar or lower mortality and prevalence.” In 2022, the NIH reported just $9.5 million dedicated to PCOS. That’s negligible compared with the disease’s $15 billion-a-year U.S. cost in medical care, complications, and mental health impact.

Women as cash cows

Current treatment of women with PCOS indicates a culture of profit over prevention. Pharmaceutical companies and fertility clinics thrive on long-term medication and expensive IVF cycles — not on teaching diet shifts, endocrine-safe living, or stress reduction.

Nutrition and the environment's impact on health cannot be discussed without being labeled as “anti-science.” The tragedy is that PCOS is not only treatable but in many cases manageable through lifestyle interventions.

Though PCOS is often influenced by genetics — such as family history with type II diabetes — it’s also strongly tied to insulin resistance, poor metabolic health, obesity, and environmental stressors. Nutrition, exercise, weight management, and reduced exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals can dramatically improve fertility outcomes.

Even modest changes — a 5%-10% weight reduction in overweight women or a shift toward lower-glycemic diets — have been shown to restore ovulation in many women. But such non-invasive and inexpensive advice is considered “body-shaming.”

RELATED: The American women forking out $8,000 for fake babies

Getty Images

Touch the holistic third rail

Women’s health, especially fertility, has become fodder for political punditry on both sides of the aisle — with little real research, funding, or solutions for root causes. Instead, women have become cash cows for an entrenched medical-industrial complex that profits from endless prescriptions and IVF cycles, while ignoring what might prevent infertility in the first place.

The “third rail” of holistic fertility care gets dismissed as “anti-science.” That’s part of the problem. It’s time to touch the rail.

If America is serious about reversing demographic decline, it must start with reproductive health at its root. That means early screening for PCOS, education about metabolic health, and shifting from a medical culture of symptom management to one of holistic fertility stewardship.

Women deserve it, and the future generations of Americans — literally — require it.

CEO Of Surrogacy Firm Admits He Uses Fertility Tech To Avoid ‘Ugly’ Kids

'Nobody wants an ugly kid,' Barrie Drewitt-Barlow said. 'Sometimes we get them, but we don’t always want them.'

‘Children as assets’: Gay couple’s viral IVF video reveals just how far Obergefell has gone



A video has gone viral of a gay man explaining how he and his partner are choosing two embryos via in vitro fertilization that they will be transferring to two surrogates.

“We’re so happy that we decided to purchase as many frozen eggs as we could, 40, because that leaves us with these 10 embryos for two babies. And we’re told that the majority of journeys take two to three transfers to get pregnant,” the man explained.

“We’ve decided which embryo on both sides that we want to transfer to our two surrogates. We’ll keep you updated as we do the transfers and as we find out whether or not we’re pregnant,” he continued.

“But we’re not going to share the sex of both babies until we’re officially pregnant, just like any other expecting parents would,” he added.

BlazeTV host Steve Deace does not like what he’s hearing.


“So, that’s a homosexual man talking in depth, in detail, about essentially trying to manufacture a human life on an open market with him and his gay lover. And this video went everywhere. It was viral everywhere on social media over the weekend,” he explains.

Deace cites Katy Faust — founder and president of Them Before Us, a global children’s rights nonprofit that focuses on a child’s right to a mother and a father — who blames the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court case for same-sex couples manufacturing human life.

The Obergefell v. Hodges’ Supreme Court case decided that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples.

“Her argument really is that Obergefell is the genesis of all these kinds of videos ... and Katy points out, the central core of her premise, the best that I can understand it, is that since Obergefell, the paradigm of child-rearing and procreation has completely flipped,” Deace says.

“And in the past, what happened for thousands of years essentially of human existence is that children and their priorities were put ahead of the adults,” he continues. “And now what we have is that the children are assets to be acquired.”

Want more from Steve Deace?

To enjoy more of Steve's take on national politics, Christian worldview, and principled conservatism with a snarky twist, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

IVF CEO says conceiving naturally is for those with 'genetic privilege'



The CEO of an in vitro fertilization company says sex is for fun and IVF is for conceiving babies.

Noor Siddiqui is the founder of Orchid, a company that screens embryos for those using IVF services and looks for possible genetic defects and disease.

Siddiqui recently equated the idea of using IVF screening to providing the maximum amount of love to a child, meaning that if parents choose not to use IVF, they are subjecting their offspring to untold risks.

'I didn't want to quote that to you because I thought it was so ridiculous, but go on.'

Siddiqui gave an interview to the New York Times podcast "Interesting Times with Ross Douthat," where the host saved his best question for last. After reciting a poem that describes the magic of a man and woman creating life, Douthat asked Siddiqui about the idea that she wants to take that magic away.

"You're imagining a future where that just goes away. And I'm wondering if you think anything would actually be lost if that goes away," Douthat asked.

