Your search for "ivf" returned the following 27655 results:
Displaying results 1 to 25 sorted by relevance. Sort by recency.
Bargain-Basement IVF
Score one for the home team -- Alan Trounson, an IVF pioneer and director of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine in San Francisco, was quoted in a gee whiz article in Nature , expounding on ...(such as clomiphene) and remove just one or two eggs, and only transfer one embryo, it can be done for less than US$100." IVF for less than it costs for a decent pair of shoes? Whoa. Canadian news source The Star spells out a few other possibilities , ...SanFrancisco : July 21, 2008
[+] Anyone on boards done IVF? If so, what are your thoughts. 40 years old with 2 kids n... 5 replies
- You never know or can predict, it's so much hocus pocus. I did IVF and was successful with one child out of something like 5 implanted. That said, I know someone who had success with one live birth and 3 implanted. So she went o have a second child via IVF and her RE did the same: 3 implanted. Guess what? All three took. The family of 3 doubled and is now a family of 6 out...
Talk : : August 29, 2010
Anyone on boards done IVF? If so, what are your thoughts. 40 years old with 2 kids naturally (5 and 2).. no issues with fertility, but we want one more and tried for one year with no luck, so although all tests were good, we went with IVF due to my age. RE says all is good, but got three eggs at retrieval. So is this normal at 40.. and have any of you gotten so few eggs and had success? Doc said at myage, would like to see 5, but if all three fertilize and develop, would be good. Doc also only wants to transfer 2- which I'm thinking transfer 3 if that's all we have. I know it depends on how they will progress over next few days.. but anyone with no known fertility issues (other than age) or anyone in general with success with 3 eggs?
5 replies [ Reply | Watch | More08.29.10, 01:49 PM Flag ]You never know or can predict, it's so much hocus pocus. I did IVF and was successful with one child out of something like 5 implanted. That said, I know someone who had success with one live birth and 3 implanted. So she went o have a second child via IVF and her RE did the same: 3 implanted. Guess what? All three took. The family of 3 doubled and is now a family of 6 out in the burbs by necessity. Fast. ! You just can never be sure and you must listen to your RE who has a ton more experience with this than you, and also, is emotionally detached. You can always freeze the embryo and implant later when you are no longer able to make good eggs...GL
[ Reply | More ]08.29.10, 03:13 PM Flag
[+] Saw someone post about IVF the other day, now can't find. But I just did IVF, too at ... 4 replies
- but hard to lose hope. I will remain positive. But it's sooo much to get to this point with IVF and then to have just one today...
Talk : : August 30, 2010
Saw someone post about IVF the other day, now can't find. But I just did IVF, too at 40. Had great test results and ovarian reserve, etc going into this so they thought I would be good responder.... but only have ended up wtih 1 fertilized egg day after retrieval.. am worried. Anyone on here end up with only one and what was outcome. They are now saying will probably do day 3 transfer.. Can try one more fresh cycle IVF if this fails and then out of money.. so any info would be helpful.
4 replies [ Reply | Watch | More08.30.10, 12:50 PM Flag ]
[+] How physically taxing are IVF and other fertility treatments? I have friends consider... 10 replies
- i had IVF twice and found it exhausting.. physically but most of all psychologically. I think it depends on what doses of stimulation drugs you...
- I had my first successful IVF and the shots in stomach don't hurt (the PG ones in the butt did) -...
- I know, but doing it four times is very taxing. I thought my first IVF was the easiest; number four was the most difficult (plus for the last three I was...
Talk : : September 01, 2010
How physically taxing are IVF and other fertility treatments? I have friends considering them, but have no idea how they affect a woman's body and health.
10 replies [ Reply | Watch | More09.01.10, 03:58 PM Flag ]It's taxing (especially if you hate needles) but not as bad as you think, esp if it's your first - think it would be much harder with #2 or 3
[ Reply | More ]09.01.10, 06:07 PM FlagIt is taxing--btdt 4x. First is all the testing, then you have to give yourself multiple injections in the stomach daily for two weeks or more, then is the retrieval (minor surgical procedure), then the transfer, and then you have to give yourself a shot in the butt each day for two weeks. But the emotional stress is even worse.
[ Reply | More ]09.02.10, 05:03 AM FlagI had my first successful IVF and the shots in stomach don't hurt (the PG ones in the butt did) - but if you can try and not get overwhelmed it makes it doable
[ Reply | More ]09.02.10, 05:10 AM FlagI know, but doing it four times is very taxing. I thought my first IVF was the easiest; number four was the most difficult (plus for the last three I was on very high doses of meds). It's less the needles and more the emotional stress of having multiple failures. In fact, even though we could keep trying with my own eggs, we've decided to move on to donor egg.
[ Reply | More ]09.02.10, 06:27 AM Flag
For me, it wasn't really physically taxing. I don't mind needles and have a very high pain tolerance. Emotionally, it was very hard.
[ Reply | More ]09.02.10, 05:39 AM Flag
[+] Has anyone else read the NYTimes article today about IVF? How will IVF and health car... 62 replies
- sponsored health plan that provided only basic health services, IVF should not be included. Rather, it should cover only...
- Most IVF procedures even with multiple embryo transfers result in 1...the chances of multiples when conceiving naturally vs IVF with multiple embryos. the difference is that you...get the care any children deserve! Although apparently IVF is covered in many European countries (posters discussing...
Talk : : October 11, 2009
Has anyone else read the NYTimes article today about IVF? How will IVF and health care reform be reconciled? $1.2 million for two babies care in NICU. Do you support government sponsored health care reform and if so, to what extent do you think pre-term IVF multiples should be covered?
62 replies [ Reply | Watch | More10.11.09, 09:27 AM Flag ]-
The article was somewhat skewed but it is a fact that in certain circles, IVF twins are the new accessory and those people who think it is a fashion accessory need a wakeup call as to the risks and the costs. Not all or even most IVF families feel that way but some do and I personally know more than one mid-40's woman who is trying for twins or triplets so that she can have an instant family and not 'just' a singleton before she hits 45.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 10:18 AM Flagthis would not even be topic for discussion if not for that psycho "octomom" and the greedy, negligent MD who implanted her. IVF is an amazing tool to help one become a parent, unfortunately people are starting to abuse it (like most things). I personally used IVF two embryos, one shot, one miracle baby!! My MD would not implant more than 2 (we agreed) I am very lucky, I was also prepared to try again and pay for it completely. I do think that insurance companies should not be responsible for paying for IVF. It is extremely expensive and inflated. I also think the NYT tends to present one side in many if their human interest or "sociologic" articles. Remember this article was not in the Science Times!
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 05:01 PM Flag
Honestly, I don't get your point. You are obviously someone who thinks IVF is a bad thing. Premies are born for many reasons most having nothing to do with IVF. Most IVF twins go full term. Do some research. Google is your friend. Maybe we should just have the government screen all women and if they go premature just nit cover anything. Really tbd only fair thing to do. NOT. I hate people like you. Self righteous fools.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:33 AM Flag-
You're the fool. I just asked a question here posed by the article. You had better stay away from the NY Times comments because they are downright cruel.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:53 AM FlagYou are promoting an article that is extremely lop sided and does not present the whole story. Clearly you believe it or at least are wondering if you should or you wouldn't have written your post as you did. Don't create or feed hysteria. Learn how to recognize it and take a stand against it. That article could easily be rewritten to be about cancer treatment or some other medical condition that may have directly affected your family. Then see how you feel about the article and the question you and it are proposing. That is why I called you foolish. You are being played by a media looking to whip up a good public frenzy. Today IVF, tomorrow something else.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 10:04 AM FlagI don't think the article was seeking to demonize IVF. It was just laying out some of the trade-offs and encouraging more responsibility in providers and consumers. I didn't come away with the impression that the writer had a bone to pick with IVF at all. On the other hand, you seem to be a little off your rocker! Why so defensive?
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:57 PM Flag
NP: Most IVF twins do not go full term. Read the article. Most TWINS are not full term. Premies ARE born for all sorts of reasons, but IVF is contributing more and more to the increase in premies born in the US. I for one am not against IVF, but multiple embryo transfers do pose a risk to both mother and children (and that's not even considering the economic costs). I don't think IVF is the problem... it's multiple embryo transfers.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:38 AM Flag
-
I think there is no way NOT to cover pre-term IVF multiples. Once they are here, their care must be paid for by someone, and there is no way that most families could do that. Thus, the cost is passed on to others in some form. If we don't want to pay for IVF multiples (and moreover, to expose children to this needless risk), I think we will have to focus on preventing multiple embryo transfers instead. Honestly, it's difficult for me to understand why some people go to such extremes to conceive for YEARS rather than just adopt a child. Adoption certainly isn't easy or inexpensive, but dragging on fertility procedures indefinitely isn't either.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:36 AM FlagEveryone has free will in how they wish to build their family. There is not 'just' about adoption and it is not the responsibility of the people dealing with infertility to adopt the children of the world without families. People who have multiple ART procedures usually can afford the expense as many insurance companies do not cover any part of ART. Sure you'll find a whack-job out there setting up web sites for donations, but most people going through ART can afford to care for their children if they are blessed with them.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:46 AM FlagI'm not saying that most families who use ART cannot afford THOSE procedures... I am saying that most families cannot afford the health costs that sometimes result (the millions of dollars in hospital costs for premies, for example). So for that reason, it is not realistic to expect that any health insurance company could decide not to cover the costs of medical bills for babies conceived via ART. I don't think the people using ART are whack-jobs, and I think it is definitely understandable that people use ART to create families... but when the choices of a subsection of those using ART--choices that are avoidable as in multiple embryo transfer--impose costs of millions upon the other people in their insurance pool, as well as health risks upon themselves and their innocent children, I think a frank discussion about the ethics of these practices should ensue. At that point, it's about more than the choice of the couple seeking to conceive.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:51 AM Flag
Wait, I don't accept the premise that IVF would even be covered under a gov't sponsored health system. England and Canada have seen treatment for diseases denied, b/c of costs. This is one of the reasons I'm not for govt run healthcare.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:29 PM FlagNo, I meant that someone (the government, if we had a government sponsored health system) has to pay for the steep medical expenses after the babies are born, if they have problems. Once they are here, they are obviously humans that must get the care any children deserve! Although apparently IVF is covered in many European countries (posters discussing below).
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:56 PM FlagI agree with you, I just don't accept the fact that it would definitely be covered, or if it was initially, that it would remain that way. GB aside (which has its own problems) the US is a totally different animal than the Euro countries with gov't healthcare. They have their military defenses financed off the backs of the US, they just don't have those costs that we have, or the population that we have. There is not a model for US gov't run healthcare that exists, this would be something new and we can't assume anything. I'm more for an expansion of medicaid and removing restrictions on buying insurance across state lines rather, also spending a certain amt of money on health care tax free rather than an all encompassing gov't plan.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 04:02 PM Flag^^^puppy and kids jumping on me, sorry for how rambling/unclear that was, long day (for the grammar/spelling friends on the board).
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 04:03 PM FlagNo, I agree with you for the most part. I'm not sure that ART would be covered, either... although I have a feeling any public option would reflect a lot of lobbying by special interest groups, so that would bode well for it! I think improving health insurance choices by increasing competition is a great idea, but it would also mean that the government has to tackle the built-in lack of competition between companies right now (ie price-fixing, criminal practices including routine denials of covered claims in the hopes that consumers will just pay rather than fight for corrections). And politicians are so beholden to those companies that I am more than a little cynical about their desire and ability to do this!
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 04:12 PM Flag
The same way I feel about pre-term "naturally" conceived pre-term babies, in that all life human life brought into this world should receive top-notch medical care especially when in distressed. I do think in the case of HOM usually conceived through a poorly managed IUI not IVF, though people lie and say it was IVF, there needs to be some reform in how ART is supervised.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:39 AM FlagWe are also having this discussion in Canada. Some suggest that having the gov pay for more IVF would be cheaper in the long run (less financial motivation to transfer multiple embryos, fewer multiple births = much lower NICU costs).
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:44 AM FlagI think that *if* there were a government sponsored health plan that provided only basic health services, IVF should not be included. Rather, it should cover only a core suite of services and treatments necessary for health. I think that there could be optional insurance add-ons (that would cost money) to pay for additional services (not required for the health of the policy-holder, but things many people would like) such as IVF. In all cases, I think that procedures should aim to reduce the occurrence of multiples, in order to promote health in the mother and baby.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:47 AM FlagI agree with you. The problem is going to be the lobbyists trying to cram their particular service into the definition of "core service": treatment of communicable diseases - absolutely; preventative medicine - a lot of it, but getting people to change their behavior is harder than it looks; not medically necessary elective procedures - well, maybe some (which is where the problems really start - do we really want to go back to the days of post-mastectomy reconstuctive surgery not being covered?).
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 06:10 PM FlagI know, figuring out core services is really tough. Oregon tried to do this for their state health program, and all hell broke loose. Instead, they ended up with the system they have now... basically covering everything, with the knowledge that the money for the program will run out much earlier than the end of the budget year. Either way, the services get rationed, but people really want to avoid writing down a list of core services for exactly the reasons you mentioned!
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 06:27 PM Flag
This question is loaded. You are looking for posts that support IVF being a bad thing. How can you presume to dictate whether or not someone should have a child of their own? If IVF were 100% covered in full, people could so transfers of fewer embryos, but you can't avoid multiples altogether (identical twins for example). Perhaps cancer treatment and other illnesses shouldn't be covered. $1.2 million is nothing compared to that cost. After all, all of this isn't "natural" or how "god intended it".
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 09:58 AM FlagOP: I don't think that IVF is a bad thing. Sorry to offend everyone. I read the article, which in itself was somewhat biased, and this was essentially the question they were trying to answer. Good day to all. I wish you successful IVF or whatever you choose and for you to have happy, healthy full term babies.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 10:01 AM FlagI think my tone was a bit abrupt, too. This is a place for discussion, so I'll dial it back. What is it about UB that makes everyone go for the red meat. LOL. I'm pro-ART but I do think there needs to be a few more checks and balances in place. But honestly there are very few Octo-moms. Most IVFs and even IUIs result in 1 baby. REs actually consider the procedure a failure if the procedures resulted in multiples, even twins.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 10:12 AM FlagNP: I am also pro-ART, but there is a big problem with unlimited coverage and that is the law of diminishing returns - if IVF doesn't work the first 2 or 3 times, it's probably never going to work at all. A line has to be drawn somewhere - the plan I worked for drew it at $50K (including meds).
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 06:31 PM Flag
Honestly, I don't know the numbers but I really do feel obesity, smoking, and all the terrible foods we put into our bodies is what is draining our healthcare dollars and crippling individuals, families, and America's finances. Ugh. I'm 50 pounds overweight, and yes some is due to recently having a baby, but in all honesty it's my poor diet and lack of exercise. Just being Black I'm in a lot of high-risk illness categories and with all this healthcare talk I have started to take my weight loss and nutrition very seriously. I don't want to be a financial drain on my family because I was greedy.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 10:07 AM FlagAwhhh, I know how you feel. I was doing great a few months ago--eating healthy, exercising daily--and since I have been pregnant I have totally lost it. Know it is bad for me and the baby, but I am craving sugar and feel too tired to exercise! I also feel greedy, and I know it is bad for me and the baby :(
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 02:42 PM Flag
natural multiples are also subject to early term birth. All should be included
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 10:19 AM Flagnp: you're right, all natural multiples are subject to early term birth. there is a difference though, between the chances of multiples when conceiving naturally vs IVF with multiple embryos. the difference is that you are stacking the decks with the latter. i think art is a great thing, but we should be focusing on how to reduce multiple births. as someone said above, REs view multiples as a failure... it's not an outcome we want, and we should be trying to reduce the odds of it!
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 02:44 PM Flag
I haven't yet read the article so not sure what the discussion there is but regarding twins. More are born because women are having children later. I know very few from IVF. Most friends I know that did IVF have singles. I think doctors here may be more responsible than other places though.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 11:45 AM FlagFertility treatments and the resulting pregnancies should be paid for completely out of pocket - just like plastic surgery and other vanity-based procedures. It is absurd that these exorbitant costs should be absorbed by others.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 02:36 PM FlagI don't think fertility treatments are vanity-based, but I do think fertility treatments should not be included in basic health insurance. I think that most insurance policies put a low limit on what they will cover already, though (if they cover it at all). The real costs come after the babies are born, though, if they have a lot of medical problems.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 02:47 PM FlagThis is why we need health reform. Somehow they do this in GB and Europe and it's not considered vanity.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:22 PM FlagReally, it is included in public health plans there? That's really interesting. I think it's really hard to draw the lines about what to include and not include in the coverage available to everyone. I would say not to include it, but I know this would be very unpopular with a lot of people, especially since so many people are having to depend on ART as we have babies later.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:26 PM FlagThey cover it in Europe because the white population there is falling close to replacement rate. If they don't encourage white people with jobs to have more children, including covering fertility treatments and paying women to have more children, whites will very soon become a minority. Politicians couldn't care less whether women who want children have trouble conceiving, or how much it costs to get women to choose to have second and third children, as long as they get the population numbers back up.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:47 PM Flag
IVF and other fertility treatments should not be covered by insurance at all, much less by a public plan. We're already overpopulated, so producing more babies serves neither personal health nor the public good, especially with the number of children already waiting for homes.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:19 PM Flagso those who can't have babies naturally should pick up the slack and not have their own child? You are cruel.. Shall we limit how many natural babies people can have like China? How about that
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:22 PM Flagnp: i think that, like adoption, people who can't have babies naturally should pay for the process. i think (also like adoption) that many companies would probably try to help cover these services. i don't think the number of children people have should be limited, of course, but i do think that ART is not a service necessary to preserve health (even though it is very important to many people). and for that reason, it should be treated like an adoption expense. in reality, this is the way it is for a lot of people already! people are lucky if they get much elp from insurance.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:28 PM FlagAdopted children ARE our own children. And yes, we should limit who can have children. A lot of people out there are not good enough to be parents, and people shouldn't be allowed to get pregnant until they have proved they are qualified. But that's outside the original point. Fertility treatments serve no public good, so they should not be picked up by insurance.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:34 PM FlagHow on earth would you decide who is qualified to be a parent? Tons of people who might be great parents are barred from adopting because of such a process. What would you do if somebody became pregnant but were not qualified? Force them to have an abortion? Take their child away? This sounds very 1984. I am sympathetic to the notion that lots of people out there are terrible parents, but the solution is worse than the problem in my opinion.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:37 PM Flag
Your reasoning is way besides the point. I have no problem with IVF, and would 'hope' (as if this gets you anywhere) that any couple facing infertility had access to the process somehow. The issue is that there is no way a gov't sponsored health care program that covered everyone could afford that type of coverage in even the short term. I don't want the gov't deciding what procedures I can have. Have a gov't option for those who need it by all means, but allow the private insurance system to remain in place.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:51 PM FlagThe question wasn't whether IVF should be covered, but whether treatment for multiples' medical problems should be covered. Obviously, it isn't the babies' fault that they were born this way, and we would need to cover it. But limiting IVF coverage and banning multiple implantations would go a long way toward reducing the costs.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 03:54 PM FlagThey're often not--that was one of the points of the article. When you're paying so much out of pocket to have a baby, you want to transfer multiples so you'll have a better chance at a lower cost. Many ppl. think that if you offered IVF single transfers (even over IUI), you'd end up with less multiples, and lower associated costs that have to be covered by insurance later.
[ Reply | More ]10.11.09, 04:20 PM Flag
-
[+] If you had health insurance that covered your IVF procedures, please post which insur... 174 replies
- all the posters on here. you are the staunch IVF defender and truly the most insulting, condescending, unlikable poster...affliction. It is not. Furthermore, wealthy people DO get IVF, the people who are against insurance coverage are...
- No insurance limits your ivf regardless of your risk stratification...
- Insurance companies do limit IVF to women under a certain age (who, therefore have...
Talk : : June 21, 2010
If you had health insurance that covered your IVF procedures, please post which insurance you had. I'm so desperate (after four attempt, paying out of pocket) that I'm considering changing jobs just to get the coverage. If you feel the need to flame, please save it. I'm already feeling crappy enough and would just like a little help from ladies who have been in my shoes.
174 replies [ Reply | Watch | More06.21.10, 03:58 PM Flag ]Here's an opinion from the other side of the fence. I'm a trustee for a large entertainment union insurance plan who recently led the move to drop coverage for all IVF and fertility treatments. Why? Because it was literally bankrupting our fund. We were denying basic health coverage for the younger, lower-earning members by raising their minimum income threshold for coverage so we could subsidize older women's "choice" to have children later in life. As a trustee of a health fund, I found this to be absolutely ludicrous, and luckily so did the other trustees. I feel for women who can't have children any other way (I was one of them), but having a baby is not a basic health care "need", particularly at the expense of other members' real health care needs.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:05 PM Flag^^^real health care needs. And frankly, I'd expect other health plans to follow suit.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:06 PM FlagYou are wrong. The movement is to mandate coverage as insurance companies post record profits and deny coverage for "unpopular" procedures. Fertility is thought to be a RICH, WHITE WOMAN's problem (when in fact, 50% of problems are with men and sperm counts continue to drop). Because of this perception, you CAN deny coverage, whereas there is outcry when you limit services to the obese. Because of this, states are moving to mandate coverage for fertility, and Obama is receptive.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:12 PM FlagI used to work for a different union benefit plan. We made the determination a number of years ago to limit coverage for the same reason. We were looking at having to eliminate things like vision coverage and increasing everyone's prescription co-pays in order to maintain infertility coverage. IIRC, we put a $50K lifetime cap per member for infertility, including drugs.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:14 PM Flag-
There is an overall lifetime cap and some restrictions on other things - orthodontia, vision, etc., but I don't remember and flat caps like that on anything else (but I don't have the SPD memorized either). The issue was that if infertility treatments were going to work, they were most likely to work quickly - the more failures there were early on, the lower the likelihood of success later on and the preference was to pay for the successes, not repeated failures.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:29 PM FlagUntrue but you probably aren't that familiar with it. Treatment is often pursued in a step-wise fashion. You should look into lifetime caps for obesity. Between diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, dialysis and costly gastric bypass, limits should be set.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:44 PM FlagI just know what the actuaries said. They ran the numbers very carefully. If someone didn't get pregnant on IVF cycle 1 or 2, it was almost guaranteed that they would not get pregnant on cycle 6 (the odds of getting struck by lightening were higher). Given a choice between doubling co-pays on treatments that almost always work and paying for treatments that almost never worked, it wasn't a hard decision for the Trustees.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:52 PM Flag
-
OP here and you are an a$$. Too bad you didn't keep your opinion to yourself. I didn't ask if you agreed with coverage, I asked for help on which carriers cover it. I am not an "older" woman who decided to have kids later in life. Shows what you know. Thanks for nothing.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:20 PM FlagAll I want to know is how much you weigh? Ten bucks says you are fat or at least overweight and possibly a smoker. Anger like this doesn't come from someone who's got a normal, happy life.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:51 PM FlagWell, now we know why you are in HR: you clearly have no reading comprehension skills and have been relegated to "admin" jobs for the rest of your life. Did you think people on this post would be in awe of your "knowledge" and forget the fact that you didn't answer the OPs question? Please explain to all of us how your response ANSWERED the question posed. You can have three tries, since you're a "trustee" and all.......
