Selective Reduction

[Minerva]

I was sad to hear she gave birth so early, but I've been following her blog and if anyone can handle the challenges she's going to face, this woman can. All this vitriol flew at her when she blogged about reducing, and she handled it super gracefully. She is going to be a stellar role model for her son - far better than the mothers who are attacking her.

Most of the people attacking her are the mothers of triplets. Some people think that if you do something difficult, it gives you license to shit all over people who choose not to do that difficult thing which, in my opinion, is a really childish mindset. Many of the people defending her are also the mothers of triplets, of course, which restores my faith in the existence of rational adults.

[valsa]

Most of the people attacking her are the mothers of triplets. Some people think that if you do something difficult, it gives you license to shit all over people who choose not to do that difficult thing which, in my opinion, is a really childish mindset. Many of the people defending her are also the mothers of triplets, of course, which restores my faith in the existence of rational adults.

The very cynical part of me wonders if so much hatred is being thrown her way because she did something they couldn't or wouldn't do. There have got to be more than a few mothers of multiples who either found themselves overwhelmed by the disabilities that often plague preemie multiples or just by sheer numbers and stress.

[YPestis]

The very cynical part of me wonders if so much hatred is being thrown her way because she did something they couldn't or wouldn't do. There have got to be more than a few mothers of multiples who either found themselves overwhelmed by the disabilities that often plague preemie multiples or just by sheer numbers and stress.

I read an article that notes parents of multiples experience a substantial higher rate of divorce. They are beset by financial and emotional stresses in their lives. I sometimes think some are so eager to have kids that they don't realize until too late how overwhelming having multiples are, and/or how difficult it is to raise special needs children.

I agree with others that selective reduction is like a kind of "Sophie's Choice" for fetuses. It's having to choose which child to ultimately sacrifice so that others could survive. There's no win-win situation with it. Whatever the decision, there will probably be emotional repercussion. I am a numbers gal. I try to make the best choice based on statistics. Reducing is always a medical recommendation for more than three (or even three depending on the situation). The reason is pretty clear from a medical standpoint. I understand if some choose to not reduce, but I also think it's horrible for people to belittle others for choosing to do so. It's like saying that because Bill Gates became rich and successful, the best thing is to make sure your child does not go to college. People don't seem to understand the difference between defying the odds and increasing one's chances. Selective reduction, when medically recommended is to substantially increase the chance of a healthy delivery for both mother and child(ren). I would never belittle someone for making the best medical choice provided to them.

[valsa]

I read an article that notes parents of multiples experience a substantial higher rate of divorce. They are beset by financial and emotional stresses in their lives. I sometimes think some are so eager to have kids that they don't realize until too late how overwhelming having multiples are, and/or how difficult it is to raise special needs children.

I agree with others that selective reduction is like a kind of "Sophie's Choice" for fetuses. It's having to choose which child to ultimately sacrifice so that others could survive. There's no win-win situation with it. Whatever the decision, there will probably be emotional repercussion. I am a numbers gal. I try to make the best choice based on statistics. Reducing is always a medical recommendation for more than three (or even three depending on the situation). The reason is pretty clear from a medical standpoint. I understand if some choose to not reduce, but I also think it's horrible for people to belittle others for choosing to do so. It's like saying that because Bill Gates became rich and successful, the best thing is to make sure your child does not go to college. People don't seem to understand the difference between defying the odds and increasing one's chances. Selective reduction, when medically recommended is to substantially increase the chance of a healthy delivery for both mother and child(ren). I would never belittle someone for making the best medical choice provided to them.

I read an article written by someone who shadowed a doctor who did selective reductions and, iirc, the parents don't always get to choose. A lot of choice about which fetuses are aborted comes from which ones are developing normally and which ones the doctor can get access too. However, there were some parents that got to choose by things like gender (usually in cases of twins, which I'm guessing has to do with there being better access and chances that both fetuses are developing well)

[Guest Anonymous]

The very cynical part of me wonders if so much hatred is being thrown her way because she did something they couldn't or wouldn't do. There have got to be more than a few mothers of multiples who either found themselves overwhelmed by the disabilities that often plague preemie multiples or just by sheer numbers and stress.