In response, Siddiqui recalled her own quote: "Sex is for fun; Orchid and embryo screening is for babies."

Douthat immediately replied, "I didn't want to quote that to you because I thought it was so ridiculous, but go on."

The CEO claimed that because most sexual encounters do not result in a pregnancy, "it's actually not so strange of a concept" that IVF becomes the predominant way to conceive.

"But when you get a baby, most people get it from having sex," Douthat argued. "It is linked inextricably to having sex with your spouse. And you are saying it's time to sever that for the sake, I concede, of potential medical benefits."

While one might consider that Siddiqui is simply providing a service to those who cannot conceive naturally, the CEO made it clear that she believes those who do not use IVF are rolling the dice on their child's health.

RELATED: Lila Rosa challenges Christian support for IVF, debunks one of the most common arguments

"I think that if you have enormous genetic privilege and, for you to roll the dice and to get a outcome that isn't going to lead to disease is in the cards for you, then of course, go ahead and roll the dice," Siddiqui told the host.

The 29-year-old claimed "the vast majority of parents" will not want to "roll the dice," before stating that IVF screenings are actually the highest form of love a parent can give a child.

Parents are "going to see it as taking the maximum amount of care, the maximum amount of love, in the same way that they plan their nursery plan, their home plan, their preschool," she said.

Siddiqui then turned in vitro around on naturally conceiving parents and said it would be "denigrating and dismissive" to IVF parents to say that babies conceived through IVF are somehow "inferior to babies that are made the old-fashioned way."

RELATED: Surrogacy: Inside the industry that rents women’s bodies

BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey took a hard stance on the issue and said embryo screening is not a moral or ethical option.

"When technology takes us from what's natural to what's possible, we have the obligation to ask: But is it moral? Is it ethical? Is it biblical?" Stuckey told Blaze News. "The answer here is: no, no, and no. Embryos are human, and like all humans they have an inherent right to life."

Siddiqui said in a 2024 interview with Mercury that she has "always known" that she wanted to conceive through IVF, despite neither her nor her husband having any fertility issues.

In the interview, she argued it was actually "unethical" to stigmatize the embryo screenings and argued it is not "playing God" to get a cast for a broken leg or to have chemotherapy for cancer. Therefore, she is not interrupting "God's plan" with her services.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CEO Of IVF Eugenics Company ‘Orchid’ Claims Culling Embryos Is A ‘Positive Moral Choice’

No amount of doublespeak or question dodging from Siddiqui can disguise the true intentions of eugenics-based companies like Orchid.

Backpedaling On Taxpayer-Funded IVF Would Be A Trump White House Win, Not An ‘L’

The Trump White House’s decision to ditch his plans for taxpayer-funded IVF is more on par with his professed platform than ever before.

Lila Rosa challenges Christian support for IVF, debunks one of the most common arguments



In vitro fertilization – the process by which a human embryo is created outside the body using naturally occurring egg and sperm – is growing in popularity as infertility continues to rise.

But how should Christians view IVF? Is it something believers can support or take part in without compromising their Christian ethics?

Allie Beth Stuckey invited Live Action’s Lila Rose to “Relatable” to have a candid conversation about this topic.

Allie points out that many Christian IVF supporters make the case that “even though scientists and doctors are bringing together the sperm and the embryo, it always has to be God who gives the spark of life, so God is in IVF.”

“I’ve definitely heard that [argument] as well,” says Lila, and while “it is true that those are precious human beings made in God's image” and “God respects our power to [create life artificially],” that doesn’t mean it’s the moral thing to do.

She explains that just because God has allowed life to happen doesn’t mean he condones the manner in which it was created. She points to rape as an example. In a case where a rape results in a child, that child is an image bearer of God and a blessing to be cherished, but the act that brought that child into the world is condemnable.

In the case of both rape and IVF, “The act that brought that life into existence ... was not the moral act, so the act that brings life into existence can be immoral, but the bringing of the life into existence is never immoral,” Lila explains. The only way to morally bring a life into existence is through “the loving marital embrace.”

“[Children] deserve to be conceived in love. It's a natural order, and there's a lot of protective mechanisms in God's providence for that child if they're conceived that way,” she adds.

If children are conceived naturally, there’s no chance they will be “frozen” in perpetuity, and there’s a much higher chance of survival, as IVF has just a 50% success rate for women under 35 using their own eggs. That percentage plummets with a number of factors, including age, clinic quality, and lifestyle choices, among others.

“The natural order is much more designed for [children’s] safety and their nourishing, so IVF is wrong,” Lila concludes, “but what is not wrong is that new human life.”

Allie agrees — “The baby is always a blessing, but that doesn't mean that we are endorsing every method of making a baby.”

To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

IVF Experiments That Mix And Match Multiple Adults’ DNA Are Bad For Kids And Society

Scientists are paving the way for people in polyamorous relationships to commission the creation of children with their DNA.