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 06:16 PM Flag
-
My husband's Aetna policy covered 3 rounds of IVF but my Aetna policy at my job did not. It is based on the individual employer not on the insurance. I'm so sorry you are going through this, it is heartbreaking.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:35 PM Flagsorry you're going through this, and for the rubbish posted above. ignore it. we have cigna $25k for procedures and an additional $10k for meds. we used all of it through four rounds when we finally found success. you probably dont need to change jobs, just change plan to restart your lifetime max again, but check this w your HR group. and good luck, it's a long journey but well worth it in the end.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 04:53 PM FlagThis is outrageous. Having a child is not a guaranteed right of all people. From my perspective, no reason why other people should have to subsidize infertile people.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:20 PM FlagNeither is your right to eat yourself to oblivion, but it galls me that I pay for your obesity and therapy. Now STFU.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:35 PM Flag-
And if we are going this way, I am not paying for obese peoples cardiac bypass, or mens impotence, or breast reductions. None of it. Because even if a couple has 6 cycles, insurance cos make money on them long term.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:40 PM Flagthis is a dumb statement. insurance companies don't "make money off of people". Yes, tehre isn a profit margin built in because it's a risky busoness. this shows a basic lack of understanding of the concept of risk and insurance. (And I am for IVF coverage, though probably limited to 4 cycles)
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:59 AM FlagYou are extremely stupid and clearly have no experience working with insurance companies. Insurance companies make record profits and its executives are paid as high as some bankers. You have a complete misunderstanding of insurance- having worked closely with insurance companies in the field of health insurance, I do not. There is no risk in health insurance the way it is structured now. By capping care and being legally protected from lawsuits for denying care- there is virtually no downside. Why don't you do a preliminary inquiry before you make bald assertions that are untrue?
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:06 AM Flaginsurance companies are poorly run, but they are not making money hand over fist- if that were the case, more companies would enter the space until profits were brought down to a more reasonable level- do you understand basic economics? NO, you don't. Everyone would only be so lucky to ahev insurance companies "make money on them". Do you think your car insurance company is also making money off of you? that you've wasted money on it because you've had no adccidents?
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:27 AM Flagnp: if you don't understand that the insurance industry is one of the most powerful industries in the country, then i can't help you. yes, they make money hand over fist and they also control entry into the market. insurance has become a requirement of life in this country, so in exchange for taking on risks, they charge us a lot of money and they get to determine how much that should be. if the risk gets too great, then they drop coverage. ask anyone who's had too many car ins or homeowners ins claims what happens. or how you cannot get flood insurance in certain areas, etc. as soon as your risk level is unprofitable, then no one will insure you.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:51 AM Flagthis is a prime example of your misunderstanding. areas that flood constantly should not be able to receive flood insurance. The risk is too great, the cost too high- these are areas people should NOT LIVE in. something expensive with a high probablity of happening is not something that gets insured.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:22 AM FlagReally? Then why does the US government bail out these people with FEMA? Let me tell you a sure thing: you will get sick someday. Expensively, atrociously, ruinously sick- and you will expect the insurance co. that has received at least 20k per year on your behalf to pay.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:26 AM FlagHouses should nto be consistently bailed out that are located in high flood areas. period, it is a dumb thing to do- I learned about these sorts of things when i took risk management 101 at wharton. I already have been sick, and had infertility. Health insurance is different, and I do expect the insurance company to pay. There is a pooled risk. Though as we age health insurance starts to become something different.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:32 AM Flagno, you don't get it. houses located in high flood areas shouldn't be there. markets shouldn't provide insurance to something that has a high probablity of happening and is expensive when it does happen. insurance is for low probability/high cost items. not for high probability/high cost. you just don't get it.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 11:07 AM FlagITD. EVERYONE dies and yet you can get life insurance. Everyone needs health care and yet you can get health insurance. The reason that insurane is for low probability and high cost items is bc that is the risk that insurance companies are willing to take on - that is their business model. BECAUSE it is a profitable model. you don;t seem to want to understand that insurance companies only take on risks that they can make money on. THAT is the point.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:17 PM Flagand life insurance companies sell life insurance to 80yo's all the time. 80yo's use it as part of their estate planning. you really want to be right, that insurance companies are providing a necessary, valuable and reasonable service at a modest profit. they're not. they're making calculations, that greatly favor themselves, about what risks they are willing to assume and at what price IN ORDER TO MAKE BIG MONEY. I should know, I've worked for a big insurance company for years.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:29 PM Flagwow, you clearly buy the BS that the insurance company is selling. the fact is, whether or not you consider permanent life insurance to be "true life insurance" is not relevant. the fact is, it is life insurance coverage. yo upay a premium and the insurance company pays when you die - whether that's tomorrow or 20 years from now. the investment componenet is a crock of horseshit.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:48 PM Flagyou don't knwo anything about life insurance, do you? term life is not an investment vehicle- the other forms all include at least a portion of investment. you are just too dumb to continue speaking to, you just don't udenrstand the basic components of risk management. bye-
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:55 PM Flagthat the insurance companies convince you to use permanent life insurance as an investment vehicle (a crappy one) does not mean it is not life insurance. it does not mean that they only need to pay the death benefit when you die and they are still taking on a certain amount of risk that they will collect less in premium from you than the death benefit that they have to pay out. the internal "investment" component is largely irrelevant to the insurance company. I have no trouble understanding risk management, but YOU seem to want to defend that insurance companies are not doing this to an incredible profit and that an insurance contract is not one where the insurance company holds all the cards and is in the position of power. They know exactly how much to charge you so that they will always "win" in the end. Kind of like the house in a casino.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 02:04 PM FlagWho cares that you got a dozen quotes. Each of those quotes was calculated by the actuaries at the insurance company. THEY are the ones with the information about mortality and who can calculate your risk profile. You can choose AMONG them, but you can't bargain with them. You can't say "I think I should only have to pay X." You either take what they offer OR you don't get life insurance. The companies make sure that what they are offering is profitable for them.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 02:11 PM Flag
I understand that it is not an risk that an insurance company wants to insure. Why? Because they can't make money off it and that is the business they are in. It is a business decision - as you said "the cost is too high". As I stated above "as soon as risk level is unprofitable, no one will insure you."
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:41 AM Flag
Or her right to smoke till her left lung explodes but we are all paying for her chemo treatments and emphysema meds. These posts are sick in the head. Just wait until they "need" some help. Hopefully it won't be there for them and people taunt them by telling them they brought it on themselves.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:37 PM Flag
-
Should we have to subsidize children who were born to crack addicts? Fat people looking for weight loss surgery? Smokers? People who refused to wear sunblock and spent their days at the beach and are now being systematically dismantled by surgery to eradicate melanoma? Face it honey, we've all got problems and if you don't have any yet--that's great, but I pity the day when you or your kids needs some unforeseen subsidy because if everyone thought like you do, it might not be there for you when you need it.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:46 PM FlagThank you. The entitlement of these mostly white middle-class women to insist they have a right to clone themselves no matter how expensive it is, is infuriating. IVF is a choice, not a necessity.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:54 PM FlagTyped by a welfare mom, surrounded by her 8 children, collecting money from her 5 baby-daddies, no doubt.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:58 PM FlagOR: You figure I'm trailer trash or welfare-dependent because I don't want to pay for your narcissism? What happened -- I held up a mirror and you ran, screaming?
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 06:00 PM FlagThe only reason I'm against IVF is because the (mostly older) women who use it will likely have SN kids. And it's not like some medical journal is going to study the relationship between age and SN. Infertility is a billion-dollar racket; a sacred cow.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 06:11 PM FlagNot sure about the trailer trash, but my guess is that you were molested as a child or your husband is cheating because he can't stand you. Either way, you are clearly engulfed by bitterness and talk incessantly so you don't have to hear the voices of hate in your head. Poor thing. Sending a back pat your way.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 06:24 PM Flag
well I had to pay out of pocket and now i'm broke so now I'm declaring bankrutpcy and you'll be paying for that too - see I gotcha on the flip side
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 03:51 AM Flagnor is it a right to be able to smoke 3 packs a day and have someone pay for your treatment for lung cancer, throat cancer, emphasima, mouth cancer, etc. You also don't have a right to drink a bottle of wine every night and then get a million dollar liver transplant. Or thousands and thousands in rehab so you can dry out. I also don't think I should have to subsidize some overweight guy's Viagra meds - sex isn't a right either. I find YOU outrageous.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:14 AM Flag
Ignore the idiotic posts and skim to the ones giving you the info you seek. Here in CA our Blue Cross covered 60% of all meds and most procedures, except ICSI and IVIG. Good luck with this!! You may also want to look into clinics who use the Shared Risk plans (basically you pay a certain cost upfront and it covers up to 3 treatments. If you get pg the first time you don't get any refund, but if you don't, you can keep going till you've tried three times for no additional costs).
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 05:50 PM FlagI have Oxford (NYC), and "Advanced Fertility Benefit" (ie IVF) is a lifetime limit of 10k. Doesn't seem like much, but ultrasounds, bloodwork and meds are covered separately and are unlimited so for me the 10k lasted 1.5 cycles. It really depends on your RE and what his/her contracted rates are with the insurance company because they vary widely. Now I've exceeded the 10k limit, so I have to pay 10-12k out of pocket per cycle, but I still have coverage for all ultrasounds, bloodwork and meds.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 06:02 PM FlagI think you are coming at this from the wrong direction. The employer purchases a fertility treatment rider. All the insurance companies carry this as an option, but not all employers opt to offer it (it costs them extra $ to offer). NYS has an IVF grant program, it has an income cap but might be worth a shot. http://www.rmany.com/infertility-demonstration-program.aspx apparently, RMA participates, but the program is run by NYS Health Department. The whole thing sucks, GL!!
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 07:54 PM Flag-
I agree with the general idea of needing to limit insurance plans to control costs, and administrators would be the people making the decisions. Not sure why the first OR's comments are so controversial. I doubt IVF is the only thing being limited. Health plans limit all kinds of coverage including mental health, vision, and dental. Ethical debates occur all the time on limiting dialysis, given it has bankrupted many health systems already. Another area in which we do apply value judgments and evaluate likelihood of returns vs cost/resources is organ transplant recipients. None of these concepts are new, and it should not be personally offensive that it would also be an area of concern with IVF - a very costly and controversial area (as are many of the above).
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 08:11 PM FlagActually no. You never hear the lay public talking about limiting care to the smallest of preemies or yanking patients from dialysis to die. These are considered "death panels" but with IVF, it is ok, because of the PERCEPTION of whom infertility affects.
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 11:33 PM Flagnp - i have had this discussion with many other members of the lay public. i do think we need to limit health costs by not covering all procedures. and the comments about transplants are also correct. we do choose to transplant only those with a good chance of success. same reasoning behind limits on ivf.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 12:23 PM Flag
Because the typical UB crowd put off having kids until they're in their 40s and expect modern medicine to make it better for them.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:30 AM Flag50% of all infertility is male. Did you know that? Now you know. How do you explain that, Einstein?
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:40 AM Flag-
-
I didn't say it had anything to do with maternal age. It gets harder to get pregnant when either or both mom and dad are in their 40s. When a couple puts off having kids until they're in their 40s, they'll have problems.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:33 AM FlagNope, male infertility is not related to advancing age. Many cases involve varicocoele's etc. Sperm counts are also declining- there are studies into why this is happening and some scientist are researching parabens. It is clear you know nothing of the epidemiology of infertility so it is best now for you to just stop posting and pretend you logged off or something.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:59 AM Flag
-
-
IVF coverage is ALREADY limited. The few plans that cover it at all will only cover it for women under a certain age, and they all have lifetime limits (either a certain number of cycles or a $ amount).
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:34 AM FlagThat seems fair. Having a child to me seems to be an elective part of life. There should be limits on the number times insurance should pay for it especially at the cost of other health benefits for other employees. I know of a company that basically had to eliminate all aspects of health care because a certain family kept on getting IVF treatments.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 11:17 AM Flag
The company was called 147 Million Orphans in the World and the plan was under Why Aren't They Good Enough For You?
[ Reply | More ]06.21.10, 11:44 PM Flagnp - b/c we cant adopt most of them and the many others are permanently damaged
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 12:31 AM Flag-
most countries do not allow foreign adoptions (or US prevents it) - so subtract those...subtract those who are not really orphans ...and if you think every child is healthy physically or psychologically...boy are you ignorant....better assumption is children will have health issues so be prepared or dont bother
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 03:37 AM FlagPlease choose your words more carefully. Those "permanently damaged" children are still real children and are absolutely no less deserving of love and a family simply because they don't fit into some arrogant and selfish person's definition of perfect. I hope you wouldn't hand your bio child back if she turned out to be "permanently damaged." Finally, there are many orphans whose health issues can be easily fixed and/or kept to a minimum if given the resources that a family in the developed world can provide. There are so many so-called "special needs" labels on orphans and agency lists throughout the world that are really no big deal if people would just educate themselves instead of burying their heads in the sand pretending that it isn't their problem.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 04:10 AM Flag
-
Why weren't they good enough for YOU? Why did you have your own biological child?
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 02:40 AM Flag-
Because the arrogantly fertile always ask "why not just adopt?" to the infertile. Those who actually HAVE adopted know that it is not a panacea.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 03:14 AM FlagYou are mistaken. I began mountains of research and reading before beginning my first adoption. Those who give a simplistic "we just can't/it's too complicated for us" answer are looking for a cop-out. If you do your homework you will find that there are plenty of adoption methods that are not only less expensive than IVF but have a much higher "success rate" than the IF stats. Besides, do I even have to tell you how great a need there is for adoptive families?
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 03:34 AM FlagThere are reasons certain people cannot adopt: age or illness of father (as in Celine Dion's case) etc. It is also EXTREMELY expensive. You did not adopt, because you would know this, but nice try ignoramus.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:41 AM FlagThis is so bizarre that you would presume to know about my family life. Do I need to fax you birth certificates and adoption decrees? If you knew anything about adoption you would know that there are programs that do cost money but definitely less than IVF and you are more assured of having a baby in the end!
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:43 AM FlagAbsolutely not. The only way to get an adopted child cheaper than a single cycle of IVF is if you adopt a special needs child and hurriedly you the exemption to put them on Medicaid or something. Your ignorance revealed your ignorance. Enough said.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:57 AM FlagI have friends who adopted through the mixed race program in their state. They got a newborn infant in 6 months at a total cost of about $10,000. They have since gotten a 2nd infant (same adoption process). Never went through any ART. So don't assume that adoption has to be expensive or international.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 09:12 AM FlagThat is the same cost of one cycle of IVF. I am surprised that there is any program that approves people that easily and quickly- I have never heard of such a thing- which state is this?
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 09:18 AM FlagPennsylvania. I should add that they did have an advantage as they were a mixed race couple so they were given priority, however, they were told that it would only speed it up by 2-3 months. Of all the women I know who've gone down the ART route, only 1 got pg on the first IVF and had never tried anything else prior to that. Most I know tried for months on their own, then Clomid, IUI, etc. and then 2-3 IVF cycles. So the cost of 1 IVF cycle is kind of meaningless for most people.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 09:23 AM FlagIn my case we had male factor infertility. We paid cash for the IVF and could easily afford it. When I looked around the clinic, I got a little troubled by the obvious affluence of the people there. It is bothersome that only the wealthy can afford to promote their own genetic material if they happen to have infertility. JMO.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:20 PM Flag
It is so unfortunate that there are still SO MANY misconceptions about adoption. I know a family who got a healthy infant girl from Ethiopia for 8k, and families that adopt through foster care or infant placement programs (not special needs) for much less than that. Those all certainly are less than the endless IF parade of expenses.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 12:41 PM FlagI don't think the argument is that adoption is better, but many people opting for IVF and asking for insurance to cover it, are defensive that adoption is equally if not MORE expensive and certainly not covered by insurance. I think the point is that there ARE lower cost adoption options.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:32 PM Flag
that was my experience too. Had 11 years of infertility and every person who said "Have you considered adoption" had at least two biological children. Always wanted to say a) "Wow, all these years of infertility and it NEVER occurred to us!" or b) "Gee, thanks for giving me the $60,000 for the legal and other fees! That's so sweet!"
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:20 AM Flag
-
Because many of the countries with the highest orphan populations don't do foreign adoptions. Go home illiterate troll. Throwing random stats out without being able to discuss their relevance makes you and your posts laughable. Do some research, come back here with a number and links to back it up about how many children in this world ARE available for adoption. Until then, piss off.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:54 AM Flag
I have been in therapy 20 years at a cost of around 10K a year, I never used my insurance because the benefit is around 1500/year, too trivial to be denied life insurance and other benefits as a result. I am nonfunctional without therapy, I am barely functional with it. But the insurance companies have (at least until the recent parity law) made a decision that mental health benefits were not "real" medical issues and/or are too expensive. Similarly, my dental health is a disaster and I have paid at least 30K in the last 3 years for treatment, with much more to come--dental insurance, which I have, is capped at 10K a year. Honestly these things are NOT elective, but I have to pay out of pocket. I don't know what is the right or wrong answer for infertility treatments, overall I would say it should be covered, but I am not sure why it is covered over and beyond things I"ve mentioned--it is all about business, unfortunately, and unfortunately there are many things in life we have to pay for if we want them, though it is unfair.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 03:55 AM Flag-
I don't think it should be necessary for IVF to be covered, just like I don't think diabetes or obesity-related problems should be covered, or smokers. You're responsible for your own life and having a child is a choice, not a right.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:29 AM FlagYes, let's plunge more of our population into debt because of medical expenses and make them sicker because they can't afford to go to the doctor. You are a genius. How about if you or one of your kids breaks a leg skiing? Should that be covered? After all, the rest of us shouldn't have to subsidize the consequence of your dangerous choice to go skiing! Or playing soccer, or football, or whatever!
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 06:51 AM FlagAnd while we're at it, let's let OR determine in her Gdlike medical wisdom exactly what diseases people caused themselves. Diabetes? Hmmm, maybe the kid born with Type 1 had a mom who had who ate doughnuts all day in utero. That mom should have to pay out of pocket, she may have caused it! Skin cancer? Well, only a moron would EVER go to the beach or walk outside without sunscreen, they SHOULD have known that even 40 years ago for an adult. Hernia? Why on EARTH were you lifting something so heavy? Breast cancer? You didn't keep track of how long it had been and SKIPPED your mammogram, tough noogies. Really, virtually all of human life and existence is free will, and all must bear the consequences of their poor choices.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:08 AM Flag
No one ever said IVF was a right, genius. Go back to watching TV. You're clearly below the IQ level required to have a meaningful conversation. You are totally off topic. Re read the original post and see if you have any input. Stop answering like a kid with turrets and yelling out any old thing that comes to mind.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:58 AM Flagnp - reading this whole post and you are the nastiest of all the posters on here. you are the staunch IVF defender and truly the most insulting, condescending, unlikable poster in this thread. you should be ashamed for being such a nasty human being.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:09 PM FlagNNP: actually, I think that the OP is obviously infertile, running out of cash and looking for really specific advice/information. For a person to take that opportunity to proselytize that she is wrong to look for insurance help is actually fundamentally more nasty.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:22 PM Flagyet, the IVF defender is the only one insulting people right and left. here are a few saracastic, nasty quotes: "Wow, glad we have an expert on board." "Then you are stupid." "you clearly have no reading comprehension skills." "piss off and go serve your dribble somewhere else." "Please don't reproduce and spread the stupidity." "You are extremely stupid." There are more. Not to mention the repeated insults toward people who are overweight or have mental illness.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:42 PM FlagThe expert on board comment was accurate. When someone holds forth as an expert and describes what they believe to be a "trend" and it is the opposite of every documented trend and they were very peripherally aware of decisions- they deserve to be called out. There is a great deal of ignorance, prejudice and yes, stupidity, regarding ART, especially amongst the middle and lower class. You seem concerned about care being limited for the overweight and mentally ill, but not the infertile- let me hazard a guess about which has affected you personally. Decisions like this are not based on the impulse of people unfamiliar with the technology and their feeling that this is an upper-middle-class-white-woman affliction. It is not. Furthermore, wealthy people DO get IVF, the people who are against insurance coverage are basically saying that the less wealthy do not have the right to pass along their genetic material. Is that where you want to go?
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 01:49 PM Flagi see. you ARE the nasty poster. well, that explains things. i genuinely feel sorry for you. it must be hard to go through life being so angry, bitter, and hateful. i truly wish you luck with your fertility issues, and hope the resolution of that problem will make you a happier, kinder human being!
