reducing high order multiples

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-28-2007
reducing high order multiples
29
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 12:16pm

MINNEAPOLIS - Half of the sextuplets born prematurely to a Minnesota couple have now died, while the others remained in critical condition, hospital officials said Saturday.

A third boy, Lincoln Sean Morrison, died Friday. Two of his brothers, Tryg and Bennet, died earlier in the week.

The four boys and two girls were born last Sunday about 4½ months early a Minneapolis hospital. Doctors had advised the couple to selectively reduce the number of viable fetuses to two, but they declined.

The story goes on and you can read it at the link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19268732/

Anyway, I thought that this might be an interesting topic here. Reducing the number of viable fetuses may have given the remaining 2 to have a better chance to make it to full term. Is it responsible for people to have so many babies at one time? It is responsible for a doctor to put so many fertilized eggs in the uterus at once? I know that isn't always how higher order multiples happen, sometimes the eggs split to create more.

Do you think that the couple who did the fertility treatments (if this is a fertility treatment case) took gamble and should take what they get? Or do you think that it is best to choose to selectively reduce to give the others a better chance? Would that be more or less painful than losing the ones they have now so close after birth?

I really don't know. I am pro-choice although I would not have an abortion. However, maybe in this case I would seriously think about it. There would be no way I could have had 6 babies at once, and we live far away from family so I would have no help.

What is your opinions?

Photobucket

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-07-2007
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 1:12pm
I think it's irresponsible and selfish on the parents part but I'd never tell them they shouldn't do it. It's the parents who'll have to deal with the consequences of their actions.
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-28-2007
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 2:07pm

<>

What do you think is irresponsible?

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-07-2007
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 2:21pm
They shouldn't have tried to gestate 6 babies.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-18-2006
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 2:39pm
Well i think that if they are willing to take the risk of having 4-7 babies then or are willing to reduce, then they should be allowed to have as many embroys put in as they want...But if they are nto willign to take these chances then only 3-4 should be put in tops
Avatar for myshkamouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 3:31pm

Well first, does anyone know if they did IVF or fertility drugs alone? My guess is drugs not IVF. I can't see an RE transferring 6 embryo's. I know ours wouldnt. 3 is the max.

Personally, I think its incredibly reckless of the parents not to selectively reduce. Twins and triplets are high risk enough. More than that is stupidity, IMO.

There was a show on TLC that I saw a while back about sextuplets. They all were premiees and all had obvious minor developmental disabilities. And that is the *best* outcome one can wish for.

Still, its very very sad and I feel for the parents.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 4:40pm

Myshka....how are *your* multiples(twins) doing? I hope your family is doing well. Your children are adorable!

Sue

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-03-2007
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 7:55pm

I checked out their website. The way they explain their story is the only way I could imagine getting into their situation that is morally justifiable. My own choice would still be totally different, but at least they seem to be internally consistent.

They were both children of pastors in evangelical Christian churches. They were young and infertile. They were at that stage of assisted repro where they stimulate the ovaries of the woman. (which comes before implanting embryos). After they stimulated her ovaries with Follistim, there was an ultrasound which showed 2 or 3 follicles developing, so they seriously discussed the risk of carrying twins or triplets and decided to go ahead and have sex. Several weeks later, they discovered there were 6 fraternal conceptions, the ultrasound had missed several developing follicles. They had been passionately against abortion from the beginning.

I have no idea how often that happens, how accurate the ultrasound of ovaries is in showing how many ovulations probably happened. If that's more than extremely rare, I would prefer (my opinion) that couples that refuse to selectively reduce skip straight on to embryo implantation. It's not that much more invasive, and can conclusively prevent higher order multiples.

In the US, couples will still transfer 2-4, but in Europe I believe that you only get covered for it if you transfer single embryos. It's getting to be such a well-practiced art that even with only one blastocyst it's quite successful.

Avatar for myshkamouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 10:31pm

thanks! They are doing great. They'll be 4 in July which I can't believe! I'm pregnant with a boy, 19 weeks now, due in November.

MM

Avatar for myshkamouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 06-17-2007 - 10:35pm

They were both children of pastors in evangelical Christian churches."

Why should that matter?

" They were young and infertile. They were at that stage of assisted repro where they stimulate the ovaries of the woman. (which comes before implanting embryos). After they stimulated her ovaries with Follistim, there was an ultrasound which showed 2 or 3 follicles developing, so they seriously discussed the risk of carrying twins or triplets and decided to go ahead and have sex. Several weeks later, they discovered there were 6 fraternal conceptions, the ultrasound had missed several developing follicles. They had been passionately against abortion from the beginning. "

This isnt consistent with IVF protocal. So they didnt do IVF so no implanting of embryos.
Sounds like they used Follistim -- sounds like they didnt realize (or the Dr didnt tell them) that follicles can develop at any stage during the stim process from a certain point on, and, sperm can stick around for what ... 4-5 days? Anyway, sounds sloppy to me with a capital S.

I have no idea how often that happens, how accurate the ultrasound of ovaries is in showing how many ovulations probably happened."

Accurate, but not if they had sex later on and sperm stuck around.

" If that's more than extremely rare, I would prefer (my opinion) that couples that refuse to selectively reduce skip straight on to embryo implantation. It's not that much more invasive, and can conclusively prevent higher order multiples."

Agree.

In the US, couples will still transfer 2-4, but in Europe I believe that you only get covered for it if you transfer single embryos. It's getting to be such a well-practiced art that even with only one blastocyst it's quite successful."

Yes agree.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-03-2007
Mon, 06-18-2007 - 10:44am

The only reason I mentioned the religion is that they both had lifelong been publicly on record about their view on abortion and how it's never an option.

I think the whole thing broke down with the ultrasound diagnosis of follicle numbers - I'd love it if anyone has an idea of how often that's inaccurate.

Pages