Selective Reduction

[bananacat]

I think it his her choice. But the one thing that does bother me is the use of the word 'reduction' and this I do not understand because I have no issue with abortion ...far from it. Maybe I am too literal. She gives all the well thought out reasons for 'reducing' quotes the medical odds, statistics quite analytically. Then uses a slightly less evocative term 'reduction.'

For some reason that makes me uncomfortable.

I am completely pro-choice and I think reduction is the best term to use in this case. It's not about shying away from abortion at all. But abortion is something you do to a process, and she isn't stopping the entire pregnancy, so I don't think abortion is the most correct term to use here.

[Minerva]

I am completely pro-choice and I think reduction is the best term to use in this case. It's not about shying away from abortion at all. But abortion is something you do to a process, and she isn't stopping the entire pregnancy, so I don't think abortion is the most correct term to use here.

Yeah, she's reducing the pregnancy, not aborting it. Still, it's her experience, so she can call it what she wants. I like how openly she's calling her fetuses babies. A lot of pro-choice pregnant people, including those who are going to have an abortion, call their fetuses babies. It takes away a lot of the power that anti-choicers have given themselves by using the word "baby" as an argument in itself.

[SunnyAndrsn]

While I do agree that what she is doing is wrong, that doesn't give me the right to tell her what she can and cannot do. t ..

Is this a natural pregnancy? Honestly, if a woman's doing IVF, and choses to transfer three embryos, she needs to realize that she could in fact end up with triplets. I remember one woman who transferred three embryos. They all took and then one split! She ended up with four babies, two being identical twins. She did end up miscarrying one of the singletons so I believe she ended up with three anyway.

Also, I hope she understands the risks to losing the whole pregnancy by doing selective reduction. Just imagine the hate mail she'll get from these so called "christians" if she ends up losing the whole thing ...

I don't think every MWOP'er claims to be a Christian. I don't think I'd make the same choice as this woman is, but I'm sure as hell not going to say 100% without a doubt what I would do. I've BTDT, and have had to eat my words.

The chances of all the embryos implanting and having one split are very, very small. In the case of the blogger they are talking about, she has a singleton and identical twins who share a placenta and a sac. No idea how many she transferred in the first place.

[Hane]

After reading about selective reduction and the agony and decision process these parents go through, I hereby state that no one has any right to an opinion on selection reduction unless she is actually carrying multiple fetuses.

I once met a young woman with her twin baby daughters. She mentioned that her pregnancy started out with triplets, but that she miscarried one. I said, "Oh, I'm so sorry," and she instantly replied, "I'm not." I was taken aback by her response, but reserved judgment. I'm glad I did--I wouldn't have been the one carrying and raising and paying for three babies at once. I know plenty of twin parents and know how risky twin pregnancy can be, and how exhausting raising twins is, compared with a singleton.

[desertvixen]

A lot of pro-choice pregnant people, including those who are going to have an abortion, call their fetuses babies. It takes away a lot of the power that anti-choicers have given themselves by using the word "baby" as an argument in itself.

This. Also, it helps counter the argument that pro-choice people are somehow anti-child. When I spoke about my own pregnancy, it was always "baby" (or occasionally "parasite") but she was a much-wanted, planned pregnancy.

[bananacat]

After reading about selective reduction and the agony and decision process these parents go through, I hereby state that no one has any right to an opinion on selection reduction unless she is actually carrying multiple fetuses.

I once met a young woman with her twin baby daughters. She mentioned that her pregnancy started out with triplets, but that she miscarried one. I said, "Oh, I'm so sorry," and she instantly replied, "I'm not." I was taken aback by her response, but reserved judgment. I'm glad I did--I wouldn't have been the one carrying and raising and paying for three babies at once. I know plenty of twin parents and know how risky twin pregnancy can be, and how exhausting raising twins is, compared with a singleton,

That can happen even with singleton pregnancies though. My mom got pregnant in her early 20s and had a miscarriage and she was glad for it. If she hadn't miscarried, she probably would have had an abortion. Miscarriage isn't always tragic.