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 04:04 PM FlagActually I am not. As you should be able to tell from my writing, I know how to spell Tourette's. As far as me, we are very wealthy and have two children. I would have paid privately since I pay for my Ob-Gyn, Pedi etc. out of pocket (not crazy about the insurance providers) despite having insurance. I can afford to. And frankly, a bump up in the premiums won't hurt me. I feel so sorry for you that your ignorance has translated itself not only into a lack of empathy, but a lack of wealth. Keep scratching those tickets!
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 04:22 PM Flag-
You're nuts if you think there's only one IVF defender on here. The problem on the thread is that the some of the first responders took the opportunity to air their feelings about IVF and whether it should be covered on insurance. Had they actually read the post, they would see that no one asked their opinion. If they wanted to start a monologue about all the wrongs in insurance, they should have started another thread.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 05:00 PM Flag
I am digusted with all of you. You must be dead inside and have a total lack of compassion. I hope nothing bad happens to your family. I guess an anonymous message board let's your true colors come out. It's so ugly. The lot of you but for a few. Go buy another designer bag or a pair of $1000 shoes. Much more important. The whole thread makes me sad because you people are real. I don't fit in to the "it's all about me mentality"
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 02:17 PM Flag
I would like to add that if IVF was covered (and I do agree on an age limti and cycle limit, like 4 times or something) you'd probably save money in teh end because people wouldn't do like 9 IUIs, and the incidence of high level multiples would also be reduced, because (despite octomom and her doctor and there complete disregard for SART standards) most high order multiples come from IUI cycles.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:05 AM Flagthe only reason multiples come from iuis is bc people don't listen to their drs. Just like Kate - she was told not to have sex - it really isnt' that hard to abstain. She was selfish -I guess all the way to the bank now. Many of us only have 1-2 follicles for an iui - most good drs won't over stim
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 02:30 PM FlagI agree. I have no fertility issues, personally, but I have less trouble with the idea of covering a few cycles of IVF than covering those women who get pregnant with 6 at once and then refuse to abort any, thus potentially dooming their children to a lifetime of disabilities and services.
[ Reply | More ]06.23.10, 06:32 AM Flag
In MA, I believe insurance cos are legally required to cover ivf.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:07 AM Flagnp - I thought the purpose was to responde in a HELPFUL way to this woman who reached out to us.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:16 AM FlagSo true. But there are obviously a lot of lonely, bitter women on tonight who want to type just to see their posts responded too--regardless of whether or not they were actually on topic. They just need their opinions heard, regardless of relevance. Hopefully most of these trolls don't have children themselves. Now THAT would be survival of the fittest in action.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 08:00 AM Flag
i thought that in MA IVF was free. Not an insurance cost at all.
[ Reply | More ]06.22.10, 07:37 AM Flag
[+] IVF= Birth defects, Autism, etc.? Who agrees? 67 replies
- , it is the parent's genetic "stuff" BUT the IVF/ICSI practice (not the procedure itself) circumvents this natural...
- PGD addresses the IVF/ICSI concern that you have....
- . a few of your clients with autism were conceived thru ivf??...
- of children being born with disabilities so why should IVF parents. Your argument is extremely flawed . It's...
Talk : : January 26, 2009
IVF= Birth defects, Autism, etc.? Who agrees?
67 replies [ Reply | Watch | More01.26.09, 02:13 PM Flag ]ME. I would never do it-purely sefish. http://www.slate.com/id/2109131/
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:14 PM FlagWith all the internet has to offer today you answer with an article from slate magazine that is from 2004?
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:22 PM Flag-
-
you want to have a child and will do anything to get it, even if it means risking its future health. Try adoption.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:41 PM Flagyour view is based on incorrect/false information. IVF does not risk/harm a child's a health.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:42 PM Flag-
I do quite a bit research actually, and subscribe to medical journals on this issue. You are entitled to your opinion but do not have the right to present information that is false.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:45 PM Flag-
This is a very progressive, fast paced area of medicine. A 2004 study, and may I add, simply one 2004 article, is simply an outdated and unreliable source of information in this particular field.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:50 PM FlagITTTA...op obviously dosen't have a lot of information about IVF and didn't fully understand the article...There are a multitude of reasons why a couple may be infertile. Studies show the rate of genetic defects to be 1% which is the SAME as the rest of the population. I can't believe my son (healthy in every way) is going to grow up in a world where people think his parents are selfish for bringing him into it. Very hateful and arrogant! OP is completely ill-informed.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 05:05 PM Flag
-
-
-
Disagree. Latest study done on 5yr olds showed no difference between natural and IVF.I would give you a link but it is from a medical journal I subscribe to.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:35 PM Flagdisagree with you. Have you read the work of Kathy Hudson at JH?
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:42 PM FlagKathy Hudson agrees that whatever differentiation observed is due to the parents' genetic makeup/issues and not the process of IVF.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:48 PM FlagEXACTLY. Which means the parents should not have had the child in the first place, ivf or no.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:52 PM Flag(I replied above about the absurdity of posting a Slate article from 2004. I'm not against IVF or any of these procedures per se!) But this seems like a deflection. Isn't the issue that IVF (and ICSI) go a long way to circumvent the natural selection? So yes, it is the parent's genetic "stuff" BUT the IVF/ICSI practice (not the procedure itself) circumvents this natural safeguard.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:57 PM FlagIf natural selection is going to serve as the basis of an argument, then any sort of medical intervention is unnecessary and considered playing god.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:59 PM Flag-
PGD is "preimplantation genetic diagnosis" -- eggs are retrieved, injected with sperm via ICSI, sent to lab after several days and checked for specific genetic issues, trisomy, etc., and a normal one or two normal ones are put back.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 03:45 PM FlagThat is friggin cool (how do they remove the material to test the fertilized egg? I mean at that point it isn't like there is waste/dead cells floating around to test like there is for amnio. Is there?)
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 03:57 PM FlagThey retrieve a single cell from a developing blastocyst. It is tricky actually, but can be helpful with certain genetic complications. They still recommend amnio, however, which is why we chose not to do it. Why potentially compromise a perfectly sound blast if you'll possibly have trouble anyway. Btw, we have two healthy, happy and very bright little boys, both IVF. Never heard this bunk.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 05:37 PM Flag
Disagree....completely disagree! My beautiful IVD DD is brillant and has no birth defects or autism...
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 02:43 PM Flag-
-
and if you had cancer and needed chemo to live, would you say "well some people just arent meant to live to old age"?? that is just dumb. modern medicine exists to help people with various medical issues that would otherwise prevent them from achieving their goals.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 06:15 PM Flag
yep--much much higher incidence of megalo --glioblastomas --brain tumor
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 03:13 PM Flag-
Three dcs from IVF - happy, healthy, normal. Would do it again in a flash
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 04:18 PM FlagMe too. In fact we are! Have two, IVF, trying for a "bonus round" ;) This chick has some bible belt mentality that has closed her to the beauty of science and the gorgeousness of being able to have children you thought you'd never have. I'm going to kiss my five year old right now. He is perfect! And my 19 month old is sleeping, or I'd sneak a kiss on him too.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 05:40 PM Flag
I work with children with autism, and a high rate of my students have parent who did IVF or clomid.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 06:15 PM Flagthats probably because a high rate of parents in ny have parents who did ivf or clomid. go to dalton kindergarten, you will find the same holds true there!! and its not because ivf produces geniuses--its bec there are high rates of ivf in nyc.
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 06:19 PM FlagSUCH A LOAD OF BULL. My dd has autism. I was young, healthy, very fertile, no drugs of any kind in my pregnancy, father was young (29), and my dd has autism. It was the MERCURY in the vaccines, baby.
[ Reply | More ]01.27.09, 07:34 PM FlagWow are you serious? Do we have to blame someone or something for every bad thing that happens in our lives??? Get a f*cking grip.
[ Reply | More ]01.28.09, 04:42 PM Flagnp...you need to get a blipping grip. Mrs. MD you must know that the causes of autism are unclear. I don't think the poster is trying to "blame" somebody, there are some in medical community who believe the mercury is to blame. Only time will tell, in the meantime keep your sorry ass comments for your friends.
[ Reply | More ]01.29.09, 02:24 AM Flag
I work with children with autism too. I'm a social worker and around 150 of the children we work with have autism. I don't know a single one that was conceived through IVF. Infact I don't know a single child that has adisbility in our area that was concieved through IVF. It's just not something that has ever come up and it's the kind of information we would have too.Many families have two or three kids with autism and I think there must be some genetic trait, even though one hasn't been found.But as for IVF being a cause I've just never come across it at all. You have to remember that around 3% of the population will be born with a birth defect or disability. Some studies have shown that that risk raises to 4% in the IVF baby population. This could be for all sorts of reasons including parental age, and the risks there are to twins and multiples. Even so if an IVF baby is born with a disability chances are given the percentages above that 75% of those disabilities would have been present if the baby was conceived naturally. The general population doesn't stop having children in order to lower the risk of children being born with disabilities so why should IVF parents. Your argument is extremely flawed . It's also probably doing more damage to the health and wellbeing of IVF kids and their parents than having IVF ever would. It's just not even valid.
[ Reply | More ]06.28.09, 12:44 PM Flag
I cannot understand why anyone would post this. What possible motive could there be: trying to reach someone who's considering IVF but now will not because of what she read on UB? As if IVF were anyone's first choice!
[ Reply | More ]01.26.09, 06:42 PM Flag-
[+] My husband and I (I just turned 42) recently went through IVF (we have no other child... 129 replies
- As someone who has gone through multiple fertility issues, ivf, etc., I can assure you in our experience that the...we are transferring three this time because of my previous IVF failures. It is obviously a painful decision to have..."messing around with nature" comment seemed to refer to IVF or fertility treatments in general--which in the vast majority...through IVF. I am 42 and after several unsuccessful IVF cycles am FINALLY pregnant. With each prior cylce I...
Talk : : March 09, 2010
My husband and I (I just turned 42) recently went through IVF (we have no other children). I had really great and unexpected results. 13 out of the 22 retrieved fertilized successfully. 6 developed and were good to go for the transfer. My doctor decided to transfer three (we have frozen the others). To my surprise and (I'm embarrassed to say)horror, all three of them took and I am now faced with triplet talk and the possibility of selective reduction. I am having such a difficult time thinking about what I should do. Based on my age, I never ever would have thought that ALL THREE would have taken. I only have a couple more weeks before I have to make a decision regarding what I am going to do. All three are scheduled for a CVS test (genetic testing) next week and shortly after that, my decision will have to be made. I also have a history of hypertension(although right now my readings are surprisingly normal) and I am overweight. My head is spinning right now and I do not know what to do. If there are no genetic issues with any of them, I don't know how I will make a decision to cancel the life of one over another. I would love to have all three, but financially it will be more than a struggle living in NYC, and physically it will be risky. Any words of advice, similar stories, or bits of wisdom that my Urban Baby family can provide will be extremely appreciated. Thank you all.
129 replies [ Reply | Watch | More03.09.10, 11:52 AM Flag ]Congratulations and wow, gosh and oh my goodness. As a 41 year old about to have her 3rd who isn't sure she can cope with 3 singles, I think that triplets would be terribly hard unless you can afford full time help - if you're going back to work, you'll need to hire 2 nannies. Selective reduction is a terribly hard thing to even think about but equally if you haven't had a long conversation with your dr already you should discuss the health ramifications - not only for you but also the survival rates if you opt to carry all 3. Good luck with whatever you decide.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 12:04 PM FlagI am surprised your doctor put in 3 on your first attempt. Anyway, congrats!
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 12:09 PM Flagat her age though, i think 3 is normal. congratulations!!!! just remember, whatever decision you make will be the right one. =)
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 12:13 PM Flagmy doc put 5 in at age 40 and none took. I remember him saying there was a 1% chance of triplets and I freaked out, needlessly. I understand your concerns. Not sure what I would do but I would probably reduce one of them for my own health and those of the other two. gl.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 07:29 PM Flag
Congratulations - that is really wonderful. That's a tough decision though. Of course you need to be mindful of your health and the health of your babies but I think if it were me - I would try to go for it. Don't make any decisions until you get the results of the CVS back and take it from there. Good luck!
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 12:18 PM FlagPlease read up on the dangers of carrying multiples, what can happen to three fetuses when they're sharing one uterus, and how it affects them as babies and children. I'm not trying to scare you, but you should know the statistics. Good luck with your decision.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 12:34 PM FlagPlenty of people have twins/triplets. Your jealousy is showing.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 05:45 PM FlagOR: I am very lucky I have never had to make this decision (singletons only). I'm sure that you have huge regrets either way. I personally would rather have one healthy DC than 3 developmentally challenged DC, but that is MY preference. I can't make the decision for OP, but she should make an informed decision based on the facts. Not happy-ending or tragic anecdotes, but the facts.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 03:15 AM Flag
I can only tell you that a good friend went through almost the same experience. They of course were just as shocked as you are at first, then when things settled down, decided to go with it. There was a lot of bedrest at the end of the pg. but all the babies were fine and at 2, they are all doing great. I think once they made their decision, it was impossible to imagine anything BUT their three db's and are so happy that they have their instant family. And as soon as babies were born, everyone was so supportive. Good luck to you!
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 12:37 PM FlagNP--anecdotally, I also had a friend experience this, but one of the three has significant, if not hugely severe, developmental delays and learning disabilities (all three are now healthy 10 yr olds).
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 03:29 PM FlagNP Since we're sharing anecdotes, I know a woman who got pg with triplets (no IVF, etc.) naturally. She lost them at about 22 weeks. (She is young, too, btw.) I know this is a conversation btwn OP, her dr. and her but I do think that carrying 3 babies to term at any age is not an easy road. OP, GL and wishing you all the best whatever happens.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 03:25 AM Flag
Congrats! I can't imagine being in that position (you must be terrified and torn and thinking a million different things) but since I'm not in that position and am only an outsider, I can say that I feel pretty certain that I would reduce (1). It's a terrible and wonderful position to be in.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 12:40 PM FlagOh wow--this hits close to home for me. I am on stims for my third IVF and, though I am only 35, we are transferring three this time because of my previous IVF failures. It is obviously a painful decision to have to make, but we have decided that if all three stick, we will reduce. Medically, it is the best thing to do and you are maximizing the chances that the remaining fetuses will be healthy.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 01:14 PM Flag"Maximizing the chances" and then selective reduction. Yuck.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 02:41 PM FlagITA... way to hide morality in verbage so what you are doing doesn't sound wrong.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 08:43 PM FlagWhether you agree with OP and her doctor's decision to transfer three embryos is beside the point now. OP is already pregnant with triplets. That ship has sailed. Any doctor will tell you that carrying triplets is very risky, and she has a significant risk of losing the pregnancy altogether or experiencing severe complications. Twin pregnancies are considered high-risk too, but much less so than triplet pregnancies.
[ Reply | More ]03.11.10, 05:00 PM Flag
If you were not comfortable with the idea of having triplets, you shouldn't have gone transferred 3. Too much medical intervention here, I just find it odd. Really ruins the whole miracle of life bit, which I will get flamed for now as I am "provincial and a troll." Did it ever occur to you to adopt?
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 03:25 PM FlagI cannot believe the arrogance of these responses. You went in with the intention of creating life. Because you were messing with science, you wound up with three. Since that was not the intent, you will just destroy the other two fetuses? Doesn't make any sense. I am not anti-abortion, btw, but I am anti-selective reduction.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 03:32 PM FlagHow are the responses -- or the post for that matter -- arrogant. If there are developments in science -- and ps, IVF has been here for about 30 years - to help women, how in the world to you have a problem with that? If you're anti selective reduction, that's your prerogative but it also sounds like you're anti IVF which is just weird.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 03:56 PM Flagnp: I think it has something to do with this idea that we can mess around with nature and decide what's best. I kind of get what Or is saying.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 04:24 PM Flagsays the person who has never experienced infertility. So I guess if you had had trouble conceiving, you would have just said "oh well, that's life" and not considered seeking medical help?
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 05:47 PM Flagnp: I tend to agree with the above posters. Transferring 3 means you are prepared for all three to take, which is physically challenging for the mother and could be detrimental to the babies. In turn, this situation makes selective reduction look like the only way to go (and I agree that it is), but OP should have considered this more seriously prior to the transfer (same goes for her doctor). Infertility sucks, but if you're going to intervene then you need to do so responsibly.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 03:34 AM Flag-
Implanting three when she was not prepared for three seems irresponsible to me.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 08:29 AM FlagHer doctor (who is well known and very respected), recommended three because based on her age, the chance of all three sticking was extremely remote and in his opinion, this was her best chance of ending up with one healthy child. I am doing IVF and also transferring three this time, because my previous two IVFs failed completely. Is there a small chance that all three will stick in my case? Of course. But after two years of infertility, multiple IUIs, surgery, and two IVFs, I'm willing to take that small chance. (np)
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 08:59 AM FlagBut if all three take, will you selectively reduce? That is the question. If so, then I think you're being irresponsible. That's just my opinion, you are of course free to do what you wish.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 09:23 AM FlagYes, I would. In the unlikely case that all three take, I would reduce because I believe strongly that is the most responsible thing to do for a healthy pregnancy and for the sake of the remaining fetuses. It is not a situation I want to have to make, but I'm prepared to if it comes to that. And my doctor, who is very experienced and whose goal it is to help me conceive just one baby, agrees that given my history, transferring 3 is reasonable.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:33 AM Flag
Personally, yes, but I think if you are going to make the decision to go through with IVF, you need to understand that there is a possiblity that you could wind up with multiples. I find it arrogant that people think they should be able to special order their children.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 03:08 PM Flag
People like you disgust me. All of medicine is "messing around with nature." I hope you never ever took a medicine or used eyeglasses because you were naturally meant to be weeded out before you procreated and contaminated OUR gene pool!
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 06:54 AM Flagnp: That is a silly analogy. Eyeglasses and aborting a fetus are two different things.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:03 AM FlagThe original "messing around with nature" comment seemed to refer to IVF or fertility treatments in general--which in the vast majority of cases does not involve aborting a fetus.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:25 AM FlagExactly. We mess around with mother nature with all aspects of medical care- no one complains about that- but if someone gets infertile, people get all Darwinian on you. I suspect there is a lot of jealousy of the average IVFer but that is a topic for another time.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:48 AM Flagnp-huh? jealous of the average IVF'er? I'm missing something.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 02:50 PM FlagExactly. Why would someone be jealous of a woman who has to go through IVF in order to conceive? I guess I am missing something too.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 03:14 PM FlagI think IVF brings out a lot of anger in people because of the typical IVFer- wealthier, better educated, slimmer, etc. It angers people that people who are fortunate in other areas are not necessarily deprived in this- it is just a pet theory from the vitriol and prejudice that surrounds IVF.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 04:56 PM Flag
I am the Or of the "messing around with nature" comment. It's a compound statement. I have no issue with IVF, but, like any instance where you are "messing around with nature" there are ethical consequences. Do we keep someone on life support for 30 years just because science allows and the spouse isn't ready to let him/her go?
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 03:18 PM Flag
-
is okay to abort an unwanted fetus, how is it not okay to abort a 'wanted' one for the safety and health of another baby? In both cases, regardless of intent, a fetus is being aborted. I'm genuinely curious; this is such a grey area to me and while I think IVF is a real blessing to people struggling with infertility, the ensuing selective reduction makes me very uncomfortable.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 09:54 AM Flag
Congratulations on your miracle! How wonderful for you. I want to share with you a story from my dh's family; it may sway you a bit on your decision re: to reduce or not. Dh's sister was in a similar situation, except it was a surrogate mother-- all three embryos implanted. They chose not to reduce. The triplets were born at 26 weeks... two boys and a girl. One of the boys died after seven days. The remaining girl and boy are now 7 years old. It's amazing how far they've come, considering they weighed about a pound each at birth, but they have serious issues. The girl doesn't hear in one ear and has motor problems. The boy has issues similar to autism (but is not autistic) and vision problems. It's been a long, hard road for my sil. This is not what she imagined when she set out to raise a family. I know selective reduction is controversial, and no one can tell you what is right for you & your dh... but just know that carrying 3 is very risky. Good luck, many blessings for you & little ones to be.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 07:37 PM FlagA positive story for you. My df went through years of fertility treatments (including surrogacy) and finally had her first successful preganancy at age 39. All three of her eggs "took" after have no successes at all for many years. She had allowed a transfer of three as a "last ditch" effort. All three of her little peanuts looked very healthy and she found a high risk specialist at Cornell(often mentioned and respected here) who agreed that reduction did not seem to be in order in her case. She carried her trips to 35 weeks! They are now happy, healthy, normal 5 yos. They have done some minor OT and speech along the way (under EI which), but all love books and are chatty and sociable and imaginative and they are reading or pre-reading and fabulous. They were born healthy and 2 out of 3 were over 5 lbs! MY df is a petite woman and her pregnant belly was a wonder! Good Luck. And get in touch with the Mothers of Twins of NYC. They were very helpful to my df.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 07:55 PM FlagCongratulations. As someone who's been through 5 IVFs, I understand what you went through. As far as hypertension, it can be controlled with meds during pregnancy. As far as the cost and the difficulty in raising triplets, I'd say that the first few years are the hardest, but in ten years from now when you have a set of wonderful triplets doing all the great things 9 year olds do--you'll look back and thank God you didn't make the choice to live without one or two of them. You can do it. Take care of yourself. Make the financial sacrifices necessary. This is the opportunity of a life-time. Think of all the ways in which your family will be enhanced by the triplets!
