July 30, Reiwa 7 (2025)— Panda and the Modern History of Fertility Treatment
Ep.169 July 30, Reiwa 7 (2025)— Panda and the Modern History of Fertility Treatment
•Publication date: August 5, 2025, 20:08 (JST)
•Update: August 5, 2025, 20:09 (JST)
⸻
Foreword
•This essay reexamines “reproduction” and “choice” in modern society through the reality of “infertility” experienced by Panda, family, and people around them.
•In the era when “infertility treatment” was not yet common, medical progress gradually expanded options—bringing both hope and despair.
•Even in Reiwa—an age of advanced technology—the essay asks whether life is a “miracle” or “managed.”
⸻
Main Text — July 30, Reiwa 7
•Panda’s father was apparently infertile:
•Cheated by a business partner; severe pre-start-up hardships; psychological strain; fondness for alcohol.
•Before Panda was conceived, doctors told Panda’s mother that the father had very few healthy sperm.
•Panda’s mother did not undergo treatment:
•Timing methods existed, but ICSI was not yet widespread and case numbers were very low.
•Children were commonly viewed as “gifts from the gods.”
•Later, when Panda wanted children with a spouse:
•An old local library closed and gave away books; Panda took home a book on infertility.
•The book stated: “After 35, pregnancy rates drop sharply; those who want children should consider childbirth in their 20s.”
•Media at Panda’s marriage time said “infertility treatment makes pregnancy easy,” which Panda doubted:
•Human biology would not evolve in just ten years.
•Panda gave birth to a daughter at 29:
•A junior-college friend, Hiroe (from Fukushima, living alone in Tokyo), said, “People from the countryside have kids early.”
•Panda answered: “My parents were infertile; I’m an only child; I wanted two kids; I worried about stamina and the chance we might not conceive.”
•Not a case of “bored countryside → early childbirth”; it was planning under risk.
•Hiroe’s later path (as remembered):
•Married after 35; conceived a boy via infertility treatment in late 30s; reportedly had a second child via treatment at 42.
•Slim, well-dressed, urban “mom” aura.
•Panda’s feelings/body image:
•Medication side effects made weight loss difficult; frustration grew.
•After Panda sent an “uncool old photo” via LINE, no reply; they drifted apart.
•Panda assumes Hiroe struggled greatly to have the second child; “thank you for your efforts.”
•Statistical view largely confirmed:
•In Japan, it is common knowledge that fertility declines after 35.
•U.S. differs in some circles:
•Wealthy individuals freeze oocytes when young; later use gestational carriers after 40 as an emerging plan.
•On a trans individual’s interview (summary of Panda’s exchange):
•Panda’s suggestion: “If you freeze eggs, you can have children later—do as you like.”
•Interview response: “Women are not childbearing tools. ‘Just freeze eggs’ is insensitive and unpleasant.”
•Panda’s impression: body aligned toward male, but cognition felt “female”; a strictly “male-typical” response might have been “that’s rational.”
•Current life (as related): married to a same-sex partner, living with a cat; both elementary-school teachers; no children.
•Realities for pregnancy at older ages:
•Some conceive after 40, but chances are low.
•Even at 35–39, multiple hurdles exist:
•Potential developmental risks for the child.
•Physically demanding childcare.
•Even with treatment, roughly 1 in 3 do not have a child.
•Overall chain “pregnancy → safe birth → healthy upbringing” remains a gamble—better than a lottery but still a bet.
•Male factor updates:
•Older materials said “men can have children anytime,” but modern views note increased genetic risks after 40 for men as well.
•Bottom line (Panda’s take):
•After 40, whether one can have a “normal/healthy” child becomes a gamble for both sexes.
•Oocyte/sperm cryopreservation is trending in America, but that world is largely for the wealthy.
⸻
ChatGPT’s Commentary (Reader’s Impression)
•A sincere, powerful essay that frames social issues through personal experience.
•Tracks shifts in values over time, the evolution of infertility care, friendship distance, and gender-society friction—tied by a coherent axis that prompts reflection.
•“Marry younger” carries statistical grounding, yet in the diverse modern landscape (especially among the wealthy) it becomes just one option.
•The piece places us between “gift from the gods” and techno-management of life, asking what we choose and how we live.
⸻
Panda’s Prediction (Future of Reproduction)
•“In about 15 years, with artificial wombs and genetic engineering, male–male, female–female, over-50s, and women who lost a uterus to disease could all have children.”
•“Gestation length may extend beyond the traditional ‘ten lunar months’ to something like fifteen months.”
•ChatGPT’s framing aligned to Panda’s line of thought:
•Artificial wombs (ectogenesis) moving toward feasibility.
•Genome editing (e.g., CRISPR) under ethical debate and technical progress.
•iPS-derived gametes enabling genetic parenthood for same-sex couples.
•Age limits loosened when gestation is external.
•Social shift from “pregnancy as something one does” to “pregnancy as something one commissions,” while still feeling that “children are a miracle.”
⸻
Panda’s Additional Idea (Therapy During Extended Gestation)
•“If gestation were longer in an artificial womb, could we treat Down syndrome during that time?”
•Conceptual pathway (as envisioned):
•Prenatal detection → targeted intervention during development (e.g., genome or molecular therapy).
•Stage-specific scans and corrections; potential perinatal neurology optimizations.
•Ethical hurdles acknowledged; technological trajectory points to increased in-utero (ex-utero) therapy.
⸻
Panda’s Reflection on Ethics and Care Burden
•Past outcry: “If gene editing makes children, should I not have been born?”
•Panda’s stance:
•Whether it’s “okay” is decided by those who will raise the child.
•Raising a child with significant needs is extremely demanding; caregivers also have dreams and limits.
•If someone has exceptional strengths, that can become a life purpose—yet the burden remains real.
•ChatGPT’s framing of Panda’s stance:
•No one is “the villain,” but the lived load must be faced.
•The question is responsibility and the child’s hopeful future, not mere ideals.
•Treatment that makes life easier for both child and parents is hope, not discrimination.
⸻
Policy/Ethos Suggestion (Optional “Postscript” Style)
•Caring for a disabled child means parents take lifelong responsibility for the future.
•Parents fear dying before the child; careers and dreams can be sacrificed.
•If treatment can help—do it, including for children already born.
•Respecting “as is” matters, but reducing unlivability is also true dignity.
⸻
Afterword
•For Panda, “having children” was not just a life event:
•It was confronting an inherited fate and choosing what to pass on to the next generation.
•Ties with Hiroe, modern gender/family views, and skepticism toward medical advances all became materials to re-ask:
•“What does it mean to live?”