[OkToBeTakei]

Yeah, she's reducing the pregnancy, not aborting it. Still, it's her experience, so she can call it what she wants. I like how openly she's calling her fetuses babies. A lot of pro-choice pregnant people, including those who are going to have an abortion, call their fetuses babies. It takes away a lot of the power that anti-choicers have given themselves by using the word "baby" as an argument in itself.

I guess I will disagree. I have struggled to understand why it irked me because I do admire her honesty. I think it is the terminology and after taking some 24 hours or so to examine my own thoughts. The reason it irks me is BECAUSE I am pro-choice. Right or wrong in my thought process was the uncomfortable thought that because somebody chooses to pursue a pregnancy with a child as the end result, then as is her right chooses to 'reduce' if 2 or 3 was not her plan. That is fine by me.

If an unplanned pregnancy has the same concerns ie. Not what the person planned or can cope with. I do not want that person lumbered with a term a word that brings them strife, judgement.

For me what it comes down to is words. I have no issue with the word abortion. It is a word. Reduce, abort... same thing.

[emmiedahl]

I think abortion generally refers, semantically, to aborting a pregnancy. A person who has the pregnancy reduced has not aborted a pregnancy; they are still pregnant, just with a little more wiggle room in there.

I have a friend/distant relative who was pregnant with twins. One died at around 6 months gestation and the other twin had to be watched closely. But the Mama was relieved. It was an unplanned pregnancy and she has a malformed uterus that would make any pregnancy technically impossible. She was happy to have the risk reduced somewhat, and she was left with one miracle baby that she is thankful for because she cannot technically have children. A fetus is not a person. It cannot be said often enough. No one is ever happy to lose a child, but losing a fetus can be a real boon.

[gustava]

I think abortion generally refers, semantically, to aborting a pregnancy. A person who has the pregnancy reduced has not aborted a pregnancy; they are still pregnant, just with a little more wiggle room in there.

I have a friend/distant relative who was pregnant with twins. One died at around 6 months gestation and the other twin had to be watched closely. But the Mama was relieved. It was an unplanned pregnancy and she has a malformed uterus that would make any pregnancy technically impossible. She was happy to have the risk reduced somewhat, and she was left with one miracle baby that she is thankful for because she cannot technically have children. A fetus is not a person. It cannot be said often enough. No one is ever happy to lose a child, but losing a fetus can be a real boon.

Ring the bell. Blare the trumpet. A FETUS IS NOT A PERSON.

ETA: Boldface in emmie's post is mine.

[bananacat]

I guess I will disagree. I have struggled to understand why it irked me because I do admire her honesty. I think it is the terminology and after taking some 24 hours or so to examine my own thoughts. The reason it irks me is BECAUSE I am pro-choice. Right or wrong in my thought process was the uncomfortable thought that because somebody chooses to pursue a pregnancy with a child as the end result, then as is her right chooses to 'reduce' if 2 or 3 was not her plan. That is fine by me.

If an unplanned pregnancy has the same concerns ie. Not what the person planned or can cope with. I do not want that person lumbered with a term a word that brings them strife, judgement.

For me what it comes down to is words. I have no issue with the word abortion. It is a word. Reduce, abort... same thing.

I have major issues with the terminology that people use, not lease of which is the term pro-life, which implies that I somehow care less about life. However, I really think reduction is the better term in this case. You abort a process, not a fetus/embryo/baby/whatever. You can abort a space launch or abort the installation of a software program, meaning that you stop it. This woman is not stopping her pregnancy, she's not aborting it. She's modifying it. When you claim that this should only be called abortion, you are actually the one who is conceding to the anti-abortion point-of-view. You're accepting their false definition of abortion as something that is done to an embryo and not something that is done to a pregnancy. I refuse to concede that point to them, so when a pregnancy isn't aborted, I won't refer to it as abortion.

