Multiple births due to fertility treatments

[chobie]

Of course, those fetuses would be aborted so the fetuses left would have the best chance at being born healthy.


You know what they say about opinios. Everyone has 'em and you are entitled to yours. In my opinion I think keeping a litter of babies is selfish. And yes, I expect that people will not agree with me.

I agree with you.

 

[golfgal]

Personally I am glad that I haven't had to be in that position because I don't know what I would do. I guess to start with I wouldn't have had that many embryos implanted to begin with. I would have said no more then 3, I think. Maybe that is why we never had a problem conceiving children, we tried to get pregnant twice and we have 3 kids (both pregnancies took on the first month trying).

 

[DizBelle]

Yeah - but if someone was concerned about playing God, I dont know if they should be doing IVF, in the first place.

Interesting! You're effectively playing God by conceiving "artifically" in the first place. Why not continue playing God and reduce? Hmmmmmmmmmm...

 

[AllyandJack]

Interesting! You're effectively playing God by conceiving "artifically" in the first place. Why not continue playing God and reduce? Hmmmmmmmmmm...

Maybe they want all the babies.

 

[DizBelle]

I have NO IDEA what I would do in this situation. Here's the things that would possibly go through my head.

How can I possibly reduce the number of babies? How can I eliminate ANY of them? These are my children.
If I reduce, the remaining babies have a much better chance at being healthy.
How can I not reduce the number since if I kept all of them, they would all be at a much higher risk for health problems?
Am I prepared to deal with 5 special needs children all at once?
What would that mean to the one child that I have already? Would he/she suffer as a result? Would I end up neglecting the older one for the sake of the babies?
What kind of life am I setting up for my older child?
What kind of life am I setting up for my 5 babies? Or 4, or 3, or 2, or 1, or none - if some or all don't survive?
Am I prepared to leave my DH as a single father to potentially 6 children because keeping all of them increases the risk of my dying? And is he prepared for it?

A LOT to think about.

 

[PaulaSue]

I wouldn't reduce, it is against my beliefs.

 

[noodles]

I couldn't reduce, it would haunt me for the rest of my life. I also can't judge what anyone else would do in this situation because Im not in their shoes.

 

[CEDmom]

This is where my problem with IVF comes in. We speak of the health of your babies, but what about the health of the ones we "selectively reduce". Kinda like playing God in my opinion!

That's what is wonderful about living in a free country. No one is making you do IVF if you don't want. Until you're in a position where you desperately want a child and are unable to conceive you don't know what you'd do. You also don't know what you'd do if faced with the possibility of giving birth to several special needs children vs. 1 or 2 healthy ones.

 

[FionaLovesShrek]

No one, who hasn't spent years wanting a child and doing everything possible to achieve that dream, can understand how you would feel when you finally find out the embryos placed inside you are living and growing. Out of nine eggs retrieved from my ovaries, 4 embryos made it to the stage for implantation into my uterus. It was never an option to do less than 4. The chances for a successful pregnancy with IVF are very slim. I was told I had a 25 percent chance of achieving a pregnancy, and a 10 percent chance of going to term if I did become pregnant. It was worth everything I went through. Had all 4 embryos taken, it would not have been an option for me to choose how many lived. I wish I had more children and the thought was always there to do it again, but I have what God gave me. Man has the knowledge to go around the traditional method for baby making when the plumbing doesn't work right...but only God can create life.

 

[mrsltg]

If I were in the same situation, I would have been grateful for the one child I already had, and not go to those extraordinary and dangerous lengths to have more.

I love this opinion. When my son died people told me to be grateful for my daughter. "Wow!" There was the epiphany! I hadn't been grateful for my child before (as this couple is not grateful for the child they have now). Thank heavens people were there to tell me to be grateful for child I had!

Frankly, I think it's one of the most horrific things a person can say to someone who looses/desperately wants another child. Do you walk up to all pregnant women who are not expecting their first and say, "What's the matter? Weren't you grateful for your first baby?" It's not about being grateful. The desire to have another child DOES NOT NEGATE the love you have for your first or other children.