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 08:01 PM FlagBeen there, done that and although I have two wonderful dd's right now, I will never be able to look at them without thinking about the other. It will be a life-long regret. I wish I would have had the faith to carry all three. At least I wouldn't have the guilt of knowing I voluntarily ended the life of my daughter's sibling. If you selectively reduce, you will never forget it. I know that's harsh and I'll get flamed for saying it--but it's true and unless they've been through it, they don't know what it feels like.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 08:05 PM FlagI'm a poster from above and I admire that you put yourself out there and admitted this. My friend chose to go with it and now has three healthy 2 year olds who are a complete delight to her and her dh. No one has mentioned the guilt and it is good for her that you brought it out.
[ Reply | More ]03.09.10, 09:37 PM Flag
You are not alone...my sister is 11 weeks with triplets as well. She and her dh are overwhelmed too. But, thrilled!! They had been down a very long and painful IVF road. Try tripletconnection.com and there are lots of triplet blogs out there. GL and congrats!
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 04:08 AM FlagNot triplets but twin mom here (also IVF). I was younger than you when they were born (34) and had no health issues (except infertility). Multiple pregnancy is a whole different ballgame than singleton, and triplets so much moreso than twins. With my twins I developed high blood pressure (started creeping up at 30 weeks gestation) and was on hospital bedrest for 5 weeks on-watch for pre-eclampsia. My twins were born fullterm (38 weeks) and thrived but it took a LOT of medical care and expertise to get me there... and it was so hard and stressful for months. If you decide to carry all 3, find the BEST high-risk OB you can find in NYC. I also highly recommend the book "When You're Expecting Twins, Triplets or Quads" by Barbara Luke, it gives a realistic sense of what you're about to embark on. Good Luck and Congrats! I hope everything works out perfectly for you and your family.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 05:40 AM FlagMy sister naturally concieved twins. She was much younger (31) and no health issues. The twin pregnancy was much more difficult than the singlton for her, mostly due to lots of back pains and discomfort from about 18 weeks or so. However, she had 2 young kids to take care of (6 and 2), no help whatsoever, worked full time - i am sure it did not help. She delivered 2 healthy (but small, under 4lb) girls at 33 weeks. The after birth care of overwhelming, but the pregnancy part can be done, espcially since you do not have young kids to take care of. Congrats and take care of yourself!
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 09:18 AM FlagI'm also a twin mom (via IUI). I was 41 when they were born. My entire pregnancy was completely uneventful (but highly monitored because they were twins). I was induced at 38 weeks and my boys have no medical, neuro, sensory, ANYTHING issues. Just perfect in every way. Just because something MIGHT happen doesn't mean it will.
[ Reply | More ]03.11.10, 01:42 PM Flag
twin mom here (we have 4 in total), also via IVF: please don't let finances dictate this decision. Let your doc's prognosis about the babies' health (and your own) guide you, please. Financial decisions can be tailored to fit your needs/means/goals and circumstances, but life is too precious. Great, good luck to you.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 05:48 AM Flaggood luck, please just get all the medical facts so you can make an informed decision rather than one based on anecdotes. I had twins myself and was shocked to find out how risky it is to have twins. the pregnancy was very scary. people don't tell you the really scary stuff and just assume twins are no big deal these days -- NOT true. btw -- congratulations! and again -- good luck
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 09:36 AM Flagcongrats OP! You must have great eggs! If it were me I'd reduce one and go with twins. Whatever you decide, it will be the right decision for you and DH, and you just need to make peace with it. Everyone will have a story to tell you, either happy or not, but remember that the plural of anecdote is not data. So try not to base your decision on others' stories. Look at the statistics and go with your gut. Good luck OP, and I hope you keep us posted.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:05 AM FlagIf you didn't want three, why would you have three transferred? There is always the possibility of them taking. Selective reduction is awful. Sorry. But it is.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:06 AM Flag-
if you have not dealt with infertility, then you don't know what the FU#JNFDKS you are talking about.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 12:42 PM FlagNP: I cannot ever imagine someone who has dealt with infertility actually choosing to "selectively reduce" a pregnancy. Totally agree. am sure OP is frightened and extremely emotional right now--rightfully so! But the whole idea of selective reduction is disturbing, to say the least.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 12:48 PM Flag
-
Congrats to you on your successful outcome. I hope you can ignore/filter through the ridiculously judgemental comments on here, and get some help from the people who actually want to help. People who haven't been through the difficulty of infertility sometimes (not always!) just simply don't want to understand the understand, and as far as I'm concerned, they can just live in their ignorance while the world moves forward.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:10 AM FlagOops, hite reply before finishing my comment, and didn't get to my main point. I had an S/R from fraternal triplets to twins, primarily b/c I coldn't face the thought of losing all 3, which is a real risk in a triplet pregnancy. (1/3 of them are lost, and another 1/3 (I think) will have at least 1 baby affected in a long-term health way). In any event, it was an incredibly tough (emotionally) situation to face and process to bear, but I truly feel that I did what I needed to do to bring my son and daughter safely into this world. I don't regret it one iota, although I will admit that I feel deep sadness when I think about the 3rd child- even to this day. (My kids are almost 2). In any event, go and see Joanna Stone- she is the best around with s/rs. Good luck to you!
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:12 AM Flag
First, wait for CVS results. At 42, the odds of an abnormality are in the single digits (like 1:45), so get through that hurdle first. If all are normal, then you still have a lot of risks associated with the pregnancy and with the inevitable premature births. Reduction would minimize the risks.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:55 AM FlagYou should go online and consult the board at San Francisco Parents of Multiples. Plenty of parents there who have gone through this experience. I myself am single and have twins. I'm 34 and have some support form family. If you have a good support system--family, friends--it's possible. The first 6 months is the hardest. Just getting them on the same schedule and sleeping through the night. After that, it's just diapers, bathing and food. There are some great triple strollers--my personal favorite is made by doubledeckerstroller.com. It will get you through the first year and maybe the 2nd and third if you get the toddler seats.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 10:59 AM FlagCongratulations on your pregnancy. Singletons, twins or trips now matter how they are conceived are a wonderful miracle. I was 42 when I conceived my twins via IVF. We implanted five embryos, so obviously my (very highly respected) RE would not think three was too many for a 42 yo. Dh and I had the ethical discussion prior to the transfer just in case three took for us. Luckily we never had to make this decision. It has to be the hardest one to make in your life. I agree with the previous poster that recommends waiting until after the CVS. For us when we made the hypothetical decision, it came down to would carrying three effect the outcome for the other two, as well as my own health. Only you and your OB can truly discuss this. Lastly, I also agree, ivfconnections will have a more experience audience to offer guidance. Good Luck!!
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 11:23 AM FlagContinue with all three pregnancies and do not look back. After what I can assume has been years of trying (if you went the IVF route), one can only believe that fate has a hand in all three "sticking." How can you choose which child should live, and which will never get the chance? Count your blessings--all three of them!--and you will not have to spend the rest of your life wondering "what if?"
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 12:45 PM FlagWow, what is wrong with you people? Clearly you have not experienced the emotional roller coaster of being in your early 40's and going through IVF. I am 42 and after several unsuccessful IVF cycles am FINALLY pregnant. With each prior cylce I had anywhere from 2 - 4 embryos transferred and was told that my chances of any embryos fertilizing was very slim. Never in my wildest dreams would I have envisioned more than one embryo hanging in there for the long haul. OP: This is such an enormous decision you and your husband have to make. Best of luck to you in whatever you decide, and as an earlier poster said -- whichever way you go it'll be the right choice for you. Congratulations, and may the force be with you!
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 01:59 PM FlagThis is why I am against IVF and everything related. If you cant get pregnant without help your body is telling you something, and the over-aggressiveness of these women and doctors desperate to get her pregnant results in un-necessary deaths. Shame on you. If you only wanted one, you should have only implanted one and taken your chances, not selfishly taken a life when things turned out better than expected. This makes me sick, and I am pro-choice.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 02:42 PM Flagyou make me sick. It's not a life yet and it may jeopardize the life of the mother and the health of the other fetuses. Go about your fertile life because you understand nothing
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 03:04 PM Flag-
you are the devil. you've obviously never been through IVF before or longed for a child so badly that you thought your heart was literally going to break in two. sit tight. karma will be back around to teach you a lesson on judgment and condescension.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 08:22 PM FlagWTF ever. Way to spew vitriol too justify your questionable life decisions. Karma doesn't need or plan to teach me any lessons, I have done nothing wrong by expressing my opinion. Wanting a baby so bad your heart will break is not a reason to implant more eggs in your uterus than you are willing to give birth to. Selfishness is selfishness. Its wanting to be pregnant so badly that you are willing to sacrifice a life if things go better than you thought they would.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 08:42 PM FlagClearly the poster hit a nerve. You sound like a miserable person. It may not be Karma that gets you, but from the likes of your posts, something is BOUND to teach you a little compassion...just hope it's not a personal tragedy or something so huge you need to rely on others for sympathy because it's doubtful you'll be deserving of it.
[ Reply | More ]03.11.10, 11:04 AM Flag-
^^I help bring babies into this world and guide the mothers through the process. I am actually a very happy, fulfilled person but there is no way to sugar coat OP's situation and the decision she feels she needs to make. It is unnecessary death. I support a womans right to choose abortion if she has an unwanted pregnancy, or to reduce if there are chromosomal abnormalities because not everyone can be a sn parent. But to choose to end the life of a healthy baby, for selfish reasons, when YOU decided to implant 3 healthy embyos into your uterus is JUST PLAIN WRONG.
[ Reply | More ]03.11.10, 02:04 PM FlagSo in your bizarre worldview, it's not okay for op to reduce for the health and well-being of her remaining embryos (which she and her doctor transferred because at her age, it was exceedingly unlikely for all three to implant), but if someone is irresponsible enough to have sex without birth control knowing full well they can't (or don't want to) care for a baby, it's fine for them to abort?
[ Reply | More ]03.12.10, 05:05 AM Flag^^and if you knew anything about IVF, you'd know that many (at OP's age, most) embryos that look good at transfer time arrest in the uterus. If there were any way to know they were "healthy" before transfer, there would be no need for ever transferring more than one.
[ Reply | More ]03.12.10, 06:40 AM Flag
This is one of the most ignorant and judgemental things I've heard in awhile. IVF is frankly a miracle which has helped so, so many people battle and win against the DISEASE of infertility (yes, it is a medical condition that can strike ANYONE). It makes me sick that IVF makes you sick. If only you could live a day in the shoes of an infertile person struggling for a baby- I am sure you would drop off your ridiculous high horse pretty darn quickly. I am not infertile but I consider that a sheer stroke of luck as I've seen many friends (YOUNG ones in their early 30s, late 20s) struggle with this and I cannot imagine feeling anger towards the medical miracles that have helped them push through to parenthood. Would you deprive a handicapped person surgery or prosthesis to help them lead more normal lives? Would you simply say that nature has selected them to accept what their body is dealing them? It's no different.
[ Reply | More ]03.12.10, 05:58 AM Flag
My friend had triplets. She would not do selective reduction. One child has Cerebral Palsy. Please consider what this may mean for the children and what YOU can deal with. Triplets often have problems. Twins do much better.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 03:29 PM Flagare you saying that a child with cerebral palsy is somehow less worthy of love and life? i'm sure you aren't because that would make you heartless.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 08:23 PM Flagcome on. the point is, not everyone is cut out to be a parent of a kid with sn. i posted above about my sil's case. believe me, she is NOT a good mom to her sn kids-- i think under more benevolent circumstances they could be doing better, but she's just not that type of parent.
[ Reply | More ]03.10.10, 08:34 PM Flag
[+] Genuinely curious: I don't understand why so many women put themselves through IVF a... 125 replies
- because of impatient people and doctors. As a last resort, IVF is a useful and wonderful intervention, when all testing and...the study that says that the majority of women undergoing IVF are "approaching 40" before they start trying. What you fail...
- I started trying at 30- not everyone getting IVF has age related fertility issues-...
- of impatient people and doctors. As a last resort, IVF is a useful and wonderful intervention, when all testing...
Talk : : June 29, 2010
Genuinely curious: I don't understand why so many women put themselves through IVF and other fertility treatments. Why not make it a priority to have children younger in life (late 20's, early 30's)? I don't understand why going against nature is so common among so many women today. It seems to unnecessarily complicate things. Anyone agree?
125 replies [ Reply | Watch | More06.29.10, 02:26 PM Flag ]are you serious? you do understand that there are ppl who are infertile at 24 yr old. My friend got married at 23yr, tried having a baby right away for 15 yr with her dh..nothing. She just had her first at 41yr. Getting pg was a priority to her but mother nature had other plans
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 02:29 PM FlagI do understand. However, for many women age is the major factor.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 02:31 PM FlagHow about they haven't met the right guy? Or should they just go breeding with whoever comes along with sperm?
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 02:32 PM FlagI think it's less a matter of "meeting the right guy" and more an issue of choosing to wait. Are you telling me women are frantically searching for a mate from 22-40 and then finally meet Mr. Right? I don't buy it. There are many more men available to 25 year old women than 40 year old women.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 02:39 PM Flagor: what is wrong with choosing to wait until you're set financially and set in your relationship
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 02:44 PM Flagthen, your body isn't NATURALLY ready any longer for kids. More often then not, it is these women who have IVF. I have NO judgment for women who have fertility issues younger in life, but the women who wait and wait and wait until ALLLLL the ducks are in a row, I don't feel so bad for. It still stinks, it's still hurtful when a woman wants a baby and can't irregardless of age, BUT n those cases, maybe they shouldn't have waited so long.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:25 PM FlagYou need to look this up. Half of all infertility is male, and it is not age-related. No reputable clinic works with very high FSH for IVF- they never even make it to retrieval. And no IVF clinic in this country has EVER gotten an over 45 year old pregnant with her own eggs- they make that clear upfront. You just want to blame the victim.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:27 PM Flagnot blaming the victim. it's biology and common sense. Unless there are extenuating circumstances, don't wait until your a few years away from menopause to have kids.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:30 PM FlagDid you READ what I just posted? 1/2 of all infertility and IVF cycles are male factor infertility. High FSH (poor risk older women) rarely make it to retrieval and often won't even be cycled? Did you drop out of school before reading comprehension was covered?
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:32 PM Flag-
this is not true. I know someone - my cousin who was 45 46 her own eggs and froze some and had another - you are totally wrong
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:05 PM FlagHere you go http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:7-OfQmlLY4kJ:www.advancedfertility.com/age.htm+IVF+success+rates+in+45+year+old&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:15 PM Flag
you do understand that some people can naturally become pregnant around 40. I personally know of a few- one was my grandmother- had 10 children, 3 of them when she was 39, 40 and 44. You need to mind your own business and let people live their lives. not your problem if someone wants to have a baby at that age. many of them have been trying for years. thank god we have IVF!
[ Reply | More ]08.12.10, 06:13 PM Flag
not saying I agree, but in Britain, they do not cover IVF for women over 40 (I believe those younger than 40 are fully covered for 3 cycles).
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 02:33 PM Flag-
maybe so, but they are coldly assessing who will be most successful with the procedure (under 40). If you can afford it, you don't have to go through NHS and you can try as much as you like. At least if you're infertile and poor, it's covered - unlike in the States.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 06:02 PM Flag
-
np: I care b/c I am continually judged for having my dc at 25. Why is it okay to judge someone for having a baby in their mid 20's, but not early 40's?
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:28 PM FlagOh, so you want to judge people who do get pregnant? Tell you what, IVFers richer than you, and can afford all the IVF cycles they want. They'll get a kid. But you'll never match their achievements.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:34 PM Flagoh, now I really feel awful. You have no idea how incredibly jealous I am of those moms!!! You have NO CLUE the success my dh and I have. Just b/c we had a child at 25 doesn't mean lack of success or intelligence.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:37 PM FlagI do, because you wouldn't be so all-fired jealous of people who can buy anything they want. You want the smug satisfaction that there is at least ONE thing they can't buy. Guess what? You're wrong. I'll let Celine Dion know your congrats are in the mail.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:38 PM Flagwho the hell said I was jealous? LIsten lady, I watched my mother go through this at 36. It was horrendous. AWFUL. I was 16, I knew what was going on. I clearly stated above that I felt awful for the women who didnt wait until they were 40 to start this process. From someone who has seen how awful it can get, I CANNOT wrap my head around WHY women would wait so long when they know the possible outcome? My husband and I are very comfortable, I am SAHM on UES, 0 complaints. Sometimes, I know this may be IMPOSSIBLE to believe, not everything is monetarily motivated.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:43 PM FlagWhy did she wait so long after you? The belligerent passive-aggressive personality was just too much for her? You should ask her why she waited so long. You are jealous because you couldn't afford to cycle until it worked and you LOVE the idea that you were rewarded for getting knocked up and staying barefoot and pregnant with a baby. Wrong. Time, time to have a career, find the right guy, etc. can be bought. And people buy it.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:46 PM FlagSOME people buy it, but women are pushing it and pushing it. At some point to far is too far. You think I was REWARDED for getting 'knocked up'? look around, I'm the minority, it was no picnic CONSTANTLY explaining that dh and CHOSE to get pg and it wasn't an accident and no I wasn't sad. You're a real piece of work to imply that my mother waited 16 years to get pregnant b/c of me. I pray to the good Lord you never speak to your own children like this. What's sad, is you are probably old enough to be my mother and are speaking like that to someone. A new low.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:53 PM FlagSo why did she wait? Are you GENUINELY CURIOUS about that too? They aren't asking because you are young, they are asking because: 1. they can only explain his marrying you by you being pregnant or 2. you clearly are not where you should be to have a child. Don't worry- my children know manners and are smart enough to learn about things before they pontificate.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:55 PM Flagshe waited for the same reason some of these women are advocating- getting her ducks in a row. You know, career, husband, etc. She waited too long and then was kicking herself b/c she knew it. Dh and I were married for a year and a half before we got pregnant AND we are definitely where we 'should be' to be making children. Unbelievable right?
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:58 PM FlagBut she had you? She did the Hell in a Handbasket routine and decided NOT to do THAT again. Have you asked her why? I am only telling you the reasons people ask that question, they obviously cannot for the life of them find another reason that he married you...
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:14 PM Flag
-
np: No doubt she'll give a follow-up post: "For those of you who found your DH at 35, wouldn't it have been easier to find him at 25? And for those of you who discovered you were infertile at 30, wouldn't it have been better to find out you were infertile at 22? Why didn't you just try to have a baby then and see what happened?"
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 03:13 PM Flag
obviously you are a moron and yes i mean that in the rudest way possible. you are CLUELess when it comes to fertility. I started trying when I was 28 years old, is that young enough for you?? here i am 2.5 years later doing IVF.. don't you think we wish we could get pregnant on our own? UGH people like you are the worst.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 02:41 PM Flagoh she knows exactly what she's saying. This is a trigger post to piss off people. It's so very obvious. Guess she had her brood young.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 02:45 PM Flagyou, I actually do feel awful for. I really do feel bad for women who have tried prior to say 40 and are unsuccessful... I watched my mother do it at 36, it was awful. BUT that does not go for women who wait until they are approaching 40 to try and have kids.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:39 PM Flag36 is pretty far along in breeding years too- how come that doesn't make the cutoff for you???
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:40 PM FlagPlease cite the study that says that the majority of women undergoing IVF are "approaching 40" before they start trying. What you fail to grasp is how long everything takes. You don't try for three months then go to IVF. There is a massive amount of testing, and if they find "something" then you have to wait to get it fixed, then wait to see if that solves the problem. BOTH my husband and I had to have surgery, in my case 3 times. And that was after one doctor made me wait an entire YEAR before agreeing to send me to a gyno because he didn't beleive me when I told him I thought I had endo. ALl you get is crap about "you're young, don't be in such a hurry, relax, it'll happen". Like relaxing cures scar tissue...
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 06:07 PM Flag
typically the longer it takes for adults to move out on their own and become financially independent, the longer it takes for couples to get married and for women to start having children. it's usually primarily an economic thing. i'm not sure how you believe women can just decide to start families early despite adverse economic conditions for young people. do you want to see an entire generation on the dole?
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:11 PM Flagsome of us who came of age (horror!) in the days before match.com and jdate had trouble meeting the right person until later in life. and getting knocked up by an a$$hat wasn't a "priority." what amazes me is how trapped in their own little bubble people like you are. anyone agree?
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:23 PM FlagWell, what about the fact that 50% or so of women undergoing IVF don't actually need it.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:40 PM FlagHow so? Not sure I disagree, but sometimes people don't want to wait and chance it.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:43 PM Flagexactly. it's turned to so frequently because of impatient people and doctors. As a last resort, IVF is a useful and wonderful intervention, when all testing and less invasive approaches have been used. I know women in their late 20s who have lots of money and TTC for maybe 3-4 months and went straight to IVF. To each her own, I suppose.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:48 PM Flagwhat about the ones who are waaaaaay past the point of it doing any good? there are far more of them than women in their 20s using ivf.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:51 PM FlagNot really. Do you know anything about high FSH IVF? I am guessing no....but clarify.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 04:53 PM Flagwhy don't you clarify? since your "not really" seems to indicate you have some stats. i'm guessing no....
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:10 PM FlagHere you go, and for the future Google is your friend.http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:7-OfQmlLY4kJ:www.advancedfertility.com/age.htm+IVF+success+rates+in+45+year+old&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:17 PM FlagAnd also here, where you can see he says most clinics steer IVF patients to Donor Egg directly http://www.ccivf.com/high_fsh.html
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:19 PM Flag-
NOT TRUE! If you look at the individual clinic-by-clinic reports published on the CDC websites, you will see how few egg donor cycles most clinics do.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 06:22 PM FlagFor high fsh? You bet they do. Nyu, Cornell etc feel it is not ethical to keep cycling high fsh-ers with their own eggs.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 06:26 PM Flagno, no no. If you LOOK at the numbers you will see that on a relative basis the number of IVF cycles using donor eggs is very small compared to the number of non-donor egg cycles. that's because "loww FSH" isn't the only cause of infertility. See below poster's comment re: male factor infertility. If your DH has low sperm count they don't do donor egg!