[OkToBeTakei]

I have major issues with the terminology that people use, not lease of which is the term pro-life, which implies that I somehow care less about life. However, I really think reduction is the better term in this case. You abort a process, not a fetus/embryo/baby/whatever. You can abort a space launch or abort the installation of a software program, meaning that you stop it. This woman is not stopping her pregnancy, she's not aborting it. She's modifying it. When you claim that this should only be called abortion, you are actually the one who is conceding to the anti-abortion point-of-view. You're accepting their false definition of abortion as something that is done to an embryo and not something that is done to a pregnancy. I refuse to concede that point to them, so when a pregnancy isn't aborted, I won't refer to it as abortion.

That is your prerogative.

Oxford English dictionary. verb. Abort. 1. carry out or undergo the abortion of (a fetus) 2. Biology. (of an embryonic organ or organism) remain undeveloped; fail to mature. 3. bring to to a premature end because of a problem or fault. - Origin LATIN Obiriri 'miscarry'

[bananacat]

Ok, anytime you use at dictionary as a Bible, you automatically lose. Learn how etymology works. The definition has only changed because of anti-abortion emotional appeals. Get back to me when you can talk about this topic like you actually know something about it. I really wish that people in general had a better understanding of how language works.

[OkToBeTakei]

Ok, anytime you use at dictionary as a Bible, you automatically lose. Learn how etymology works. The definition has only changed because of anti-abortion emotional appeals. Get back to me when you can talk about this topic like you actually know something about it. I really wish that people in general had a better understanding of how language works.

Ouch. I disagreed with you. You do not like it. You assume I know nothing about the topic. I chose not to make it personal...if that is your best recourse I am not impressed.

[Austin]

That's cool that you're interested, but I don't see how you can be all, "Oh that's an interesting fact about fertility treatments that I didn't know!" and then be all, "A lot of people seeking fertility treatments are woefully unaware of these very important facts about it that I know." It seems wrong to judge people seeking fertility treatments for not planning ahead for multiples when you yourself aren't fully informed on how multiples happen. For the most part, people aren't running around making frivolous decisions about how many eggs to transfer, they're just making hard decisions that sometimes work out in their favor and sometimes don't.

As a former infertility patient (both primary and secondary), I can attest to the fact that once they bring out the big gun fertility drugs, medical personnel make sure you know the risks. It was addressed repeatedly with us. We went into that process with open eyes, and there was no "woefully unaware" of what was involved.

I conceived twins and carried them both to 35 weeks, so we were not faced with this sort of decision. But the notion that people are somehow unaware of the risks and difficult decisions involved with higher order multiples is not the case, in my own experience and with the many others I've known who have had similar help in conceiving. This was more than 19 years ago (said twins will turn 19 this week).

[rox]

I might be wrong, but I think that they call this procedure a reduction rather then abortion because abortion, by the medical definition, is a procedure which empties the uterus. Reduction plainly does not do this.

[TXDuck]

I might be wrong, but I think that they call this procedure a reduction rather then abortion because abortion, by the medical definition, is a procedure which empties the uterus. Reduction plainly does not do this.

This. Dictionary definitions aren't terribly helpful in this situation. Abortion would mean she isn't pregnant anymore and she clearly is. Medically speaking, it is a reduction as no process is being halted. Obviously, these terms cannot speak to the gut wrenching decisions this woman had to make.

[BlueChair]

This woman's son was born recently at 25 weeks and 3 days gestation. Josie sized. From what she's written on the blog he seems to be doing relatively well in the NICU. Of course, there are some real gems in the comments lately so peruse those at the risk of your own blood pressure spiking.

The post in which she announced the birth: babymakingmerrygoround.blogspot.no/2012/10/baby-gg-was-born-today-at-25-weeks-3.html#comment-form

[CrazySister]

Wow, can't help but think if she hadn't reduced that he wouldn't have made it even this far. Hoping all goes well with as smooth a NICU ride as possible.