As far as the OP. I wouldn't reduce. I'd be too afraid of the consequences. Reduction increases your risk of loosing other babies. I also wouldn't allow myself to be implanted with more than two or three. I feel for this family though. The desperation is painful. I hope they are able to conceive and carry the baby they so desperately want.

 

[LindsayDunn228]

I wouldn't reduce, but then again, I wouldn't be having IVF in the first place.

 

[poohandwendy]

Based on my own personal stance that I would not 'reduce', I would only allow implantation of up to 3 embryos at a time.

What other people do is up to them.

 

[PaulaSB12]

I know of a couple that already has one child that, I believe, is two years old. This child was a result of one of five embryos that were implanted. They had implanted 5 embryos before this attempt and none took.

Now, they've implanted 5 again and all 5 took. Their doctor recommended that they reduce from 5 to 2 to better the chances for healthy babies and a healthy mom. Otherwise both the babies and mom are at risk of health issues and/or death. They've decided not to reduce at all. I don't know this couple (only know "of" them) so I don't know all of the reasons for which they made this decision.

What is your opinion on this?

You do realise that with reductive termination there is a 50% chance that it will become a total abortion. They have obviously decided that its not worth the risk. BTW my sister had triplets with ivf at birth they weighed 4 pounds 12, 5 pounds 2 and 5 pounds 12 and are now healthy 12 year olds (wel appart from an acute case of teenageitus that is now developing)

 

[2bemarried]

DH and I are in the process of starting IVF, so we've had this discussion. If we emplanted all 5 and they took, we would not reduce them. Having said that...we also decided that we will never emplant more than 3 at a time, b/c we don't want to run the risk of having more than 3. It's honestly a personal decision that I don't think anyone else can make for you.

 

[vettechick99]

This happened to a couple down the street. She was on Clomid (I think) and 5 eggs were released and fertilized. At 24 weeks, one of the girls was born and passed away a few days later. A few weeks after that, the rest were born and sadly, only one is left now. She will be in the hospital for months and months. The whole town is so heartbroken, as I know the parents are.

I can't say what I'd do in the situation, but after what has happened to this couple, I'd lean towards selective reduction.

Then again, I'd find a doctor whose goal is to create one baby.

 

[CheshireVal]

To be honest, I don't think anyone can predict exactly what they'd do in this situation until it actually happened to them.

It's all well and good to say "no way, I would never," or "I would do it in a heartbeat," but I'll bet perspective and objectivity go out the window when you're desperate for children.

I only hope I never have to make these choices, myself.

 

[AllyandJack]

Anything over twins is considered a "failure" when it comes to ART. There are certain procedures my doctor won't even do on me. I hyper-responded on the lowest possible dose of Clomid. She wouldn't do a medicated IUI on me. She said the risk of higher-order multiples - more than triplets - was too great and she doesn't take those sorts of risks. Not that I would have taken the risk, but even if I wanted her to, she wouldn't let me.

There does have to be some form of accountability on the doctor's part. Even though I run the risk of quads with my 2 embyros, that risk is slim. Shoving 4 embryos in me....that's irresponsible under the circumstances and I would switch doctors if my doctor even suggested that to me as an option.

 

[phillybeth]

we also decided that we will never emplant more than 3 at a time, b/c we don't want to run the risk of having more than 3.

First of all, they are not IMPLANTING embryos, they are transferring. If they were implanted, everyone would get pregnant from IVF.

Second, transferred embryos can separate and produce identical twins. So even if you only transfer 2 or 3 embryos, you still have the chance of higher order multiples if the embryos split and all implant. I know a couple that transferred one embryo that split twice and they wound up with identical triplets.

 

[beattyfamily]

I wouldn't reduce, but then again, I wouldn't be having IVF in the first place.

Ditto

 

[AllyandJack]

Second, transferred embryos can separate and produce identical twins. So even if you only transfer 2 or 3 embryos, you still have the chance of higher order multiples if the embryos split and all implant. I know a couple that transferred one embryo that split twice and they wound up with identical triplets.

This is so true....and any doctor that doesn't inform patients of this risk shouldn't be practicing in this field of medicine.