[ Reply | More ]06.30.10, 06:43 AM Flag
-
i'm sorry. google is my friend? what point are you trying to make here, pray tell?
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:32 PM Flag
Hahaha, you are laughable. Where's your research behind this stat? Here's a tip honey, close your mouth. Your <lack of> intelligence is showing. Jersey girl, right?
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:00 PM Flagalso, as I posted above, it's turned to so frequently because of impatient people and doctors. As a last resort, IVF is a useful and wonderful intervention, when all testing and less invasive approaches have been used. I know women in their late 20s who have lots of money and TTC for maybe 3-4 months and went straight to IVF. To each her own...
[ Reply | More ]06.30.10, 11:52 AM Flag
-
i wanted to have a baby and get married younger, but you need a man to do this, and never met one. first husband told me after we got married that he decided he didn't want kids. another man who i was engaged to ended up infertile. finally did meet the right guy at 39. luckily had no problems getting pregnant, but that's perhaps unusual. it's not all about the woman.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 05:09 PM FlagWow, that's a silly question. I want to preface by saying that I also think women shouldn't wait to have kids, if they are ready in their 20s and 30s. But, I do understand why some older women choose to do IVF - it's simple, THEY WANT CHILDREN! Duh. Many women aren't ready (financially, emotionally, socially) to be mothers in their 20s. Many don't find a partner until they are older. There are many situations. But I'm completely supportive of anyone who wants to have kids and do whatever it takes to make that happen. Kudos to all of them.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 06:25 PM FlagIsn't that a huge part of reproductive choice and the beauty of reproductive choice? We can have children when they are truly wanted children. Let's support one another in that and not concern ourselves with whether a wanted child comes naturally or with technological intervention.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 06:49 PM Flag
No. You sound ignorant. Maybe your mom had you when she was too young to raise you proper. And then you went and had kids too young so never got some smarts in your head. Poor little judgmental, smug thing, so cock sure of yourself and yet such a ding-a-ling.
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 06:52 PM FlagI "put myself through" IVF because I wanted to be a mother and my diagnosis (undefined tube issues which lead to 2 ectopic pregnancies) was the correct treatment for me. I was 35 years old when my twins were born (after 5 years of infertility and losses). You think I "went against nature" but I see it as availing myself of a modern medical treatment which (thankfully) was available to me. Your clueless, idiotic post strikes me as similar "logic" to asking: "Genuinely curious: I don't understand why so many people put themselves through chemotherapy and other cancer treatments? Why not let nature run it's course?"
[ Reply | More ]06.29.10, 08:00 PM FlagMy friends who have gone through fertility treatments all started the process of trying to get pregnant when they were early to mid 30s. They tried natural for several years, then clomid (which I cannot spell) for a year, and then finally worked their way to IVF. You should keep in mind that it is not that everyone waited until they were over 40 to start. Many started younger and followed the course of progression over time, and finally ended up at IVF after maybe 5 years of trying. So don't think that all of these women who use IVF all waited until 40. But, let me add, I am also not criticizing those who did. OP, you need to acknowledge that there are a hundred different scenarios for fertility treatments.
[ Reply | More ]06.30.10, 06:31 AM FlagOP: The original question was sincere. I apologize if it wasn't worded nicely. I'm 29, and never met anyone who admitted to using fertility treatments. I have met a lot of twins, and assume many of those babies are the result of some sort of treatment. I may be mistaken here. Again, women in their 20's don't know that much about fertility and no one talks about it. For example, I have no idea the percentages of women using fertility treatments to get pregnant in 2010. I can't find that info on Google. The original question was meant to be from my point of view. I had my first at 26 and will have #2 at 29. I'm a health nut and fairly holistic. For me it was important that my children be conceived naturally. I'm wondering if anyone else feels the same way. And aren't there recent studies linking Clomid to autism? Please enlighten me if I am incorrect.
[ Reply | More ]06.30.10, 02:16 PM FlagWell, you kind of answered your own question: You don't know much about fertility...many of us don't. You were lucky to get pregnant when you wanted to get pregnant, but what if you hadn't gotten pregnant when you wanted to? We are fortunate to live in a age when women don't have to be ruled by their ovaries.
[ Reply | More ]06.30.10, 02:32 PM Flagyou are just so stupid. oh, you cant find that info on google about percentages of women needing fertility treatments in 2010 but now you are throwing out "recent studies linking Clomid to autism". Yours are the kind of questions you keep to yourself not post on a website like the ignorant tool that you are
[ Reply | More ]08.12.10, 06:45 PM Flag
I started trying at 30- not everyone getting IVF has age related fertility issues-
[ Reply | More ]06.30.10, 06:55 AM Flag
[+] I actually believe that if you can't naturally have children, you should adopt. And b... 140 replies
- .no coincidence many ivf babies have a slew of problems...
- "can't" conceive naturally. But, they *can* conceive via IVF, just as much as you *can* adopt children via the...applies to every couple who conceives naturally, not just IVF couples. And I have never heard any evidence of your...to create parents for themselves the way the parents can IVF a baby....
Talk : : July 26, 2007
I actually believe that if you can't naturally have children, you should adopt. And before you flame, yes, dh and I had fertility problems but we ended up adopting two children. I think if nature tells you no, you should listen and take care of the child n who need you.
140 replies [ Reply | Watch | More-
I'm sure most people would, but I think most people are also selfish and too entitled.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:54 PM Flagwhat happened to everyone has their own choices and they many be different from yours, but no better or worse
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:55 PM Flag-
-
having kids is selfish - and why do you limit it to those who can't have kids naturally? You should start bitching to the 22 year old in the trailer next to you.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:57 PM Flag
-
-
-
Why? I mean I understand that's what you and dh chose to do, but why do you think that's what everyone in your situation should do?
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:53 PM Flagbecause something is obviously wrong with you if nature wants to weed your genes out
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:54 PM Flag-
-
-
But if something is wrong with you, why is it OK for you to raise kids at all, such as adopted kids?
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:58 PM Flag-
So if it's OK for you, who can't have biological children, to raise your adopted children, because you "want to be a parent," then why is it not OK for someone else to use IVF?
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:03 PM Flag-
So you're not meant to reproduce, but you are meant to parent? Maybe you can't have kids because you're not "meant to" parent--how would you know?
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:07 PM Flagyou must have failed to see my response to this, at least three times already. I was not meant to pass on my genetics but I was meant to love because that is something I am capable of
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:09 PM FlagI have seen your response, but it doesn't make sense. You are saying that for people who can't conceive on their own, adopting is OK but IVF isn't, because you "can" love your adopted children but they "can't" conceive naturally. But, they *can* conceive via IVF, just as much as you *can* adopt children via the legal institution of adoption.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:11 PM Flagsome. I am agaist farm raising embryos to do so. I am also against using stem cell research to make life longer than it should. this planet could not support our current population living to 120-150 years old and that is a very definite possibilty with st em cell technology.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:17 PM Flag
-
np: ita, by her own logic, she should not be a parent. nature decided. (apparently)
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:01 PM Flagnature decided I couldn't reproduce. and nature made me capable of love too. I give that away to my kids
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:02 PM Flag
-
-
-
I'd have to disagree with this logic. There are many people out there who really shouldn't have kids, yet nature lets them continue to do so.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:57 PM Flag
-
-
-
-
Why do you think that being unable to have kids means you should adopt? You could just as easily say it means you shouldn't be parents at all, using that logic.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:57 PM Flagnot at all. the best parents are ones that want to be one. if you want to be one but can't, there are plenty of children to have. it's natural.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:59 PM FlagWhy is caring for someone else's biological child any more "natural" than using technology to have your own biological child? One is a legal invention, the other a technological invention.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:02 PM Flagcaring for a baby that needs care is the most natural thing in the world. you can see that with animals everywhere, even male ones, that adopts a baby, sometimes not even the same species.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:03 PM FlagSo the reason adoption is OK, but IVF is not, is because animals adopt? Is that what you're saying?
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:05 PM FlagIVF is not okay, imo, because you are forcing life that shouldn't exist. adoption if wonderful because you are able to care/love/parent a child who needs and both your needs are fulfilled
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:07 PM Flag-
once there are here, they are here. but I think it's selfish to force that life.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:10 PM Flagimo. 1. the money used to have IVF could be used to help other children that are already here. if you want a baby so badly, there are many that want/need you already. 2. I think there is a reason people can't concieve and that usually is a genetic defect hat shouldn't be passed on.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:15 PM Flagnp: 1. infertile people do not have an obligation to be more altruistic than anyone else (by that logic, we could start questioning whether your really need a bigger house or a second car). 2. it is not so easy to get "babies that are already here". i fact it costs as much as IVF, if not more and insurance does not cover it. 2. BS - no evidence that genetics is to blame in most IVF - there are many environmental factors and much IF is unexplained.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:18 PM FlagI know many disagree, but it's my view and I think it makes a lot of sense. I understand how people who have done it especially, would hate being called on that. It's hard to accept a parent could ever do anything to hard their child that they love so m h and wanted to badly. do not get me wrong, I know what it's like to want a baby and not be able to have one. it's heartbreaking. but what is more heartbreaking is having someone feel this way and having a child feel that way and not have the ability to create parents for themselves the way the parents can IVF a baby.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:22 PM Flag
-
-
so if nature tells you that you have cancer then you should listen to it and not seek treatment?
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:54 PM Flagita....no coincidence many ivf babies have a slew of problems
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:55 PM Flagthis is just a random bit of misinformation that gets bandied about - go back to your trailer
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:56 PM FlagAs an adoptee, who has many friends who had ivf treatments, I can say this aspect makes me very uncomfortable. One of my oldest friends had triplets; all sick. One stayed in hospital for the first 12 months of life; she's always calling them a "miracle\ and it's hard for me to agree. But I do anyway.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:56 PM Flag-
That's just crazy. That's like saying if nature gives you cancer, you shouldn't have chemo, you should just listen. Why not take advantage of medical science? I think adoption is great, but I think IVF is pretty amazing too. I have 2 beautiful nephews conceived through IVF.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 12:56 PM Flagby that logic, nature told you no and you got around the issue by adopting. you are no better that people who choose ivf. if nature wanted a wacko like you to be a parent, nature would have made you fertile, (going by your logic)
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:00 PM Flag-
so given this perspective do you also advocate termination of pregnancies where prenatal testing has diagnosed a genetic issue?
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:22 PM Flagnot at all. I am pro-choice about abortion. but that is actually a fetus that has already come into existence. I think it's wrong to use technology to create life.
[ Reply | More ]07.26.07, 01:23 PM Flaghi. i am a 16 year old child of 3 - i was a GIFT baby and my twin siblings were IVF. my mother did not 'leave things too late'.. instead her and my dad tried for a long time to have children, miscarrying once, and finally resorted to reproducing this way. id just like to say that my mum and dad do a WONDERFUL job of parenting all three of us, and i do not appreciate being labelled as 'genetically deformed' or 'against what nature (God) intended'. i am a healthy, happy, loved human being who deserves to be alive just as much as you do.
[ Reply | More ]10.30.08, 02:21 AM Flag
but then you shouldn't take any medication for any reason. if your husband has a heart attack, you'll have to just let him die rather than let docs revive him so he can live on for another twenty years being the father of your children. or, you shouldn't wear eyeglasses. nature meant for you to not see well! i have pernicious anemia. before 1950, i would have died of it, but now i get simple b-12 vitamin shots. nature would have made my child grow up without me.
[ Reply | More ]10.30.08, 04:38 AM Flagthat's your opinion. if i couldn't have children naturally, i would try even avenue possible to help me with my issues before considering adoption. and no, that does not make me a 'bad' person.
[ Reply | More ]10.30.08, 05:13 AM Flag
-
[+] I just found out for sure what I'd suspected for about a year -- that my parents, who... 110 replies
- their little savings and gave my brother $$$ for IVF, knowing that I would be stuck paying for...I would feel incredibly selfish, knowing how much ivf treatments are and how much my parent's...it's almost impossible to get PG through IVF with her own eggs. According to statistics, the...But some posters suggested she help with the ivf treatments so the parents wouldn't have to...concern. But rather than zeroing in on the IVF issue, it should be a general conversation about...
Talk : : August 11, 2010
I just found out for sure what I'd suspected for about a year -- that my parents, who aren't wealthy at all, have been paying for my SIL (brother's wife's) infertility treatments. She's had two IVFs, they both failed. She's 41 and they don't want to adopt. My sister called today and wants to sit everyone down (at Thanksgiving!) and discuss it, since if my parents run out of money their long term care would fall on her shoulders mostly, though mine too, but I don't have as much $ as she does. Not that this matters, but I think my folks have about $300,000 put away, at least they did before the 2 IVFs. Not enough to throw around, don't you think?
110 replies [ Reply | Watch | More08.11.10, 02:25 PM Flag ]-
np: grandparent want to give their money to the son, yet expect (hope) the rich daughter will pay for their spending of money...in essences, the sister paid for the SIL fertility treatment. It is not moral to poorly manage their money assuming their children will foot the bill. If they spent their money on food and shelter, even a vacation, and ran out of cash, then the children are responsible.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 05:32 PM Flag
Still OP. I'm aware my parents should do what they want with their money, but I think they've brought us into this, explaining to us a few years ago that because they waited too long, they couldn't get long-term-care insurance because it was too expensive.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:30 PM Flagnp: if LTC insurance was already too expensive a few years ago, then how in the world can they afford to help your brother out? that said, LTC insurance covers very specific expenses which may or may not be needed depending on what happens as they get older. however, they will need to support themselves in retirement regardless of whether they need long term care.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:46 PM Flag
Do not turn Thanksgiving into a financial intervention for your parents or your SIL. Terrible idea. I would actually have one of you (just one! no ganging up) contact the SIl and say just what you said here, that you're worried about the 'rents retirement and you heard they're giving a lot to SIL. Ask SIL if she would be willing to take the money from you if you can afford it, or a loan from you and your siblings - and make it a "real" loan (interest free but with repayment dates and a signed contract).
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:31 PM Flag-
How old are your parents? At any rate, not exactly good Thanksgiving conversation, imo.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:33 PM FlagWhy do you refer to it as giving $$$ to your SIL, it is your brother who you need talk to. I would not drag the hormonal SIL into this at all and not at Thanksgiving. Simply, ask your brother what the plan is to pay them back so that they are not in a bind for retirement. Also, how did you find out? Frankly, if it was my brother my sibs and I would have pitched in to help pay for the IVFs if they could not afford it. I think you and your sister sound selfish.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:36 PM Flagnp--I do think op and sister sound judgy with the implication that they should just adopt. what the bro/sil and parents are doing is highly personal. op's immediate concern is that she will have to pay for parents in old age. if they only had $300K op would probably have to help them w/ or w/out the ivfs.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:39 PM Flag
-
What exactly does your sister want to discuss? Whether SIL should get any additional funds from your parents? How to divide up the care of your parents? Your parents should divest their funds anyway, so that in the event they need long-term care, they would qualify for Medicaid. The $40k or whatever they gave your SIL is a drop in the bucket for nursing home care, anyway, and wouldn't have made a difference.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:37 PM FlagI think it feels like we're paying for the IVF without our consent. Maybe that sounds selfish, I dont know. I think my sister has known she will help with our parents $ in the future, and I live close to them and will probably do the 'hands on' stuff more -- but none of that has been addressed, and to hear that this money is just disappearing is a little upsetting.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:47 PM FlagOP, two points. One, I own and operate a long term care management company for a living. so that being said- keep in mind, 40K is a drop in the bucket when it comes to nursing home care. Number two, it is THEIR money, they have earned it. it is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS- they dont need YOUR CONSENT to spend their money! If you decide 20 years from now that you dont want to help them with whatever costs they need help with and they "run out of money" as you say..well that's what medicaid is here for. really- mind your own business.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:01 PM Flag
Relying on Medicaid is way less than ideal. First off, there is a 5 year look back, 2nd off, if they have no assets, many many of the better nursing homes won't admit them. And really impoverishing your parents in their old age so that the taxpayer can foot their bill, is really NO different than those women that get pg so they can get welfare and not have to work...
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:49 PM FlagAny good financial planner tells people to DIVEST when then get older. They cannot afford a nursing home as it is! Divesting is not impoverishing them . . .it's just transferring the assets to their children, but they still have access to the money.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:54 PM Flag^^^^And a five-year look-back is fine at the ages of 72 and 74, as her parents are. They are not that old.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:55 PM Flagnp: advocating that her parents give away all their money and their home at age 72/74 and become reliant on their kids to pay the bills, in order for the taxpayers to cover the entire cost of their potential future nursing care so that their kids will save their inheritance is ridiculously unethical.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:01 PM Flag
np: yes but like the poster above stated, medicaid will look at your past financials and if they see you gave your money to your family just to make yourself eligible for medicaid, the will deny your application. I know this because I was an eligibility specialist many moons ago with Medicaid..and the elderly were my clients. As a caseworker I had access to the federal computer and could see the clients financials for many yrs.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:57 PM FlagNo, they don't. First of all, you need to divest 5+ years before you apply for Medicaid. Second of all, go see what nursing homes accept Medicaid for initial entry. Not what I'd want for my parents.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:58 PM FlagOR: I understand about the five-year look-back -- but her parents are in their early 70s, so that's good -- it would not work well if they were alredy in their 80s. Second of all, with only $300,000 in savings, they cannot afford a nursing home or even an assisted living facility anyway!! They are about $6k to $10k a month.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:01 PM FlagThey own their home and they have savings. IF they need nursing care (and that's a big IF, not everyone will) for an extended period of time, they might run out of money, true. HOWEVER, if you have assets, you can enter a good nursing home or assisted living facility. Later, if you run out of money, many of them will accept Medicaid. But if you are penniless, the good places won't accept you initially. They ahve over $500K in assets. Even at $20/K month for both of them in a nursing home, that would last 2 years. And if you have money, you have other options. Stay in your home and have PT care at a lower cost, etc.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:08 PM Flag
if my parents who weren't rich took their little savings and gave my brother $$$ for IVF, knowing that I would be stuck paying for their nursing care in the future and lazy brother wouldn't, I would def. talk to my brother about either getting the money elsewhere OR making arrangements to pay parents back.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:46 PM Flagwhat right do you have to tell them what to do with their money? if you really feel so selfish about it, throw mom and dad out on the street once they need care. it's not your place to tell them how to spend their money now.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:56 PM Flagor: what right is it for her brother to take their savings and put that burden onto his sisters. NOW if the brother will be paying the money back and they have that in a signed I.O.U, that's better...but for her brother to take this money is pretty immature. Not like his parents left him this money in their will..it's their money to live off of
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:00 PM Flag
if your parents had enough money for long term care and you & sis wouldn't have to pay the bill, I'd say MYOB BUT since they're spending their savings...and you will have to make up that money they're giving to your brother, I'd def. have a talk with your parents and your brother
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:48 PM FlagThe$40k they paid for the IVF will not help one iota when it's time for long-term care -- IF they ever need it! They could each die of a heart attack. Not everyone needs to go into a nursing home.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:58 PM Flaglong term care isn't only a nursing home. Home attendants helping out cost money, visiting nurses cost money. That all falls under long term care. 40K may not cover many yrs of care but it's 40k less than OP and her sister would have to shell out ESP if OP isn't financially able to do so
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:01 PM Flag
I don't see how this is any of your business AT ALL. Maybe your parents offered this to them? This is an extremely sensitive subject, your SIL is on the older side for conception, and they obviously want children (and grandchildren). How dare you get in the middle of it? Much of fertility and IVF is covered by insurance, and the cost per month is nowhere near $300,000. BTDT both with and without insurance. Gosh, you are a BITCH!
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 02:56 PM Flagita but maybe op didn't express some kinder thoughts she also has. as is, the post focuses on financial impact on op with no compassion expressed and it does sound very selfish.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:00 PM FlagCould be possible, but since there is not one iota of compassion for these people, I have to think she has none. Infertility is an awful thing. Even before you get to IVF; it is terribly draining on a couple's relationship, can have a severe impact on their job (try going for daily monitoring in the AM when you're a teacher in a different borough than where your RE clinic is??), has set times to have and not have intercourse, is filled with letdowns, etc. I cannot imagine what these people have gone through, and to not be able to afford to conceive is a terrible feeling (I'm sure). I would bet my bottom dollar that these parents offered the money because they were empathetic to the situation. Empathy is obviously something their daughter DIDN'T get from them. Or maybe she's just jealous?
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:16 PM FlagNP: I don;t think it's fair to help out one of your three children at the expense of being able to take care of yourslef financially in retirement to then be a financial burden on the other 2. I have a lot of compassion for those who cannot have children wo ART and esp when the cost is so high that many cannot afford it. But just bc I feel for their difficult circumstances, doesn't mean I think what her parents are doing is fair to OP and her sister or particularly smart for themselves or the "right" thing to do.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:27 PM Flag
No, you're just some random IVF poster that this struck a cord with. And you obviously agreed with yourself.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:52 PM Flag
OP, you have no say in what your parents do with their money. None at all. The only say you have is whether you choose to support them if and when they need it in the future. Frankly, it seems as if your parents are spending money on a worthy cause, so I'd mind my own business.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:00 PM FlagOP, its not your money, not your business. 40 k might sound like alot to you- but if you are talking about the need for long term care- it wont get very far at all, and if it is the question between 20-40 k or not- they are in the group of people who will not be depending on their life savings, but rather on medicaid. They earned it, they are adults, they can spend it as they see fit.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:03 PM FlagYour parents are being very generous - which is probably what you'd do for your own dcs. It's their money and they can spend it as they wish. I would not at all bring this up with them. And if they need LTC and their kids can help out, then they (or you) should. When family loves each other they help out. My in-laws also give large sums of money to their children (never us though) and I'm glad that they can help their kids. I would never resent it or feel left out financially because of it - neither would my dh.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:54 PM FlagI would NEVER ask or accept money from my parents who aren't rich for IVF treatments. I'm a big girl and would find a way to pay on my own if I needed them. NOW OP I can see 1 treatment (your brother accepting $$$ but 2 or more?) How about his job? Do they save or mooch?