[Pattypoundcake]

Wow, can't help but think if she hadn't reduced that he wouldn't have made it even this far. Hoping all goes well with as smooth a NICU ride as possible.

That is what I was thinking...she could have lost the whole pregnancy at 20 weeks, who knows.

[Emme]

I have major issues with the terminology that people use, not lease of which is the term pro-life, which implies that I somehow care less about life. However, I really think reduction is the better term in this case. You abort a process, not a fetus/embryo/baby/whatever. You can abort a space launch or abort the installation of a software program, meaning that you stop it. This woman is not stopping her pregnancy, she's not aborting it. She's modifying it. When you claim that this should only be called abortion, you are actually the one who is conceding to the anti-abortion point-of-view. You're accepting their false definition of abortion as something that is done to an embryo and not something that is done to a pregnancy. I refuse to concede that point to them, so when a pregnancy isn't aborted, I won't refer to it as abortion.

YES. That. I am so pro-choice, but I'm also pro-programs that support women, mothers, and children. Most pro-lifers are pro-fetus, but not actually pro-life. If they were pro-life they'd support the multitude of programs that support young parents, single parents, people on welfare, etc.. Most of the pro-lifers I know do NOT do that.

As someone said recently, if you want to reduce abortions make sure people are well educated and healthy and have access to birth control, NOT the opposite.

Edited to add: people are so fucking nasty to her! Going in to make bitchy comments on the birth of her child? Fucking assholes.

[kb2]

Edited to add: people are so fucking nasty to her! Going in to make bitchy comments on the birth of her child? Fucking assholes.

The mean comments made me really angry also. I feel like I could write a 500 word post about how angry, but I think I'm just going to leave it at that.

[Guest Anonymous]

Women have selective reductions because they want children, not because they don't. How horrible to be in the position where you'll probably have no kids, or have to sacrifice some to increase the chance the rest have, and then to have a reminder every day of the children you had to let go of. People giving her a hard time need to shut up. Do you think they defend Octomom who it turns out may be allowing sexual abuse of her kids?

[Coconut Flan]

People giving her grief need to shut up. With a singleton she went into very premature labor and could have easily lost him. Some of us just aren't made to carry litters.

[Vex]

I can't believe people are hounding her. She clearly wanted to be a mother so badly. Something happened to her she had no way of predicting - an embryo split three times. It's not like she did an Octomom and implanted a million embryos.

Those people need to learn that only the mother can know what's best for her own body. She clearly knew more about the situation than any of us could, and she made the only choice she felt she could have. Would they have preferred she die trying to carry the three live ones to term? Or that she have three babies and go through the agony of the NICU with all of them, only to find herself utterly overwhelmed later on? That might be their choice, but they have no right to judge unless they've been in her shoes. Even then, I really don't think they have the right to judge because everyone is different.

Personally, I don't think I would have been strong enough to have made that choice. And if I were her, I probably would have lost them all because of that. I'm in awe of her courage and strength.

[congusto]

Women have selective reductions because they want children, not because they don't. How horrible to be in the position where you'll probably have no kids, or have to sacrifice some to increase the chance the rest have, and then to have a reminder every day of the children you had to let go of. People giving her a hard time need to shut up. Do you think they defend Octomom who it turns out may be allowing sexual abuse of her kids?

It's an in-utero "Sophie's Choice" to my mind, at least, and must have been one hell of a bloody position for this woman (and her husband) to have found themselves in after their infertility struggles. I'm so pleased that she has her longed-for child, and hope only the very best of outcomes for the family. But now that we have an actual, extra uterine child, interest from the fundies in his welfare will be almost non-existent. Sadly, these nutters will continue to harp on about the "martyrs of the womb" or some other such nonsense, and continue to spew venom at this woman. I would love to be proved wrong, and see some genuine Christian charity displayed. Or, human charity.