Maybe a lot of the triplet moms wish they had less kids at a time and someone else reducing makes them feel bad. Like if they consider it a mistake what they did, then they'll feel better if someone else does it too.

[valsa]

Maybe a lot of the triplet moms wish they had less kids at a time and someone else reducing makes them feel bad. Like if they consider it a mistake what they did, then they'll feel better if someone else does it too.

Misery does love company, after all.

[kb2]

Misery does love company, after all.

I have a sibling with a disability that was not diagnosed until well after birth (so my parents never really faced the possibility of aborting to avoid having a disabled child), and the disability is severe enough that my sibling lives at home with my parents and relies on them and other people to do daily things like bathe, get dressed, etc. And my parents worry about things like, what if one of them gets a back injury and it's no longer physically possible for them to pick my sibling up anymore, or what happens when they get old and they all need help with daily activities.

And there's a pro-life group that has called multiple times trying to reach my sibling, to ask them to be a spokesperson for not being aborted despite having a disability. And everyone who has picked up the phone has gotten offended by their premise that they would clearly consider my sibling for abortion, and not only that, they would like to find my sibling and tell them that directly.

[bettertomarry]

Misery does love company, after all.

I couldn't quite believe all the comments from people saying how hard it was to raise triplets, how they were completely broke or had filed for bankruptcy. There was even one comment from a woman about how her husband left her. And yet these were supposed to be arguments for not selectively reducing. Not the kind of sales pitch I would be inclined to go for.

[Coconut Flan]

Yeah, triplets are tough. The daughter of a friend of mine conceived triplets without assistance while living in a less well medically served area of the country. One fetus was diagnosed with IUGR and the twin set was thought to be doing well. Less than a year after birth, they were forced to move a thousand miles to be near my friend as they could not cope on their own any longer. She had carried the pregnancy to beyond 34 weeks so they were given all kinds of rosy predictions. Now what they have is three toddlers with autism, one who is deaf, and one with serious developmental delays. That was a "successful" triplet pregnancy.

Oh and the "IUGR" triplet turned out to be th largest of the three.

I can't blame anyone who doesn't want to give their children that kind of life or run a high risk of it. It seems that many of the mothers either want to share their misery or wish that they didn't have the burden.

[SpeakNow]

Slightly o/t but I've always wondered if children have any sort of "survivor's guilt" because of selective reduction (I.e. why did my sibling get aborted and I didn't?).

Anyway, people really need to stop bashing others for their reproductive choices. Only the woman (and the medical professionals working with her) can know what's right for her body in her situation. Why can't people understand that?

ETA- I don't think that the child should feel "survivors' guilt" for fairly obvious reasons. I just wonder about how it's portrayed to them, especially if they come into contact with prolifers or parents have a "change of heart" and become prolife.

[BlueberryBird]

Slightly o/t but I've always wondered if children have any sort of "survivor's guilt" because of selective reduction (I.e. why did my sibling get aborted and I didn't?).

Anyway, people really need to stop bashing others for their reproductive choices. Only the woman (and the medical professionals working with her) can know what's right for her body in her situation. Why can't people understand that?

Why is this something that the child would know? It is a private medical decision.

[Rosa]

well you might find out mom blogged about it. Prolifers might send them mail or accost them years later, it happens.

Or given the way people's in-laws always seem to feel like they get to know everything and judge on it, I can see someone's grandma telling them. Seriously. My son's grandma has told him ALL SORTS of inappropriate things about her family, many of them which arent' even true. Clueless, tactless people don't magically become tactful and clueful when they have kids/grandkids.

[valsa]

Slightly o/t but I've always wondered if children have any sort of "survivor's guilt" because of selective reduction (I.e. why did my sibling get aborted and I didn't?).

I think how to parents handle telling them the news (if they tell them) would affect how much guilt they may feel. If I had to reduce a pregnancy, I'd probably wouldn't keep that knowledge from my kid (my family had basically no secrets when I was growing up and that's one of the few things I actually respect about my upbringing) but I'd try to put it in terms of the fetuses being only "potential lives". The child that results from a reduced pregnancy should feel no more survivor’s guilt about the reduced fetuses than they should about all the potential fetuses that weren't able to be conceived during the 9 months the mother was pregnant with that child.