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:54 PM FlagThat's what I'm wondering! I would feel incredibly selfish, knowing how much ivf treatments are and how much my parent's DON'T have. It's like grow up and pay for your own problems. And it's the 3rd time around? Will this be it or is the family going to have to bite their nails through more treatments that won't work? Doe
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:10 PM Flag
I can't believe some crazy ivf posters are on here advocating that you help pay for brother/sil's ivf treatments. Is her infertility your problem? Not insensitive to infertility, but they should pay for it themselves. And yes, it is your business if you and your sister are going to get the burden in the long. And the trip to the Florida poster is just ridiculous but that made me laugh.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 03:55 PM FlagOP isn't paying for them, her parents are with their money.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 05:18 PM FlagBut some posters suggested she help with the ivf treatments so the parents wouldn't have to loose anymore money. And I say hell no, no one else but them shoould be paying for the treatments. This is their problem, their grown ups so they can do it or need to at least figure it out for themselves
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 05:20 PM Flag
-
It depends. At her age (41), it's almost impossible to get PG through IVF with her own eggs. According to statistics, the vast majority of older IVF patients have to use donor eggs. UBers all claim to use their own eggs, but that's highly unlikely.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:19 PM Flagnp I'm 41 and pregnant (first try) with no fertility help. Find it hard to believe that most 41 yos have only "bad" eggs.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:27 PM FlagNP: not true, depends on the cause of infertility, FSH/ovarian reserve, etc. Check the CDC stats.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:27 PM FlagYes, I know - here are those stats that show PG with own eggs and donor eggs - look at the drop after age 41: http://www.advancedfertility.com/age.htm
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:31 PM FlagThat graph seems to indicate roughly 20% per transfer for a 40 year old for all comers- I imagine it is even higher for a favorable cause of infertility.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:37 PM FlagI'm not sure if you can see it because the graph is small, but it drops 3-5% every year after 40. (CDC numbers) OP's SIL is 41 right now.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:40 PM FlagAnother graph from your same site- between 10-20% per transfer at that age. I can't understand how you read that as "impossible." http://www.advancedfertility.com/ivf-age.htm
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:43 PM FlagLive births for age 41 is about 12% on that graph. I said it's "almost impossible." Incidentally, just so it's clear, I don't have any issues wi/IVF or donor eggs. I just think it's weird that so many AMA UB posters claim to have done IVF successfully with their own eggs. What's wrong with admitting you use donor eggs, you know?
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:48 PM FlagAgain, per cycle. So if you can afford to do 10 cycles, like Celine Dion, your odds are pretty good, especially with a favorable diagnosis.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 05:16 PM FlagWait, I'm confused. If your odds are 12% per cycle, then they're 12% per cycle, whether you're on your 1st cycle or your 10th cycle. Doing 10 cycles doesn't somehow improve your odds.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 05:22 PM FlagYou need to study stats. The odds of hitting heads with each toss of the coin are always 50/50, regardless if you are on the first toss or the tenth. However, prior to any tosses, if you ask the odds of hitting heads one time in 10 tosses, they are considerably higher than 50%. Hth and please leave your brother and sil alone.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 05:41 PM Flag
^^^^ and if all of them cost a lot, then when will be reasonable for SIL/Brother to stop taking their money and using it for themselves. How many will they try until they stop? I'm sorry but i would feel terrible doing this to my parents. I understand maybe two, but when should they stop trying? Not trying to be mean just generally curious as to when it's smart to give up?
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:44 PM Flag
Wow, you guys are already planning Thanksgiving dinner? I'm impressed.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:21 PM FlagSorry to be naive her, but how much does IVF cost? I cannot imagine that it cost more than $50,000. If the concern is that that will be $50,000 less that your parents will have to live on, that really is there choice. They could have spent the same on travel, or widgets, or whatever. Would your family still be calling a meeting to discuss it. Your parents presumably have social security and this money and may be living just fine. Thing is, when elderly parents get sick and frail, chances are good they will need to institutionalize them or need more money that the amount stated to take care of them.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:38 PM Flagyou suspected it? omg- how terrible! your parents are using their hard-earned money! would you have been equally offended had they offered to pay your kids' tuition? or your brothers kids' tuition? maybe they value grandchildren more than a huge nest egg. 40 K is a drop in the bucket when it comes to long term care. actually-sorry to break it to you- so is 300k if you are talking round the clock nursing care. I guess the best you can hope for is that your selfish self indulgent parents both die of heart attacks. problem solved then? and as an aside- why is it your business if your brother wants to adopt or not!? to each their own!
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 04:50 PM FlagI agree you should not bring it up at the Thanksgiving dinner,it will poison the whole atmosphere.Why not make them a "gift"- pay for a consultation with a GOOD financial advisor, that can discuss and advise them while fully knowing their financial situation-and maybe suggest options-something like a ?reverse mortgage, downsizing to a smaller apartment in a few years etc.Actually, they should ideally discuss with 2-3 different advisors, make sure they get more opinions on what they can do.And it's their money,you can try to help but cannot/should not dictate what they can do with it.Just my 2 cents.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 05:27 PM FlagIf a parent is spending money on things other then food, shelter, etc...the same things parents are expected to provide for their children, then the children should respond back with the same help. BUT if a parent is spending it on gambling, alcohol, or pouring it into one child over looking the others then the other children are not obligated to supplement that cash. This is what I would do. The wealthy sister and you should explain that the recession hit them harder then they let on. And you both have limited resources. neither of you can support both parents. Both parents have to look out for each other. 2) tell them that in order for you to supplement them you HAVE to be able to claim them as a dependent, the money you get off your taxes is 80% of the money you can provide them. 3). This means you get control of their accounts. If they want your money then you need control of the finances, any accountant will tell you this because they have seen this time and again where parents will drain one child to feed the other.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 05:39 PM FlagPlease show some compassion towards your brother and SIL and stay out of this and tell your sister to do the same. I think it is wonderful that your parents have such compassion and understanding when it comes to infertility. My DH and I borrowed money from our parents to do IVF. OP, do you want to call them and ask them if it was "worth it" to help their beautiful twin grandchildren be conceived? FWIW, adoption would be equally expensive as IVF. Would you begrudge your parents helping them adopt a child?
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 06:00 PM FlagIf you have to choose between taking money (food, shelter, education, etc) from your children so you can pay for your parents then you have to choose your children. Also, if you give to your parents and have nothing left for your own retirement will you then expect your children to pony up the supplement? This is selfish. my family is a "pay it forward" type. Each generation is responsible to the next which also means teaching them to be financially savvy people.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 06:16 PM FlagWow - I can't belive everyone on the board has suddenly become so giving and selfless! Anything, apparently, to call someone selfish and bitchy. OP - I totally get your concern. But rather than zeroing in on the IVF issue, it should be a general conversation about your parnets finances, they're plans - and WISHES - for what happens to them in the later years of their lives. I'm certaining planning to have this conversation with my parents and brother. It will be painful and ackward but it needs to be done. They're my parents, I'm going to be involved with what happens to them, it IS my business.
[ Reply | More ]08.11.10, 07:48 PM FlagI agree with this. Have a general conversation about their finances in which all 3 children discuss openly how much they can see themselves supporting the parents as they get older (either financially or visiting a lot to take care of things, etc). You should probably straight up ask your parents how much they have saved and how much they are spending so you can gauge where you'll be a few years from now. You don't want to wind up with a nasty "we're broke" surprise.
[ Reply | More ]08.12.10, 12:43 AM Flag
Its not your business, its not your sister's business. You are a bitch, your sister is a bitch. What your parents do with their money is their business. They could get hit by a bus tomorrow for all you know. Your brother deserves to have children as much as anyone else. Worrying about 10 years from now and bringing it up during a family holiday is rude. Do you know what families are about?
[ Reply | More ]08.12.10, 05:43 AM FlagAnd what would you say if OP said her parents were feeding money to the brother so that he could build a house? Should he just go ahead anyway and drain the parents? It doesn't matter what it goes to, it's the fact that they are spending a lot of money on one child when they have three and can't afford to give money away in the first place. It's not like they're saving him from being destitute. OP earlier said that the parents are already planning to rely on the sister for money and care. This is very unfair to the sibs who aren't currently getting funds from the parents, unless OP and sister open a discussion about it and brother pledges to step up in a big way when the parents need it.
[ Reply | More ]08.12.10, 06:10 AM Flag
It may actually be a blessing in disguise for you and your sister if your brother and his wife "owe" your parents but are otherwise responsible people. You don't just need money to support older parents, you need somebody to check in frequently, do grocery shopping, research treatments, go through insurance bills, etc. It's a lot of heart- and back-breaking work. It would make sense if your brother and his wife could contribute that way... don't assume that they will continue to freeload. I am in a very similar situation (3 grown up kids, one wealthy, one needy, one in the middle.) I expect that I'll be the one who ends up doing the daily gruntwork when our parents require care. I don't expect our needy sib to pull her weight though because she lives far away and her life is always a mess. C'est la vie... I wish for her sake that she could pull it together and be happy.
[ Reply | More ]08.12.10, 08:23 AM Flag
-
[+] Is there anyone out there like me? I have one child and probably need to do IVF for a... 56 replies
- on the ttc board, you should know what IVF is, and when someone is going through something...
- Well, we'd be doing IVF plus PGD. I just am not comfortable with...
- IVF is done in so many countries now, btw....reasons, we are not considering adoption. As for IVF, the nature of the conception and the amound...the only fertility treatment I ever tried was IVF and got pg first time. Much less stressful...
Talk : : November 23, 2005
Is there anyone out there like me? I have one child and probably need to do IVF for another, and after two years of doing IUIs (with miscarriages) I just don't want to do IVF. But I don't know anyone else with fertility issues who has backed off from IVF. I'm wondering if anyone else feels this way about IVF.
56 replies [ Reply | Watch | More-
-
-
wtf? Why so hostile. I was just trying to understand the poster.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 08:58 AM FlagIf you're on the ttc board, you should know what IVF is, and when someone is going through something like this, they don't want to answer elementary questions.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:05 AM FlagJust because you are on the TTC board does not mean you automatically know what IVF is. Some people here are not at that stage yet. Some people may be foreigners (IVF is not popular all around the world). Don't need to be so exclusive NP btw
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:08 AM Flag-
-
NP: Then don't answer the questions and just ignore them. We all had to learn at some point or did you just wake up knowing everything. What's elementary to one person is not to another. Your questions might be elementary to me, but I don't tell yo not to post
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 10:37 AM Flag
-
Do you not want to go through the process? Is that what it is? If so, I am in the same boat. We are either adopting or going the only child route.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 08:59 AM FlagI answered below that there are health risk issues, but to be honest, I don't want to go through the process either. But if we only did one cycle we're only talking about 4-6 weeks. But I don't like the process.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:07 AM FlagIf you are not comfortable about it, you don't NEED to do it. I mean first, an only child is totally fine. Second you can always adopt. For me (and probably for you) it's weighing the idea of going through the process vs other options. We decided to tak other options and are happy about it. Nobody HAS to have biological children. It's not an obligation, it's a choice. We already have one and are very very happy about it.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:11 AM Flag
have done iui's and don't get a good enough response to do ivf - I would love to be able to. I think you get to know so much more about the quality of the embryos etc that you have more info to deal with and a better chance at success. I've taken the s drug protocol as ivf and that hasn't been a problem. What exactly is it that turns you off?
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:00 AM FlagWell, we'd be doing IVF plus PGD. I just am not comfortable with the nature of the procedures and possible health risks.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:05 AM FlagI think we've chatted before. Maybe you can talk to a counselor or doc at your clinic, and have them really go over exactly what is different with IVF vs what you've done with IUI - I don't see it as a huge difference (but again, I was on IVF protocol had to do IUI.) PGD will really pinpoint any potential problems with the embryos, so it eliminates the risk of more chromosonal m/cs, which I think is a real plus. But I always wonder about the effect of all of these hormones, and I will probably be stopping myself for that reason (and because the chances for success are so low) so I do get that. And, we're starting adoption process, w hich if you are considering, is really slow, so I would say get it going if you're even thinking about it. Good luck.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:11 AM FlagThank you for posting. For a host of reasons, we are not considering adoption. As for IVF, the nature of the conception and the amound of drugs and lab involvement is, to me, quite different from IVF. With my IUIs I only did injectables once, and only a mini-dose. Yes, we've chatted before. Obviously, I'm having a hard time coming to terms with this! I've read studies about the risks of IVF and issues with PGD. Those are minority opinions, though. The doctors aren't helpful b/c from a medical point of view, we need PGD.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:19 AM Flag
I'm in the same boat, but I think ultimately will try IVF. I'm on the schedule for early next year. We may not go through with it, but right now it feels good to know that we have the option. For the first time I've considered possibly adopting. We have a ds and I'm now thinking about looking into adopting a baby girl from China. I know the process can be long and arduous, so I may get started now. It's really hard to change your vision of what your "complete" family should look like. Good luck in your decision.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:14 AM FlagUp till now, I felt I couldn't deal with not haing more than one child, but my views are changing, esp as #1 gets older and needs me more. I was eager to do PGD in September and then I backed off at the last minute and did an IUI (and had a chemical pregnancy). At this point, I'm preoccupied with convincing myself that having one child is great...
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:21 AM FlagIt is great. I am an only but have a great relationship with my parents and have many many friends. Never felt lonely. Have always been happy
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:22 AM FlagThank you for posting that. I have been worried that having an only is great now, but as time goes on, I'll miss having a bigger family or dc will be lonely, etc.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:22 AM FlagI think it really depends on the way you bring your child up. My parents made sure I never felt lonley. They also taught me the importance of being independent which serves me very well. They also stressed the importance of friendship and trust, which have also helped me tremendously. Not all families with siblings are happy. At the end of the day I believe it's really up to the parents how the make their child percieve the world.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:27 AM Flag
I keep trying to convince myself that one child is enough, as well. He's 3 and not a baby anymore which in many ways is such a relief. He does so much for himself and is so talkative and loving. I can't imagine anyone giving me more joy. I also thin about how nice it would be to be able to start traveling again. We'd love to take him to Africa, for example, when he gets a bit older. But having another child would put all of that on hold. Adoption is complicated, especially where there is already a biological child in the family. I have two adopted siblings, and I think it's really hard on them, even in the best of circumstances. I always said I would never adopt, and here I am thinking about it. I hope everything works out for you.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:27 AM Flag
Yep. I have one, have had two miscarriages and am 40. We are going to continue to try without intervention, but I will not do IVF. Just don't want to put myself through the emotional and physical demands. It is very hard to give up the dream of two c ildren, but time and some therapy is helping a bit.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 09:40 AM FlagThanks. I think this is what we will do. I also could use some therapy. Meanwhile, my 3 yo is driving me batty these days....
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 11:03 AM FlagOR: The therapy helped. Only a couple of sessions. Among others things, I had been feeling (unrealistically) like having a second child would give me a chance to do some of things over that had been difficult in my pregnancy and when my son was a newbo rn. (Had stressful pregnancy, c-section and difficulty bf'ing at first). Therapy helped me deal with that stuff on its own and separate out my desire for another child. I still got sad this month when I wasn't pregnant, but it was little easier.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 01:50 PM FlagHere I am, still reading and watching this post. I have issues like that too-- things I want to differently. I'm getting my period now and kind of relieved in a way, so I don't know what's going through my head anymore.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 01:52 PM FlagOR: Yeah. I'm still here too. I went back to an old therapist who had last seen 5 years ago. Three sessions really helped me. I have a two year old son, and I felt like I was getting so depressed that it wasn't fair to the family I have now. It' ard stuff. None of my friends or family know about the miscarriages and it was just getting hard to pretend everything was fine.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 02:13 PM FlagI hear you. Mine is 3 years old now. I have *everything* saved and am kind of in a shocked state that it's not going to get used But now the idea of another baby scares me. Only a couple of people know about my miscarriages. The other day a friend asked when I was having another, so I just blurted out that we're not, and she seemed so shocked, like this was such an aberration... I keep venting here on UB so I really should go get some professional advice! On the other hand, it's really helpful to share thoughts with posters like you... thank you for posting.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 03:51 PM Flag-
I have one DC (from IVF). have been TTC#2 on our own. didn't want to have to do IVF again b/c of the emotional toll it takes. after 2 m/c and 6 months ttc, we went back to IVF and I am now pg.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 10:35 AM Flagi felt this way about ivf too. couldn't make the jump in my mind from iui to ivf. but after 3 unsuccessful iuis - i figured i was taking the drugs anyway - why not give myself better chance of success. its a tough transition to make - good luck whatever you decide
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 11:11 AM FlagI completely respect your decision to not do IVF. But the only fertility treatment I ever tried was IVF and got pg first time. Much less stressful and harmful than two years of IUIs with stims.
[ Reply | More ]11.23.05, 11:27 AM Flag
-
[+] Do you think there is any difference at all between "assisted" kids (IVF, etc) and "n... 55 replies
- why does everyone assume only older women do IVF????????...
- a friend who got lucky first time with ivf and 2yrs later wanted to do it again...
- ita on this.. my twins were not ivf and my ob said that (non-scientifically, just what...she found more m/c and complications with ivf twins.....
- this is completely ignorant. I need to do ivf because of tubal injuries--actually the most common indication...
Talk : : October 01, 2006
Do you think there is any difference at all between "assisted" kids (IVF, etc) and "natural" kids? Like when they grow up, will there be any difference in their health or longevity or ANYthing?
55 replies [ Reply | Watch | More-
my mom thinks they will have lots of health problems in old age
[ Reply | More ]10.01.06, 11:17 AM Flag-
I don't think anyone knows the anwer to that at this point. It would be within reason that the answer would be yes for IVF especially
[ Reply | More ]10.01.06, 11:18 AM Flag-
It just seems that starting development outside of the womb and in some cases being frozen and thawed could have some affects on the fetus
[ Reply | More ]10.01.06, 11:20 AM FlagI think when you are talking about a 3 day old embryo, its an all or nothing kind of thing -- either something affects the embryo enough to cause it to not be viable, or it doesn't and the development goes on as it should. (m) An IVF embryo is typically around 8 cells when its it returned to the uterus -- those are undifferntiated cells that go on to form the entire rest of the body. It seems to me that any defect caused by the process of conception (or freezing and unfreezing for that matter) would be so pervasive that it would doom the embryo to failure. I'm not a scientist, just trying to think things through logically
[ Reply | More ]10.01.06, 11:35 AM Flag
-
-
-
I admit I wonder that sometimes; maybe not once born but wonder if the pregnancy complications are higher - i'm pg w/twins w/out IVF and have been told so many scary stories about the pregnancy but they've all been IVF experiences
[ Reply | More ]10.01.06, 11:19 AM Flag-
-
there is a slightly raised chance of certain rare birth defects (becksmith-wiedemann syndrome, others I can't remember), but these are usu found close to birth. So i think chances that some weird problems will emerge down the line are small. Have 3 ama g perfect ivf children myself.
[ Reply | More ]10.01.06, 12:51 PM Flag
[+] Have had 2 m/c's and a couple unsuccessful IUIs. I'm considering moving to IVF, but ... 29 replies
- over the emotional hump of the "science" of IVF...
- OP: thanks for replying. are you doing IVF? has your concern lessened?...
- naturally? What were the m/c from? Can IVF solve that? Thx...
- an embarassment of riches. Perhaps you should do IVF once and I think you'll quickly learn...is careful about pushing decisions, but she thinks IVF will give us our best chances. 30% vs...
Talk : : November 28, 2006
Have had 2 m/c's and a couple unsuccessful IUIs. I'm considering moving to IVF, but am uncomfortable with the idea of the embryo's being in a test tube for the first three days after conception. Does anyone else struggle with this?? I'd like to get to a good place with all of this because IVF gives us our best chances ... help!
29 replies [ Reply | Watch | MoreI don't get what makes you uncomfortable, really. I know it is "weird" but I had no problem with this.
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 03:53 PM FlagOP: thanks for your answer. I really want to have no problem but wonder if there is something happening on a microscopic level. an embryo in her mother's belly vs. a test tube ... for some crazy reason that is the only part that makes me nervous.
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 03:56 PM Flag
Well they are really in a petri dish not a test tube until they grow to 8 cells. I did ivf 2x and it was actually a great experience. Learned a lot about myself and my body and felt much more in control over conception. Had a wonderful drs and nurses a nd placed myself completely into their hands so I also learned some new things about trust. Go for ivf and get that baby!
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 03:54 PM Flag-
I felt that way too. Am undergoing IVF now as well. Was a hard hurdle but there are lots of IVF babies in the world now and they are jsut as normal as other babies. I had to get over it. I look at IVF as a blessing - that we can even afford to do it, and that both me and my DH agree on it. Some people arent so lucky. IVF is a solution in itself and we are lucky we live in this age when it can even be done! GL to you.
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 04:07 PM FlagOP: thanks for your reply and good advice. all that you say is true. have you gotten past this concern? or does it sill bother you? (3 days in petri dish) I think that I will get there too. I feel like it's the choice I'm leaning towards but am just concerned about this tiny part.
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 04:14 PM Flageach step in the process takes a while. i didnt decide on IVF til 2 days before i started stim cycle. i was vascillating until that point because of the same things. however, we have a lot of friends (i'm 33 and they were older friends) who have done it nd their kids are fine! some babies they even remove a cell for the chromosomal testing and THEY are fine. but i also fear the FDA thinks they know stuff is safe then whoops they find out 20 years later it isnt. I basically had to hold my nose and go under the water so to speak, have faith that this is the one thing that IS okay long term. After all Louise Brown is now in her 20s and is fine and she was "made" under cruder circumstances than today since the tech was so new! does this help?
