or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Parenting Multiples › Is the NY Times article on Twins scaremongering?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is the NY Times article on Twins scaremongering? - Page 2

post #21 of 25
I didn't read the article but I wanted to say, I did IVF for my best friend. I was her surrogate. I had no issues conceiving my own, but was going through IVF so the baby would be totally hers and her husbands.

They decided on the day of the transfer to put in all SIX embryos. We put our trust in the doctor and yes, it was scary, but this doc had a pretty low number of multiples and no higher order multiples. The results were that 3 stuck around but only 1 grew. She is now 5

I actually stayed with my midwives the whole time. I did visit a maternal fetal medicine clinic when we thought we were having triplets, once, but I refused to go back. I have no idea where I was going with that though, haha. (I got in a huge argument at the meeting when I told them I wouldn't let them section me at 34 weeks just because I had 3 in there. And then I said I'd only have a section if the first baby wasn't in a good position. Yeah, it didn't go well! )
post #22 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocsNemesis View Post
I got in a huge argument at the meeting when I told them I wouldn't let them section me at 34 weeks just because I had 3 in there. And then I said I'd only have a section if the first baby wasn't in a good position. Yeah, it didn't go well!
Good for you! Totally reasonable.
post #23 of 25
I read the article when it came out a few weeks ago. DH brought it to me to read thinking it would be a "good" article about twins but it just upset me. I'm just into the second tri and while I realize the angle was on the expense of premmies (sp?) and how that relates to the current healthcare debate, I wish there was info on healthy twin pregnancies and not just teeny tiny sick babies.

We conceived via IUI and would have done IVF if it had gone that far but I feel strongly that since we had to drop so much science on this production, I'd like the pregnancy and delivery to be as low tech as possible. I am confident in my body's ability to grow and deliver these babies, I just needed a little help getting them in here.
post #24 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarigh View Post
We conceived via IUI and would have done IVF if it had gone that far but I feel strongly that since we had to drop so much science on this production, I'd like the pregnancy and delivery to be as low tech as possible. I am confident in my body's ability to grow and deliver these babies, I just needed a little help getting them in here.
Thank you for this paragraph . . . that is exactly how I feel.

THere have been a number of articles recently in Canadian papers that are arguing for funding for IVF to avoid all the health care costs "associated with multiple births".

While I agree that multiple births *can* have a high price tag, this assumption seems to miss a fairly crucial element . . .

What I mean by this is that if we didnt' treat pg and birth as a DISEASE, esp. multiple pg and birth and if our medical system didn't manage pg so terribly perhaps more multiple mamas would carry to term and fewer would wind up in NICU etc. Would multiple pg still carry a higher risk of complications? Sure, but not as much methinks.

I resent the implication that IVF mamas 'go for broke' and don't give enough thought to how many embryos are tranfered. THat is a broad generalization and reeks of judgement from those who have never tried to empathise.
post #25 of 25
Interesting article, but sadly I think while it highlights some reasons for concern.

I think the thing that gets me in regards to multiple births (this article included) is like dknees said lack of information women get to talk about carrying to "term." Living in LA I feel like I'm surrounded by multiples yet the lack of discussion about the possibilities of carrying to term, not scheduling a c-section at 12th week, not talking about bed rest, its all amazing to me. Having carried very high risk momo twins and not having a choice about my mode of delivery, I'm feel compelled to dispel the myth that my story of lengthy antepartum hospital stay, premature delivery, and NICU time HAS to be the case. I can't tell you how many mom's group's I've sat in when woman say their doctor has scheduled the c-section at 36 weeks. It's the norm here.

I think the larger problem is that woman need to be empowered and educated (and educate themselves) about what the possiblities are regardless of how they came to carry their multiples and most importantly our doctors need to be supportive and encourage such empowerment.

Sorry for my rant. I became I doula for just this reason.

Tina
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting Multiples
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Parenting Multiples › Is the NY Times article on Twins scaremongering?