[bettertomarry]

My Aunt miscarried one of her twins and never told the surviving child, now 20. I'm certain it wouldn't have been a big deal if it had been part of of their family narrative, but by not talking about it, this becomes something more. I imagine it would be similar with the selective reduction.

[Minerva]

If they become anti-abortion, I could see them developing survivor's guilt (though everyone anti-abortion you talk to thinks they have survivor's guilt, so how would you know the difference?) If they don't, they probably won't. Given that this blogger's son would have died if he was born any earlier, and he would probably have been born earlier had she not reduced, he'll probably see her decision as having saved him.

[Milly-Molly-Mandy]

I worked at an IVF clinic for a few months (I'm a registered nurse) & in Australia it is against regulations (ie you will be struck off) to implant more than 2 embryo's, and 1 embryo is strongly recommended. We had one young women who had 2 implanted & both split & she had quad boys. Insane. They may sometimes do 2 if the women is over 40 & insists but most doctors refuse to do more than 1 otherwise.

They say America is the 'Wild West' of the fertility industry.

If I was pregnant with twins I would keep them but triplets I would reduce to 1. And I wouldn't tell anyone. My fiancee agrees with this decision. We only want 2 kids but would stretch to 3 if the last pregnancy is twins. I would not have triplets though-so so many risks for the babies & Mum.

[G G Gunhold]

I read a NYT thing about this and spent some time trying to sort it out in my own head.

If it were me pregnant with triplets or above and facing health risks (whether standard for pregnancies of multiples or increased), I would consider reduction/abortion to two, or to zero. My father is a twin whose twin died (as young adults) and through him I've met other twins who've lost their twin. There are those who lost twins prior to conscious memory and still experience a great deal of pain/guilt surrounding it. Am I sure that the in utero/early infancy experience has that much effect on a person that I would chalk the pain up to that? No. But I also don't buy the notion that we're shaped only by experiences we consciously remember. I'd rather end up with no children than be pregnant with multiples and choose to reduce to just one and face even a small risk of being responsible for choosing that kind of pain for my child.

I hope I never have to consider it.

[Milly-Molly-Mandy]

Yes...for some reason I would feel worse reducing from 2 to 1 than from 3 to 1. Maybe because 3 is so risky & 2 is not so much. And maybe it's the 'twin' thing. Ie closeness & the fear my child would feel someone is 'missing'. Agree-hope this is not something I would have to go through.

[rock_girl]

Yes...for some reason I would feel worse reducing from 2 to 1 than from 3 to 1. Maybe because 3 is so risky & 2 is not so much. And maybe it's the 'twin' thing. Ie closeness & the fear my child would feel someone is 'missing'. Agree-hope this is not something I would have to go through.

I wouldn't feel bad either way. Twins are cute and make for great photo-ops, but it can't be easy raising them. What about things like daycare? Finding a place for one child is hard enough; imagine having to get two sets of days at centres with huge waitlists. Then there's the cost of putting two children through school at the same time. Two lots of excursion money, two lots of camp fees, two lots of books for this or that subject.

If I had multiples of any kind I wouldn't hesitate to reduce. Call me selfish, but pregnancy is risky, and even if a twin pregnancy is less risky than a triplet or quad, it's still an additional risk. Why put your body through that?

[valsa]

If I had multiples of any kind I wouldn't hesitate to reduce. Call me selfish, but pregnancy is risky, and even if a twin pregnancy is less risky than a triplet or quad, it's still an additional risk. Why put your body through that?

Exactly. People think that twins are no big deal because they're so common but they're still a significant risk over a singleton pregnancy. 50% of twins are born premature (before 37 weeks), carrying 2 or more fetuses quadruples the risk of having a heart attack while pregnant, and while carrying twins women have twice the risk of developing pre-eclampsia than if they were carrying a singleton. Not to mention you'd be hard pressed to find a doctor willing to try a vaginal birth with twins, so it's almost an automatic C-section, which carries its' own risk.

