Comments on: The Story of Anissa Ayala

By: Mandy

Mandy — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:23:11 +0000

It’s outlandish because we romanticize pregnancy and birth. Ideally, people would only have children out of love. Unfortunately for idealists, even our biology is working against the ideal, for we didn’t evolve to procreate out of love, we evolved to love in order to procreate.

This child was born for a straightforward reason, but essentially, every child is born for a reason whether the parents realize it or not. Procreation is entirely selfish–but that won’t end up in Reader’s Digest.

By: Carrie

Carrie — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 01:18:09 +0000

With an older sister with MS and a brother with cancer, I know I would do anything for either of them, and am often stuck in the position where there’s not much I can do other than offer love, humor and support.

I distinctly remember when this story first graced the headlines and the many debates that ensued. Were the parents being selfish? It’s hard to stomach the thought that the father would undergo surgery and the mother endure a pregnancy at 43 to be selfish. I think they wanted to give their daughter a chance at a normal life, and if they were that caring and nurturing, it would be hard to imagine they wouldn’t embrace the new life they were granted regardless of whether or not she had been a bone marrow match for her sister.

It was later in college when a good friend challenged me to come up with an unselfish reason to have a child. That was twelve years ago, and I haven’t been able to yet. But the Ayalas’ story is probably the closest I’ve seen…

By: emmiline

emmiline — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 07:46:11 +0000

as a parent, i would do it- but i would love that child all the more for the gift they had given.

as a sibling- there isn’t much i won’t do for my brothers and sister. and if i had been concieved simply to save one of them, i would be totally fine with it.

that is if my siblings or parents weren’t total neglectful, ungrateful jerks.(my real ones aren’t, but hypothetically speaking)

By: Seamus

Seamus — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 02:37:10 +0000

Children area blessing! With parents who love a child, and are not putting the child in danger, then saving their own child is an act of heroism!

By: Abiola

Abiola — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 23:47:55 +0000

I wonder what they would have done if Marissa had not been a match.

By: Jenn

Jenn — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:53:14 +0000

Marissa’s in college?? I feel old.

I remember the story being featured in “Reader’s Digest”; I can’t remember if it was a book excerpt or not, but it was basically an oral history of the whole situation. It was clear that the parents truly love Marissa and didn’t just have a baby to save Anissa and then get rid of her. Marissa has to feel really special, knowing that she was born for a purpose.

Also, I’ve always liked that Marissa’s name came from a combination of Mary and Anissa.

By: Meghan

Meghan — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:01:07 +0000

I think it’s definitely a quality of life issue — for both the sick child and the child conceived to help them. If a family can adequately provide for (in both the economic and emotional sense) another child, then there I see no problem with it. It’s definitely a case-by-case situation, though, as I don’t think some families would be able to raise the second child in a healthy way.

By: Brandy

Brandy — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:42:36 +0000

I would absolutely give anything possible for my sister. I remember when I was 14 I read an article that a sister had become pregnant for her sister unable to conceive. I offered to carry children for my then 18 year old sister if she ever found out she couldn’t have kids. Thankfully that was never a problem, but I would offer her anything I could to make her life better. If that object saved her life? You bet I would give it to her.

By: Christina W.

Christina W. — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:35:20 +0000

Or to “save” your marriage!

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:44:11 +0000

This is better than having more kids in order to fatten up your welfare check.