What do infertile couples want most, a child or a pregnancy?

I have been hearing rumblings lately how having children is a right and how IVF discriminates against poor couples who can't afford it.  Some think that IVF should be covered by insurance or paid for with taxpayer dollars like in England.  In the debate, I came across this comment that was so wise and really gets to the heart of the matter:

There are options for CPS fostering to adoption of children that are much less expensive. It is by no means an easy road, but no adoption is, and IVF is a roller coaster at best. I think more couples struggling to pay for fertility treatments should consider what they want most, a child or a pregnancy. My best friend and her husband, who could've afforded IVF or private adoption, decided instead to open their hearts to a brother and sister in the child protection system and have since adopted those two precious kids that God made for them, even if not from them. It took her a long time to realize that she wanted to be a parent more than she needed to carry a child...

I think that is the problem with our society's view of IVF, that somehow to be a real parent you have to carry a genetically related child.  I have called this genetic vanity and it is a problem.

Instead of spending tens of thousands of dollars, creating life in dish to be barcoded and RFID tagged and then left in the deep freeze, maybe infertile couples should instead be asking themselves if what they really want is a child or a pregnancy. Is their need to be a parent or to carry a genetically related child?