The only thing I don't like about IVF is that sperm are supposed to compete and the healthiest/strongest sperm fertilize the egg, but with IVF they choose a sperm and use it to fertilize. I don't think this creates the best genetic outcome.
In terms of all the modifications, there is no evidence that people modifying their genes will lead to viable offspring who do not have their own genetic diseases down the line. Natural selection will still win out by eliminating modifications that are not advantageous to the species.
As for creating higher intelligence, that's highly subjective. Most scientists base intelligence on IQ which is really an aptitude test, which is a test of logic and not creativity. I don't think it's necessarily advantangeous to create babies who are more logical. If we had more creative and critical thinking modalities included in the education system, people would have higher intelligence anyway. Making people "smarter" so that they can do the same mundane education modules and narrow-minded thinking of the industrial education system does not a better human make.
I don't think humanity is ready for elective genetic engineering of their offspring, but it seems like it's going to start happening soon one way or the other. In the case of the OP, it's my opinion that if a person's genes don't permit them to reproduce, then there is a good reason for that, and we should not be mixing genetic lines together.