Facebook Contest for IVF–Does This Make the Lottery Look Good?

Remember a while back I wrote about a lottery run in the UK where the prize was fertility services?   Bonnie Rochman, who writes Time Magazine’s Family Matters has a story that takes this idea another step further down the road.

A US fertility clinic set up a contest where the prize was a free round of IVF.   To enter you had to submit a video.   Once the judges winnowed down the entries the finalists were posted on-line with winners determined by Facebook voting.    Three winners were chosen.

Now I have to say this makes me shudder.  But it seems to me that once I’ve had my little shudder I ought to ask myself why it makes me shudder.   What (if anything) is wrong with the contest?

I do think back to the UK lottery.   Was there anything wrong with that, apart from the fact that lotteries may generally play on irrational hopes?  I probably shouldn’t dismiss that factor, as people struggling with infertility are doubtless very vulnerable, but in contrast to this, the whole thing seems rather decorous.

This brings me back to the video contest.  It seems to me that the clinic (which I am choosing not to name, though if you follow the link you’ll be right there on its site) is exploiting the needs and vulnerabilities of people dealing with infertility in a very public way in order to promote itself.   Surely the clinic did this to get attention, right?  Why else conduct the contest in this manner?   And equally surely, they’ve succeeded–and drawn me into the process as well.   (My choice not to name the clinic here is my tiny act of resistance.)

It’s not so much the fact that the winners get IVF that bothers me.  I assume that, to the extent there is screening for IVF eligibility, all the usual screening will be done here.   This is not, to my mind, like raffling off a baby.   Neither was the UK lottery.

What bothers me is the way the clinic is exploiting the vulnerabilities of people who need to use IVF.   It looks to me like all the finalists are married different-sex couples, which means they are dealing with infertility issues.   And of course, they are people who need to use IVF and do not have the money to be able to do so without entering this contest.   (I very much doubt that a couple with the resources could have put together a compelling video about why they needed free IVF.  I also don’t think a couple with ample resources would choose to expose itself like this.)

It’s certainly true that the three winning couples got something of real and substantial value.  And no one was forced to enter, no one had to make a video and post it.   (This does bring to mind the complicated questions of voluntariness and coercion that arise in a bunch of ART contexts.)   But still, I think the clinic callously used people to promote itself and it does rather make my skin crawl.  I suspect I’d have the same response (for basically the same reasons) if the prize was a necessary heart surgery or something like that.   Maybe in the age of reality TV (which I’ve never really watched, so what do I know?) this kind of exposure is just par for the course, but I’d rather hope it isn’t.


5 responses to “Facebook Contest for IVF–Does This Make the Lottery Look Good?

  1. I disagree. IVF is not a necessary procedure. Nobody dies from not having IVF. People who need open heart surgery may very well die without it. I don’t see how the two are comparable.

    Most insurance companies do not cover IVF services and these people want a non-essential medical service that they can’t afford. I see nothing wrong with providing them a way to achieve that desire.

    I’m surprised anyone would use or not use this clinic based on the contest. My first criteria would be the clinic’s IVF success rates, not the clinic’s success or lack of success in the its marketing strategy.

    • I think the idea might have been to get the clinic a lot of publicity so that more people would know the name, etc. I think you’re right about what a careful shopper might do, but you won’t even be checking the success rates if you haven’t heard of the place.

      You’re right about IVF being non-necessary, but I’m not sure this matters. Can we agree that the some people being unable to have a child is a terrible affliction, even if it isn’t a life-threatening one? It’s a happiness threatening one. So people can be pretty desparate. And this is, to my mind, what makes them subject to exploitation.

      At the same time, I do see your point. No one was made to do anything here. People were offered a $20,000 prize (I’m guessing the amount) if they wanted to enter. Many people surely decided not to enter.

      Still and all, it does bother me. But you should know that lots of what is on reality TV bothers me, too.

  2. I agree; it is exploitive. Especially for those who didn’t win and still ended up exposing their personal life to all.

  3. There are other ways to have children…adoption. There is a reason why these people can’t have children the way God intended.

  4. Adoption isn’t for everyone and it isn’t the same as bearing ones own children.
    Do you also say the same thing to cancer patients? do you tell them not to have surgery etc because god intended for them to go????

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s