I personally don't believe that terminating one fetus in the womb severs some sort of mystical bond it has with another fetus in there, so that's not an issue for me. I'd reduce in a heart beat, even with only twins.

[fundifugee]

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.

I am pretty sure she uses the term "reduction" because that is the medical term for this procedure. "Abortion" is to end a pregnancy. Her pregnancy is not being ended, the number of fetuses is being reduced. I am sure she is not using that term to avoid the abortion googlers, but as she stated, to put her decision process out there because when she googled "reduction" to learn more, she found very little.

[G G Gunhold]

People think being pregnant doesn't carry significant health risks. It does.

I have friends who have had abortions, and I respect them for their decisions, whether they were selfish or not. Parenting is an inherently selfish decision that paradoxically requires parents to put their responsibility to their children first (at least to parent well).

That said, there are some decisions that parents make out of selfishness that I find so self-centered I'd have trouble remaining friends with someone who made them and I knew about it. Purposely choosing a closed adoption instead of an open adoption because they think they want to be the "only" mother/father. Using their child as a go-between with their ex/speaking ill of their ex in front of the child. Selectively reducing from twin to a singleton without any risks specific to the pregnancy beyond being twins. Purposely choosing to have only one child for reasons of personal convenience. Not taking seriously a child's discomfort with someone, or challenging/denying their reports of being touched in ways that make them uncomfortable (well, in that case I'd also report it).

That's just me. I'm also not comfortable being friends with people who are homophobic, racist, classist, sexist, deny climate change, or generally have a sense of entitlement. Entirely likely that I'm a rigidly judgmental downer of a person.

[valsa]

People think being pregnant doesn't carry significant health risks. It does.

I have friends who have had abortions, and I respect them for their decisions, whether they were selfish or not. Parenting is an inherently selfish decision that paradoxically requires parents to put their responsibility to their children first (at least to parent well).

That said, there are some decisions that parents make out of selfishness that I find so self-centered I'd have trouble remaining friends with someone who made them and I knew about it. Purposely choosing a closed adoption instead of an open adoption because they think they want to be the "only" mother/father. Using their child as a go-between with their ex/speaking ill of their ex in front of the child. Selectively reducing from twin to a singleton without any risks specific to the pregnancy beyond being twins. Purposely choosing to have only one child for reasons of personal convenience. Not taking seriously a child's discomfort with someone, or challenging/denying their reports of being touched in ways that make them uncomfortable (well, in that case I'd also report it).

That's just me. I'm also not comfortable being friends with people who are homophobic, racist, classist, sexist, deny climate change, or generally have a sense of entitlement. Entirely likely that I'm a rigidly judgmental downer of a person.

First of all, being pregnant with twins IS a specific risk to the pregnancy. Yes, pregnancy is dangerous. However, pregnancy with two fetuses is more dangerous than pregnancy with one.

Secondly, did you seriously just compare reducing a twin pregnancy to calling a child who says they've been molested a liar?

[Austin]

My Aunt miscarried one of her twins and never told the surviving child, now 20. I'm certain it wouldn't have been a big deal if it had been part of of their family narrative, but by not talking about it, this becomes something more. I imagine it would be similar with the selective reduction.

Our eldest son is the product of a twin pregnancy where I lost his twin. We've always been honest about it (when it became age appropriate, anyway). Beyond that I believe honesty is best, several family members knew and I think it would be kind of terrible to learn about it accidentally at a family reunion someday or something. It isn't a big deal, although he says he does think about it from time to time and wonders what his twin would have been like. Which seems completely normal to me.

[valsa]

Our eldest son is the product of a twin pregnancy where I lost his twin. We've always been honest about it (when it became age appropriate, anyway). Beyond that I believe honesty is best, several family members knew and I think it would be kind of terrible to learn about it accidentally at a family reunion someday or something. It isn't a big deal, although he says he does think about it from time to time and wonders what his twin would have been like. Which seems completely normal to me.

I think something like that is normal. My mother has had 3 miscarriages (one before me and two after me) and I occassionally wonder about if they would have been boys or girls and what they may have been like.