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 05:44 PM Flag-
Thanks for your post. It does help. I feel like my decision has been "made" in the way we really don't have a choice if we want to get pg soon. I don't have a lot of time. But I wish I could feel more comfortable. Maybe the first cycle will hel get past it. I also have friends with beautiful IVF babies. They say they don't even think about how they got pg anymore... they just love their kid. :)
[ Reply | More ]11.29.06, 10:33 AM Flag
-
I think there are a lot of reasons why IVF may not be somone's first choice. But if having a baby with your husband is important to you, and this is your best chance, I would go with that priority first.
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 04:15 PM FlagHi, What does your RE suggest? How can IVF be better for you since you can get PG naturally? What were the m/c from? Can IVF solve that? Thx
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 05:46 PM FlagOP: My RE is careful about pushing decisions, but she thinks IVF will give us our best chances. 30% vs. 15% (IUI). My 41st bday is in january and odds drop significantly. I think this is pushing me a little in the IVF direction. My RE thinks the m/c are due to "bad eggs" due to age. I'm about 75% ready to just go for our best chances and do the IVF, but motherly instinct doesn't like the petri dish. You can't have everything, I know. And we'll be fortunate if we get a baby too. It's just scary for me. This one little part is all.
[ Reply | More ]11.29.06, 10:30 AM Flag
Do co-culture (at Cornell) the embryos aren't in a 'test tube', they're in a petri dish, but they grow them in your endometrial cells and blood (a biopsy is taken from you prior to IVF). This more closely matches the mother's uterus. I'm sure you'l he best choice for you. If the DNA were 'different' the eggs probably wouldn't grow. They have to be super strong to get through removal, 3 days in a dish, and return. Not for the fragile, weak embryos! Only the mighty survive this!
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 07:11 PM FlagI can deal with that one.. but have you pondered much those embryos that won't be implanted and what to do with them? again i'd be fine wiht them being in a feezer for a while, but would then be inclined to give each and ever one a chance, adn adoption, stem cell research, etc jsut wouldn't cut it, i'd want to implant one nad all.. so if i had great sucess, i'd be in a real moral delima
[ Reply | More ]11.28.06, 09:49 PM FlagEach question you pose is really about an embarassment of riches. Perhaps you should do IVF once and I think you'll quickly learn most people who aren't getting preg naturally don't have high enough egg quality to freeze ... Actualy, don't do IVF. Kee ying IUI, and maybe you will have success that way without all of these nagging questions. It sounds like you're looking for reasons to not do IVF. So don't do it. -- There is a group called snowflake that puts their 'leftover' embryos up for adoption. I saw a piece on 60 Minutes and it was pretty remarkable. I couldn't do it - then again, I've never had the luxury of freezing anything.
[ Reply | More ]11.29.06, 09:43 AM FlagI think you're worrying about something that's really unlikely to happen. First, they only freeze the highest quality eggs, then thawing them often doesn't work. So if you were lucky enough to freeze 3, it's very unlikely that 3 would even thaw well e h to be transferred AND then also implant. You might want to do your reading on this topic because you seem to fear this aspect of it which probably only applies to 1 in every 100 cases.
[ Reply | More ]11.29.06, 09:46 AM Flag
[+] on now buried post about abnormalities in children born with the help of ivf. there ... 47 replies
- said "there is absolutely no scientific evidence that ivf increases risks of abnormalities in babies")...
- original point. there is actual scientific evidence that ivf conceived babies have a slightly higher risk of...difference in the risk of abnormalities arising from IVF conception compared to non-IVF conception. measurement of statistically...ought to do is evaluate the differences between IVF and non-IVF conceptions among couples who themselves have...
Talk : : June 04, 2009
on now buried post about abnormalities in children born with the help of ivf. there is absolutely scientific evidence of abnormalities. i'll post some links below
47 replies [ Reply | Watch | More06.04.09, 12:19 PM Flag ]http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1678-ivf-technique-may-increase-birth-abnormalities.html
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:19 PM Flaghttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18413060
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:20 PM Flaghttp://www.reproductivemedicine.com/toc/auto_abstract.php?id=12054
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:21 PM Flaghttp://www.advancedfertility.com/icsirisks.htm
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:22 PM FlagThis doesn't dicuss any risks to the child, I don't see your point.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:30 PM Flagmy point is that someone posted earlier that there was no evidence of abnormalities in ivf conceived babies. these four studies are a few among many that indicate that thisis not the case
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:32 PM FlagOops, I posted this under the wrong link- what does the abstract (3rd link) have to do with abnormalties.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:34 PM Flagop-it doesnt. i slapped it up there quickly. i googled ivf and abnormalities and started copying and pasting. i jsut didnt like that someone had with very little work, and with absolute certainty, asserted a falsehood as truth. it got in my craw.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:38 PM Flagvery little work? I had IVF. I talked to two prominent doctors about it. (for the record they did mentions risk with ICSI.) I did reasearch for months. You google IVF and abnormalties and you're the expert?
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:42 PM FlagSo you get genetic testing - most of us who had IVF have an amnio or CVS - so no problems there. You can get all of those things without icsi you know. Do you? May is the key word in all of this. Don't worry about all of us having ivf and our kids. Worry about your own problems.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:43 PM Flag
Those are interesting points. If the reasons for the woman's or the man's infertility is genetic it will be passed on to the child with sometimes amplified consequences. I wonder if this is being addressed in the first consultation with an RE.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:24 PM Flagi dont know. i was just scrolling through earlier posts today when i logged on and was frustrated that (as usual) ub moms are posting falsehoods as truth without any evidence. (i.e. the mom who said "there is absolutely no scientific evidence that ivf increases risks of abnormalities in babies")
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:25 PM FlagYou obviously aren't well versed in IVF speak. ICSI is a separate procedure that is still so new that the risks associated with it aren't clear. All your links are about that with the exception of the one of the abstract that doesn't realte to your point. Not everyone who has IVF has ICSI- it is additive. So learn more about the facts before you post. IVF itself, which is fertilization of an egg and sperm and growth of an embryo in medium prior to transfer to a mother's utereus, does not result in increased abnormalties.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:33 PM FlagI don't think you understand the problem. If the fertility issues in the man or the woman are caused genetically your child will end up with the same problem(s). Sometimes there are very good reasons why a human being is infertile.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:38 PM FlagSo if a man or woman were infertile for NON-genetic reasons, would it be acceptable to your wise and all-knowing self for them to attempt IVF?
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:45 PM FlagThere are so many babies out there that need a family. I prefer adoption over IVF.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:47 PM Flaggood you adopt. I wanted my own child - anything wrong with that? Not so easy to adopt a baby nor cheap
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:53 PM FlagIVF is not much cheaper than adoption. And sure, let the homeless babies rot to death.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:57 PM FlagIt's not the job of people struggling with infertility to adopt the the family-less children of the world. Fertile people who spew all kinds of nonsense yet no nothing about the process of adoption nor have gone through or even thought about going through it should shut the hell up.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 03:10 PM Flag
-
she didn't say it was "solid proof." someone posted that there was no evidence of abnormalities, and she is posting that there is evidence. these studies showed a statistically significant difference in the risk of abnormalities arising from IVF conception compared to non-IVF conception. measurement of statistically significant differences in risk in the tested population is how scientists make their conclusions in scientific studies. the measure is not "solid proof," particularly with respect to relatively new procedures. i do agree with those who say that what they really ought to do is evaluate the differences between IVF and non-IVF conceptions among couples who themselves have the genetic markers for the abnormalities seen with more frequency in IVF babies. then you'd have a better basis to conclude whether IVF poses a greater risk in and of itself.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 03:01 PM Flag
http://www.ivf1.com/ivf-birth-defects/
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:36 PM Flaghttp://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s904186.htm
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:36 PM FlagInfertility is a naturally ocurring phenomenon. With so many children who are parent-less, why fight with nature. All children are miracles, especially those born with a little "help." But it's not surprising that there are issues with these artificial means.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 12:43 PM Flag
[+] IUI w/injectibles vs IVF wondering if anyone has any experience with this. I am 30 y... 16 replies
- covers 6 IUIs total and 3 attempts at IVF so cost is not yet a factor. I...endometriosis, not PCOS, but we resisted going to IVF in favor of several IUI cycles (all failed...
- ^^^should have added that IVF is more controlled at all stages so generally...ready for the emotional and financial commitment of IVF, and my RE thinks I can pregnant without...
- IVF more $$ but usually takes fewer tries The few...
Talk : : July 21, 2004
IUI w/injectibles vs IVF wondering if anyone has any experience with this. I am 30 y/o and TTC #1. I have PCOS and have been using increasing doses of clomid for 3 cycles with IUI and no luck yet. my RE wants me to move on to IVF b/c he thinks I have a greater chance of higher order multiples with injections and IUI. (because they have more control over how many embryos to put in....) does this sound legit to you??
16 replies [ Reply | Watch | MoreYep---it's legit. There is a risk of high order multiples with IUI, but you also have to consider cost and physical and emotional toil. For me, an injectable IUI cycle costs $2,000. IVF costs $10,000. (m) You can mitigate risk of multiples with IUI if you are very closely monitored for the number of follicles per cycle. It might be interesting to talk to your RE about the percentages of conceivig high order multiples--is he talking 1% per cycle (in which case it might be worth the risk) or something else? Good luck whatever you decide.
[ Reply | More ]07.21.04, 05:35 PM FlagRe: Yep---it's legit. There is a risk of high order multiples with IUI, but you also have to consider cost and physical and emotional toil. For me, an injectable IUI cycle costs $2,000. IVF costs $10,000. (m) thanks for your reply.... I am very fortunate that my insurance covers 6 IUIs total and 3 attempts at IVF so cost is not yet a factor. I am very nervous of course about the emotional toll but I have been on this roller coaster for a while!
[ Reply | More ]07.21.04, 05:59 PM FlagIVF more $$ but usually takes fewer tries The few IUI's I tried weren't much cheaper than the one IVF I did (4 IUI's at $2,000 each vs. one IVF at $10,000, half of which was reimbursed by insurance, FYI). Maybe I would've gotten pg if I tried another IUI as well, but my guess is I saved some time by moving on to IVF.
[ Reply | More ]07.23.04, 06:06 PM Flag
I have PCOS and came very close to having my first injectible/IUI cycle cancelled because I had too many follies. The second time I did it I had to down reg on the pill for 6 weeks and then it took almost four weeks on stims (we used a very low dose) m to get the eggs big enough to do the IUI. It took way too long for me and I went on to IVF. Talk to your RE about how long the cycle would take and if they need to have you on either the pill or lupron prior to starting. Then decide if you want to spend the time (and run the risk of multiples).
[ Reply | More ]07.21.04, 08:03 PM Flaghad endometriosis, not PCOS, but we resisted going to IVF in favor of several IUI cycles (all failed). finally went to IVF and got pg first try. good luck with whatever you decide.
[ Reply | More ]07.21.04, 08:26 PM FlagI was originally also told to move straight to IVF. After seeking out a 2nd and 3rd opinion I switched REs and just finished an injectable cycle. I stimulated very quickly, but didn't overstimulate. When they did the IUI I had 2 mature follicles and (m) several lagging. I don't feel ready for the emotional and financial commitment of IVF, and my RE thinks I can pregnant without it (and without higher order multiples). I think if the clinic is very careful and you trust your doctor it's doable. But it's also a personal decision. I get one crack of IVF with insurance but have much more leeway with IUI. I don't think I'm ready to reach the end of my journey just yet if IVF were to fail. I've also miscarried, and I think it would be even worse if more were invested. Sorry, this is a bit of a book, and I don't mean to scare you or worry you, but just know that there are lots of ways to approach this.
[ Reply | More ]07.21.04, 08:29 PM Flagmy Re was hesistant to do an injectable cycle with me beause I have PCOS and would be prone to hyperstimulation- our compromise was Clomid followed by injectable and I am now pregnant with twins.
[ Reply | More ]07.21.04, 11:33 PM FlagI have PCOS and have been doing injectables on a very low dose and am certainly not hyperstimulating. I'm responding very slowly, and my RE is pleased. I too am 30 and did 3 failed rounds of clomid. This is my second injectable cycle. I have pushed my (m RE on the question of whether and when to move on to IVF and he has said that because of my relatively young age and because I am "a good responder" to the drugs, he would rather get me preg on IUI than IVF. IVF not only costs more but has risks, both short term and long -- some of which they don't even know about yet -- and while he has lots of IVF patients, he prefers not to move patients into it if it's not necessary. Which makes sense to me.
[ Reply | More ]07.22.04, 09:17 AM FlagInteresting, I have PCOS,, am 30, did not respond to Clomid and did 2 cylces of Injectables/IUI (m) I was on very low dose. I responded well, but because of the fear of hyperstimulation, they only got me up to the point where I had 1 lead follicle. My RE felt it was best to move onto IVF because there was so much more control.
[ Reply | More ]07.22.04, 10:37 AM Flag
I've also heard that about the injectibles and IUI. From what I understand, you can choose to only implant 2 embryos and thus ensure you only have twins at the most!! That is not the case with inj. meds where you can have 10 follicles and many can (m)
[ Reply | More ]07.22.04, 12:01 PM FlagRe: IUI w/injectibles vs IVF thanks for ALL of your infinite wisdom. I am glad to hear other people have been in the same situation and it's not "unheard of" to go right to IVF from Clomid. I really want to totally trust my RE and I really like him but it's difficult to know sometimes. I am still seeking out a second opinion on monday just to be 100% sure. thanks and good luck to everyone!!!
[ Reply | More ]07.22.04, 04:52 PM Flag
[+] For all the lesbian moms - did you get pregnant via IUI or IVF? and if IVF, how many ... 39 replies
- women that do IUI and IVF do so because of infertility....
- Re: lots of women do IUI, IVF, not just lesbians. Unless you only wish to...covers three attempts, whether they are iui or ivf, so while i would love to just stick...iui when i could have them cover the ivf and the success rate is significantly greater....
- i disagree, iui is not invasive, whereas ivf requires surgery to retrieve the eggs. it's...
Talk : : April 27, 2005
For all the lesbian moms - did you get pregnant via IUI or IVF? and if IVF, how many IUI's did you try before switching to IVF? Dealing with this now and am curious as to what others did in same situation. TIA.
39 replies [ Reply | Watch | More04.27.05, 08:50 AM Flag ]-
-
lots of women do IUI, IVF, not just lesbians. Unless you only wish to have replies from lesbian mothers.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 08:53 AM Flag-
or: thank you that was what I was trying to convey. Was trying to get the link to being lesbian from OP.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 08:55 AM FlagYour welcome. My sister and her partner used IUI. Took my sister 2 times and her partner 3 times. (Took me 2 times but I am hetro!)
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 08:57 AM FlagRe: or: thank you that was what I was trying to convey. Was trying to get the link to being lesbian from OP. I would think that lesbians have unique issues - while there may be an infertility issue, they were probably not trying to conceive "naturally" for any period of time before turning to an RE.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:01 AM Flag
Re: lots of women do IUI, IVF, not just lesbians. Unless you only wish to have replies from lesbian mothers. No, I would love responses from everyone but I think the lesbian situation would tend to be more unique since we are actually paying for the sperm so the decision to switch to something with a higher success rate would be a bit sooner.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 08:54 AM Flagthat was CLEARLY her intention. go be cranky on another thread.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 08:54 AM Flag
-
Stats will be different for lesbian moms because they don't use these methods because of infertility
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 08:53 AM Flag
-
I would imagine if there is no infertility in your situation an IUI would work for you, it may take time but there would be no reason to move on to ivf.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 08:52 AM FlagRe: I would imagine if there is no infertility in your situation an IUI would work for you, it may take time but there would be no reason to move on to ivf. I would love to keep trying IUI's until it works but my insurance only covers three attempts (whether they be IUI or IVF) and since IVF's are much more expensive, I feel I should just switch to IVF after 2 failed IUI's.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 08:56 AM Flag
Not a lesbian, but conceived #1 after about 10 IUI cycles -- the last two medicated (Follistim). Now TTC #2 and will go to IVF after 4 medicated IUI cycles bc I'm not producing many eggs. Doc told me that using frozen sperm (my DH is infertile) reduces your chance considerably. It's just not as perky.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:02 AM FlagHi. I'm a lesbian (sorta feel like I'm at an AA mtg.) and I got pregnant w/ my third IUI. I also had ovulation problems, but I responded to clomid quickly. My doctor said not to try IVF unless we had tried IUI 6 times. We used frozen donor sperm. W now have a beautiful dd. Best of luck to you.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:26 AM FlagRe: Hi. I'm a lesbian (sorta feel like I'm at an AA mtg.) and I got pregnant w/ my third IUI. I also had ovulation problems, but I responded to clomid quickly. My doctor said not to try IVF unless we had tried IUI 6 times. We used frozen donor sperm When you say you responded to clomid quickly, what exactly do you mean? with my first round i had three large follicles (23,22, 21) and it didn't work and now i'm trying again this saturday but only have two. did you have many more than that?
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:58 AM FlagI just meant that I ovulated! I had one follicule the first time, two the second, and one follicule the third time. I have PCOs and normally don't ovulate. I took 50mg (is that the unit?) each time and was able to ovulate so I was excited. My fertilit doctor said that have two only increased my chances of having twins by 6-8%. I was 34 at time of IUI. How old are you? Best of luck. That waiting is absolutely horrible.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 10:01 AM FlagRe: I just meant that I ovulated! I had one follicule the first time, two the second, and one follicule the third time. I have PCOs and normally don't ovulate. I took 50mg (is that the unit?) each time and was able to ovulate so I was excited. My fert Tell me about it...just this past time I convinced myself I was/was not pregnant on an hourly basis. I've never been violently angry about getting my period before. I'm 30, so not quite so desperate yet but feel like I'm getting there...Congrats on your dd!!
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 10:09 AM FlagI was convinced it wouldn't happen. When we tested on the third IUI, I had absolutely no symptoms. My partner said "we're testing b/c you never know". I peed on the stick and left in the bathroom. She stood over it and screamed about 1 minute later took me until about 18wks before I really started to accept the joy of being pregnant. Best of luck you and your partner!
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 10:13 AM Flag
-
Re: ^^PS I would also stick with IUI (less cost, drugs ect) Are you covered by insurance? that is the issue - insurance covers three attempts, whether they are iui or ivf, so while i would love to just stick to iui's (especially since i went through the usual battery of tests and everything looks fine), i feel i shouldn't waste an attempt on an iui when i could have them cover the ivf and the success rate is significantly greater.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:04 AM FlagI would try an IUI before moving to IVF. PS If you have to pay out of pocket for IUI it is not that $$$
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:08 AM FlagRe: I would try an IUI before moving to IVF. PS If you have to pay out of pocket for IUI it is not that $$$ The IUI itself is only $450 but the monitoring will kick it up to several thousand each attempt. For a 15% success rate per try, it doesn't seem worth it.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:11 AM Flagi disagree, iui is not invasive, whereas ivf requires surgery to retrieve the eggs. it's worth a few tries for a much lower cost & less invasive than ivf.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:16 AM FlagWhat do you disagree with? Her insurance will only cover 3 attempts of IVF or IUI. She may get more bang for her buck with IVF.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:20 AM Flagi'm saying it's worth paying out of pocket for a few attempts at iui & then have insurance pay for the ivf if it comes to that. it's better to have the ivf covered vs. the iui. iui will be maybe a couple thousand & ivf can be as much as 20-30k dependin where.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 09:24 AM Flag
[+] RE says there's nothign wrong with me or DH. Siad becasue we were TTC for ove a year ... 23 replies
- i would go directly to IVF, dont wast the $ or time...
- Also, our insurance covered the IUI, but not IVF, so that was a big factor. Good luck...
- go straight to IVF hopefully you will get preg. w/twins and...three of them adds up to an IVF cycle...
- infertility. Did 7 IUIs with various drugs. 1st IVF attempt failed with zero fertilization - did a...
Talk : : October 06, 2006
RE says there's nothign wrong with me or DH. Siad becasue we were TTC for ove a year my tubes may not be picking up egg. had hsg and tubes were all clear. anyone else get this diagnosis? he reco'd IVF but i am 34 and feel we should give it a few more mo with IUI and meds.
23 replies [ Reply | Watch | More-
Re: RE says there's nothign wrong with me or DH. Siad becasue we were TTC for ove a year my tubes may not be picking up egg. had hsg and tubes were all clear. anyone else get this diagnosis? he reco'd IVF but i am 34 and feel we should give it a few mor We had a diagnosis of "unexplained" infertility. Got pregnant on second cycle of clomid and IUI. I was 33 when I got pregnant.
[ Reply | More ]10.06.06, 09:17 AM Flagthank you. I am glad to hear IUI and clomid helped you! we chose to go this route for 3 tries with RE before going IVF. did IUI with no drugs with OBGYN but they were ridiculously mis-timed so were useless
[ Reply | More ]10.06.06, 09:18 AM FlagTry to push for the IUI with the clomid, it just increases the chances of "hitting" an egg. Also, our insurance covered the IUI, but not IVF, so that was a big factor. Good luck
[ Reply | More ]10.06.06, 09:22 AM Flag
yes - same thing with me. We did a strict (Kruger) test of the DH sperm after the first test came back excellent - the strict test found the problem - sperm were not in great shape. We had 3 IVFs to get our baby...
[ Reply | More ]10.06.06, 09:33 AM FlagI went to the RE at age 32 and was diagnosed with unexplained infertility. Did 7 IUIs with various drugs. 1st IVF attempt failed with zero fertilization - did a culture of dh's semen and learned he had an infection. I highly recommend sending your dh to a urologist for further testing just to be on the safe side. As far as IVF vs. IUI - if insurance will cover some IUI tries, it's more worth doing - but IVF isn't so scary. I'm now 23 weeks pregnant from 2nd IVF attempt.
[ Reply | More ]10.06.06, 10:22 AM FlagI recommend doing ICSI all because I have seen the same thing happen OVER and over again. My DH was told her had a perfect count - excellent in fact. The strict Kruger test indicated a problem and when we gave him 2 eggs to fertilize without ICSI - we got ZERO fertilization. Please - ICSI everything and you will have higher fertilization. It costs a bit more but less than a failed cycle! Good luck. I wish every woman knew about this.
[ Reply | More ]10.06.06, 10:38 AM Flag
[+] OK, IUI or straight to IVF? Dr said I could do either one. IUI less invasive, but IVF... 44 replies
- location please. never heard of anyone starting with ivf...
- they say they have better control during and IVF cycle, better odds....
- Even though IVF is so much more invasive/major?...
- injectibles, but i was not a candidate for ivf due to poor response to the meds (not...
- ivf seems more invasive, but really its the medications...
Talk : : October 02, 2007
OK, IUI or straight to IVF? Dr said I could do either one. IUI less invasive, but IVF better chance of getting pg. We're thinking of one month of IUI and then on to IVF. What do you think?
44 replies [ Reply | Watch | More-
-
-
41 (just). DH had med sperm issues and they can't find anything else with me so far except for 1 high FSH among low ones.
[ Reply | More ]10.02.07, 12:47 PM Flag-
medium, meaning that his numbers weren't awful, just not perfect.
[ Reply | More ]10.02.07, 12:48 PM Flagor: i was 40 when i conceived via medicated injectibles, but i was not a candidate for ivf due to poor response to the meds (not enough eggs produced). at your age, go straight to ivf if you can. and add acupuncture and traditional chinese medicine to you your efforts. if you are nyc, i can give you a referral to the guy who worked with us. let me know. gl!
[ Reply | More ]10.02.07, 12:50 PM Flag-
np: really? i'm thinking about this for myself. when should i start and how often do you recommend? starting 3rd cycle of ivf (frozen).
[ Reply | More ]10.02.07, 12:54 PM Flagor: absolutely. start now - ideally it needs about 2 months to really have the best impact. are you nyc?
[ Reply | More ]10.02.07, 12:55 PM Flag-
The studies show that accupuncture is most effective during the week of retrieval & transfer. I started mine the 1st week of my IVF cycle to make sure I felt comfortable with the accupuncturist & needles. HIGHLY recommend. I know a # of people who didn't do it their 1st cycle, then tried on next cycle and got pg....
[ Reply | More ]10.02.07, 12:57 PM Flag
-
-
-
Both processes are VERY emotionally taxing, so I'd skip IUI and go straight to IVF. We did, and got pg on 1st try. I'd do the same thing next time, too....
[ Reply | More ]10.02.07, 12:47 PM FlagOP: We were going to try injectibles/IUI for one month and then if it didn't work do IVF, but then part of me just feels we should do IVF from the start. I'm more concerned about the effects on the baby from IVF though.
[ Reply | More ]10.02.07, 12:50 PM Flag
-
[+] sorry to be dense, but why the huge tension between the adoptive and the IVF moms? c... 63 replies
- Is somone actually judging IVF moms? Should send my triplets over there to...earlier post where a skirmish broke out between IVF and adoptive mom. and I have seen that...luckily I did not have to go through IVF, but never thought anything neg about it???...
- IVF can get the egg to the sperm and...a naturally conceived child, adopted child and an ivf child. judge me....
Talk : : January 25, 2008
sorry to be dense, but why the huge tension between the adoptive and the IVF moms? can't we just appreciate that they are different choices, neither better or worse than the other?
63 replies [ Reply | Watch | MoreI adopted but it is my business, and what others do is their business. I do feel that IVF is kind of immoral, which I will say here on an anonymous board, but would not say to a friend.
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:44 AM Flag-
why does having a different opinion than yours make me a bitch? why should I have a discourse with someone who calls me names?
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:46 AM Flagyou are calling what my best friend is doing "immoral", so yeah, you are a bitch.
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:47 AM Flagokay, whatever but I have nothing further to say to you, if you're not mature enough to have a respectful discussion.
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:48 AM Flag
I posted above (IVF mom here) and I don't think it is any secret that some people out there feel it is immoral. Why do you even care so much what she thinks? No need to call names.
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:46 AM Flagor: I simply asked why, didn't call anyone names. I am going through ivf right now and am curious as to why someone would think it is immoral. I consider myself to be a moral, intelligent woman. Often decisions are based on principle and morals...I want to know why she thinks it's immoral.
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:48 AM Flag
here is the thing. for moms who can't get pg, don't you ever feel that maybe the universe is trying to tell you something? and that it is saying there might be a different plan for you that would involve reaching out to another human?
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:45 AM Flagoh please, you could say the same thing about someone who gets cancer, should we not use the available technology to have longer healthier more rewarding lives.
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:48 AM FlagOK, now this post makes me angry. Infertility is a medical condition. Why should we not treat it, as we do anything else??
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:48 AM Flagit's a little more complicated than a 'medical condition'. and to compare it to cancer is a red herring
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:49 AM Flagi can see how that whole 'universe' argument would make you mad. its stupid. however i feel like women who wait till theyre 40 and then have a dozen ivf treatments are ridic. if it means so much to you adopt
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:52 AM Flag
But like the poster below - How can you say to a women who can't get pg because of endometriosis that that is it! Seems rediculous... It is just tissue blocking everything up... IVF can get the egg to the sperm and you are done. !! It is totally natural to want your own child and these women are perfectly healthy and able to get pregnant bar some blockage...
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:49 AM FlagWhat is this "universe" you speak of? You think it tells you things? Gee, I wonder what it tells people who die of cancer, who starve to death, who die as babies due to horrible painful diseases? Not very nice, this universe of ours, is it?
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:54 AM Flag
I'm an IVF mom but I could get pregnant - but for genetic reasons we had to take the IVF route. Many people who do IVF can still get pregnant - think of all the women with endometriosis that this helps.
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:46 AM FlagI did IVF for my second son due to blocked fallopian tubes - Nothing else is wrong with me... Just the egg and sperm could not get to each other due to a blockage that I was told 'just happens to some people'... They couldn't unblock the tubes so we di IVF and now I have a beautiful DB. Is this immoral? I CERTAINLY don't think it is... And I would fight anyone to the death on it :) Just looking at my DB is just the most wonderful and precious gift... How ever they are conceived.
[ Reply | More ]01.25.08, 06:56 AM Flag
[+] so i always thought i would be willing to try gender selection. but i have to say, i... 28 replies
- IVF is not really risky. But the expense and hassle...
- what IVF kid abnormalities are you talking about? all of the...: there is much speculation that children born of IVF have more issues - whether developmental, health, etc. i...that even those with medical backgrounds who USED IVF speculate about it. Anecdotally, they are seeing things....
Talk : : June 04, 2009
so i always thought i would be willing to try gender selection. but i have to say, i dont think so. if i'm actually lucky enough to get pg the old fashioned way, why mess with it? why take the risk associated with ivf?
28 replies [ Reply | Watch | More06.04.09, 05:59 AM Flag ]-
i have two boys and could have paid for it. (honestly, that's why i thought so hard about it) but when the moment came, i said no. and i have to say, i see all of these ivf kids with abnormalities and i wonder---would i have always wondered? where is the child i was "supposed" to have. why risk it?
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 06:05 AM Flagwhat IVF kid abnormalities are you talking about? all of the IVF kids i know are perfectly fine, and I am aware of many -- i know two children with autism spectrum but neither was IVF -- i'm confused.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 07:13 AM Flagnp: no kidding. my MIL said the same thing about ivf babies - i didn't know people were this misinformed.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 07:39 AM Flagnnp: there is much speculation that children born of IVF have more issues - whether developmental, health, etc. i do think that since many (or most) parents using IVF are also older with fertility issues, there could be other reasons for the issues. my friend (who is a doctor) has twins (via IVF) who are both mildly SN, and she says that everywhere she goes (from conferences to schools, addressing SN kids) the parents tend to be older (as is she) and there is a disproporionate number of children conceived via IVF
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 08:06 AM Flagthis bullshit to even imply that IVF has risks for abnormalties in the babies. Simply not true. Lots of studies have been done.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 08:45 AM FlagI'm not implying that it's true, I'm saying that even those with medical backgrounds who USED IVF speculate about it. Anecdotally, they are seeing things. Whether these things are a result of the procedure, or are a result of WHO the people are who need IVF is obviously not known.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 08:48 AM Flag
You don't have to go the route of IVF. Maybe IUI with timed intercourse where they spin the sperm to sort it by gender. I believe girl sperm is heavier than boy sperm but you'll have to confirm.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 06:04 AM FlagIVF is not really risky. But the expense and hassle just to know the sex? It just seems weird. Save IVF for the infertile, those with hereditary diseases, and Angelina Jolie-
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 07:07 AM Flag-
-
pre-implantation gender selection does. but selective reduction can acheive the same goal.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 07:38 AM FlagOkay, are you saying to terminate a regular pregnancy after a CVS or amnio identifies the sex? Or are you saying put back a bunch of embryos and them do an amnio and hopefully at least one is the sex you want, and you get rid of the others? ANy way you look at it, you're a SICKO!!
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 08:02 AM FlagNP, not sure I agree with your calling the poster a sicko. We all have our own ideas when an embryo is considered life and when not.
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 08:06 AM FlagTO do selective reduction, you'd have to get to at least 11 weeks (maybe longer) to do a CVS to identify the gender. And then what is the wait for results? Who would choose to get pregnant and terminate at the beginning of the second trimester just to choose the sex? How many times would you do this? Where are we- China????
[ Reply | More ]06.04.09, 08:43 AM Flag
-
-
[+] how many cycles of IUI should I do before IVF? I feel like I only hear of success wi... 21 replies
- you have no specific reason to move on to IVF right away (age, tubal factors) i would try IUI...heard to try 2x b/f moving to IVF (at least for unexplained infertility). Since it's...a lot of insurance plans cover IUI without IVF so commonly people exhaust the free options before...ones that said they tried multiple IUIs before IVF and didn't encourage me to go to...statistics work. The percentages are not cumulative (and IVF success rates are not always 50% per cycle)...
Talk : : April 27, 2005
how many cycles of IUI should I do before IVF? I feel like I only hear of success with IVF and rarely, if ever, with IUI. If expense isn't an issue (not that it isn't an issue, but not a huge issue), should I just go on to IVF or do a second IUI?
21 replies [ Reply | Watch | MoreHow old are you? My RE said if it didn't work after three tries, move on to IVF, they add up quickly
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 04:28 PM FlagI'm doing an injectibles IUI after 3 failed Clomids, but depending on the results of the stim. it may turn into an IVF (m) I think if you have no tubal or other factors that necessitate IVF then that might be a logical next step. Clomid definitely wasn't doing anything for me.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 04:37 PM FlagWe did 3 injectable IUI cycles before moving on to IVF (and were successful with our first IVF). Honestly, it took the 3 IUI cycles for me to work up the courage to even be able to consider IVF, but now, I wish we had saved the money and aggravation and moved to IVF sooner.
[ Reply | More ]04.27.05, 05:51 PM Flag-
But, not to be rude at all, but it doesn't seem like IUI worked for any of you, so I'm just curious (and I mean this in an honest non-confrontation way) why everyone would encourage me to continue doing IUI if it doesn't seem to work.
[ Reply | More ]04.28.05, 08:40 AM FlagIt's funny to me that you read everyone's responses as encouraging you to keep doing IUI--the advice looks pretty split to me.
[ Reply | More ]04.28.05, 12:22 PM FlagYour sense of humor must have a very low threshold for what's funny, if you think that is funny. What's not funny is that you have a very sad pathetic life and get joy out of responding to posts with rude, unhelpful, scarcastic responses.
[ Reply | More ]04.28.05, 01:56 PM FlagYikes lady. I'm the above poster who did 3 IUIs before moving to IVF, and what irked me was that after I took the time to respond originally, you clearly didn't read my response if you think I was recommending more IUIs. So, I thought I'd point that out to you. I understand that infertility is stressful--Lord knows I've been there for 3 years--but maybe you need to take a deep breath and actually read the advice people are giving you.
[ Reply | More ]04.28.05, 02:08 PM FlagI apoligize for my response. You are right that you did not encourage me to stick with IUI, but most of the other posts did. I was particularly focusing on the ones that said they tried multiple IUIs before IVF and didn't encourage me to go to IVF soon even though the IUIs didn't work, like you did. It's impossible to tell who everyone is on this board, but there is some person who enjoys writing unhelpful, rude replies (others have commented on this too) and I thought that you were her. But since I have no reason to know for sure, I'm sorry for my harsh reply. I don't think you have a sad, pathetic life, and I appreciate your advice.
[ Reply | More ]04.28.05, 02:56 PM Flag
I actually know several people that it worked for - but they're on the expecting or toddler boards now - not lurking around here for obvious reasons!
[ Reply | More ]04.28.05, 04:21 PM Flag
[+] Do you assume that people with fraternal twins did IVF? I always do, unless told othe... 22 replies
- kids are identical, i think automatically they're ivf babies....
- that so many people ask if I did IVF (unless of course they are embarking on it)...
- IVF is so uncommon that I never assume anyone...
- My fraternals were conceived via IVF and I also find it annoying that so...
- DH and I ALWAYS do. IVF or injectables or something beyond Mother Nature...
Talk : : May 16, 2005
Do you assume that people with fraternal twins did IVF? I always do, unless told otherwise. Do you think the people who didn't do IVF care about this?
22 replies [ Reply | Watch | Moreme too, particularly when the mom looks a lot older. recently there was a mom on here expecting triplets and everyone asked if she did IVF. she didn't.
[ Reply | More ]05.16.05, 02:21 PM FlagI did IVF and have fraternal twins. Most people assume I had help, or at least fish for information by asking me whether twins run in my family. My friend has identical twins and definitely makes it known that they are not from IVF (not that IVF increases chances of identical twins, but most people don't seem to know this). My guess is that she does not like people to think she used drugs.
[ Reply | More ]05.16.05, 02:21 PM Flagabsolutely. that may be sad, but unless kids are identical, i think automatically they're ivf babies.
[ Reply | More ]05.16.05, 02:23 PM FlagIVF is so uncommon that I never assume anyone had it; and my twins were spontaneous.
[ Reply | More ]05.16.05, 02:29 PM Flag-
non-ivf twin mom here: i care. why not just assume no IVF unless told otherwise.
[ Reply | More ]05.16.05, 02:33 PM FlagDH and I ALWAYS do. IVF or injectables or something beyond Mother Nature
[ Reply | More ]05.16.05, 02:38 PM Flagi have fratneral twins without ivf and i know people assume that i did ivf. doesn't bother me. i would be happy with twins whether or not they were natural.
[ Reply | More ]05.16.05, 03:24 PM Flag
[+] Question for those who've done IVF: How long did you try on your own, try with IUI, e... 35 replies
- Sperm. And he just thinks IVF will really work and IUI really won't and...on something my doc thinks is useless. Not that IVF is cheap!...
- IVF worked?...
- IUI instead. Did 3 unsuccessful IUIs then 4 IVFs to get pg. Unexplained infertility....
- quicker. Only 1 failed FET and 1 successful IVF this time around. I feel like we got...
Talk : : August 10, 2005
Question for those who've done IVF: How long did you try on your own, try with IUI, etc., before you finally stepped up to IVF?
35 replies [ Reply | Watch | More1 yr natural, 12 iui's, 2 surgeries, 2 IVF's...7 yrs later DD was born (2nd IVF). Going for #2 in Nov
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:42 AM Flag-
My doc wants me to do IVF after only 5 mos trying naturally, 1 IUI. I'm worried we're being crazy, but I do trust my doc. I guess if he says we need IVF, then we need IVF?
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:44 AM FlagWhat has he based his conclusion on? Is it an age factor? Tubal? Sperm?
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:44 AM FlagSperm. And he just thinks IVF will really work and IUI really won't and doesn't want to "torture" me. We did get a chem pg once on our own, though, so a little voice is telling me maybe we should do IUI. But then we're paying for everything out of po and don't want to waste money on something my doc thinks is useless. Not that IVF is cheap!
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:46 AM FlagIf its only a perm factor your chances of conceiving with IVF are extremely high. As I see it (and I am an IVF vet) it looks good for the clinic to report pg's. Cynical but true.
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:47 AM FlagThat's what I was thinking. Plus, they make a lot more money on it. I can't decide what to do.
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:48 AM FlagIn all honesty...I would do the IVF. We could do IUI's again (DH's sperm count is higher than it was) but I can't go through the months of waiting. I just want to get pg already!
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:49 AM FlagReally? That's a helpful opinion. I feel like such a baby that I'm having a hard time handling the BFNs every month. It makes me feel a little like a crazy New Yorker that I'm doing IVF b/c I don't have the patience for IUI.
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:51 AM FlagThis is me exactly. I have no patience whatsoever for IUI's. I just want to get everything over with and stop my ttc journey!
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:52 AM FlagOkay, now I know I'm a nut b/c I'm letting a person I don't really know make my decision about IVF, but I think I'm gonna go for it and stop questioning myself and my doc. If it doesn't work, we can always go back to IUI, but if it does work it just save my sanity!
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:53 AM FlagYes, once you get over the idea that it's not going to happen in some "romantic" way after dinner and a movie, it's cool to be in on the process from the very first moment. It will be hard, but I guess not as hard as another six months of single lines on HPTs.
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 08:00 AM Flag
res are not gods. if you don't think it sounds right, get a second opinion. a friend said the best advice she ever got while doing art was to only do two cycles with any one clinic, then move on if it didn't work.
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:46 AM FlagI've been thinking of getting a 2nd opinion but it's such a frickin pain in the ass to get in to see anyone. Months of waiting. Cornell makes you take blood tests before they'll even give you an appt, for God's sake!
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:47 AM Flagthen just go straight to the ivf. the success rate is so low with iuis anyway most clinics only do them because insurance requires it.
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 07:53 AM FlagI got a cancellation appt with a top doc at Cornell within a week - a fluke -just brought in my records and no blood tests prior to appt. It does cost $$, but if you can swing it, it is easy to do.
[ Reply | More ]08.10.05, 08:10 AM Flag
-
[+] Just finished 2 failed rounds of Chlomid/IUI - is it worth it to try a 3rd or should ... 27 replies
- can start them right away (as opposed to IVF which requires several months of prep--unless I'm...
- IVF doesn't require several months of prep if...me the option of doing either injectibles or ivf - but since my insurance covered iuis and...a 3rd or should I go straight to IVF? Glad you asked this question! I just finished...w/injectibles, did not want to go straight to IVF since my insurance did not cover this proceedure....
Talk : : November 11, 2005
Just finished 2 failed rounds of Chlomid/IUI - is it worth it to try a 3rd or should I go straight to IVF?
27 replies [ Reply | Watch | Moreis it that you didn't produce any follicles on teh clomid or you produced but just didn't get pg? if you just didn't get pg, I'd go to IVF and not waste any more money, injectibles are expensive and if you are going to use them use them for IVF
[ Reply | More ]11.11.05, 10:37 AM FlagMy experience: 3 rounds of failed clomid/iui and going straight to IVF. No insurance, drugs are expensive and I want to increase the odds of getting a baby sooner rather than later. I don't think it's crazy. RE didn't, either (though obviously they have an interest in doing the more expensive procedures). I guess it also depends on your age. If you're at 40 or above (or getting there), it might make sense to be as aggressive as possible. Good luck. It's a tough decision. Btw, I'm reading "Couples Guide to In Vitro" and it's pretty good -- goes through the issues you need to think about in deciding to do IVF.
[ Reply | More ]11.11.05, 10:50 AM Flag^^^btw I've heard some people recommend doing an injectibles/iui cycle to see how you respond to the drugs prior to moving on to ivf, but my RE (at Cornell) said this really isn't true -- if you don't respond that well to the drugs they just convert to iui anyway. Good luck with your decision. It's so hard.
[ Reply | More ]11.11.05, 11:04 AM Flag
Do you have a diagnosis and does your insurance cover anything? I did 3 clomid iuis, then 4 injectible iuis. My RE gave me the option of doing either injectibles or ivf - but since my insurance covered iuis and not ivf I decided to try it. And since I am unexplained I thought why not.
[ Reply | More ]11.11.05, 11:35 AM FlagRe: Just finished 2 failed rounds of Chlomid/IUI - is it worth it to try a 3rd or should I go straight to IVF? Glad you asked this question! I just finished my 3rd round of clomid - 2 with IUI and I am 4 dpo in the 2ww. I am always trying to think of my next plan so I won't be as disappointed if I don't get pg. My plan is to do one round of injectibles with IUI and then on to IVF. I am 35 and have been trying for over a year.
[ Reply | More ]11.11.05, 12:13 PM Flag-
Re: I'd go straight to IVF - why mess around any more? Thanks, I appreciate your advice. A friend who has been through this suggested the same thing, but my husband thought we should do one injectible/IUI. I am going to show him your post and the one above. Thanks again!
[ Reply | More ]11.11.05, 05:15 PM Flag
Subscribe to our newsletters!
Go »
Inside UrbanBaby
UrbanBabyBuzz
Little kids and gender seems to be a bit of a hot topic du jour, having been covered recently in Salon (“Is that my son wearing a dress?”) and the Chicago Tribune. A transgendered character has recently popped up on Degrassi: The ...
More »
UrbanBabyNewYork
Say goodbye to New York City’s hottest summer on record (since 1869!) and chillax. Let’s hope Hurricane Earl doesn’t put too much of a damper on this holiday weekend.
Kid Flix Mix 2010
New York International Children’s ...
More »
UrbanBabySanFrancisco
Good things to eat. And to read.
Ghirardelli Square Chocolate
Local patisseries and candy-makers bring the chocoliciousness, you bring your appetite. There’s a children’s area to park the tykes in as well.
When: Sat. & Sun., 9/4 ...
More »
