When One Child Is Enough

Published

Let me preface this article to say that I'm not stirring a pot. I found this article a little dispassionate considering the choice made.

When One Is Enough

By AMY RICHARDS as told to AMY BARRETT

Published: July 18, 2004

I grew up in a working-class family in Pennsylvania not knowing my father. I have never missed not having him. I firmly believe that, but for much of my life I felt that what I probably would have gained was economic security and with that societal security. Growing up with a single mother, I was always buying into the myth that I was going to be seduced in the back of a pickup truck and become pregnant when I was 16. I had friends when I was in school who were helping to rear nieces and nephews, because their siblings, who were not much older, were having babies. I had friends from all over the class spectrum: I saw the nieces and nephews on the one hand and country-club memberships and station wagons on the other. I felt I was in the middle. I had this fear: What would it take for me to just slip?

Now I'm 34. My boyfriend, Peter, and I have been together three years. I'm old enough to presume that I wasn't going to have an easy time becoming pregnant. I was tired of being on the pill, because it made me moody. Before I went off it, Peter and I talked about what would happen if I became pregnant, and we both agreed that we would have the child.

I found out I was having triplets when I went to my obstetrician. The doctor had just finished telling me I was going to have a low-risk pregnancy. She turned on the sonogram machine. There was a long pause, then she said, ''Are you sure you didn't take fertility drugs?'' I said, ''I'm positive.'' Peter and I were very shocked when she said there were three. ''You know, this changes everything,'' she said. ''You'll have to see a specialist.''

My immediate response was, I cannot have triplets. I was not married; I lived in a five-story walk-up in the East Village; I worked freelance; and I would have to go on bed rest in March. I lecture at colleges, and my biggest months are March and April. I would have to give up my main income for the rest of the year. There was a part of me that was sure I could work around that. But it was a matter of, Do I want to?

I looked at Peter and asked the doctor: ''Is it possible to get rid of one of them? Or two of them?'' The obstetrician wasn't an expert in selective reduction, but she knew that with a shot of potassium chloride you could eliminate one or more.

Having felt physically fine up to this point, I got on the subway afterward, and all of a sudden, I felt ill. I didn't want to eat anything. What I was going through seemed like a very unnatural experience. On the subway, Peter asked, ''Shouldn't we consider having triplets?'' And I had this adverse reaction: ''This is why they say it's the woman's choice, because you think I could just carry triplets. That's easy for you to say, but I'd have to give up my life.'' Not only would I have to be on bed rest at 20 weeks, I wouldn't be able to fly after 15. I was already at eight weeks. When I found out about the triplets, I felt like: It's not the back of a pickup at 16, but now I'm going to have to move to Staten Island. I'll never leave my house because I'll have to care for these children. I'll have to start shopping only at Costco and buying big jars of mayonnaise. Even in my moments of thinking about having three, I don't think that deep down I was ever considering it.

The specialist called me back at 10 p.m. I had just finished watching a Boston Pops concert at Symphony Hall. As everybody burst into applause, I watched my cellphone vibrating, grabbed it and ran into the lobby. He told me that he does a detailed sonogram before doing a selective reduction to see if one fetus appears to be struggling. The procedure involves a shot of potassium chloride to the heart of the fetus. There are a lot more complications when a woman carries multiples. And so, from the doctor's perspective, it's a matter of trying to save the woman this trauma. After I talked to the specialist, I told Peter, ''That's what I'm going to do.'' He replied, ''What we're going to do.'' He respected what I was going through, but at a certain point, he felt that this was a decision we were making. I agreed.

When we saw the specialist, we found out that I was carrying identical twins and a stand alone. My doctors thought the stand alone was three days older. There was something psychologically comforting about that, since I wanted to have just one. Before the procedure, I was focused on relaxing. But Peter was staring at the sonogram screen thinking: Oh, my gosh, there are three heartbeats. I can't believe we're about to make two disappear. The doctor came in, and then Peter was asked to leave. I said, ''Can Peter stay?'' The doctor said no. I know Peter was offended by that.

Two days after the procedure, smells no longer set me off and I no longer wanted to eat nothing but sour-apple gum. I went on to have a pretty seamless pregnancy. But I had a recurring feeling that this was going to come back and haunt me. Was I going to have a stillbirth or miscarry late in my pregnancy?

I had a boy, and everything is fine. But thinking about becoming pregnant again is terrifying. Am I going to have quintuplets? I would do the same thing if I had triplets again, but if I had twins, I would probably have twins. Then again, I don't know.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

A little disturbing to read. Personally, I can understand selective reductions for medical reasons, but I think it's really sad that a lot of women feel they have to do it for other reasons (like jobs, finances, etc).

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Neurology, Neurosurgerical & Trauma ICU.

Let me just say that I respect a woman's right to choose. If I were having multiples, anything over three, I would probably choose to reduce too. I don't believe in people having "litters" of children and every time I see that story about the couple who had 8, I get angry :angryfire ...but that's another post entirely.

However, I don't agree with how this person presented the story. But then again, it was probably intended to be presented this way so that it would make people angry about a woman's right to choose.

IMHO....I have NO right to tell another person what they can and can't do with their body....and until the child is old enough to survive outside the womb, then it is still the woman's body!!!

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Let me just say that I respect a woman's right to choose. If I were having multiples, anything over three, I would probably choose to reduce too. I don't believe in people having "litters" of children and every time I see that story about the couple who had 8, I get angry :angryfire ...but that's another post entirely.

However, I don't agree with how this person presented the story. But then again, it was probably intended to be presented this way so that it would make people angry about a woman's right to choose.

IMHO....I have NO right to tell another person what they can and can't do with their body....and until the child is old enough to survive outside the womb, then it is still the woman's body!!!

I don't think it was presented to make people angry over a woman's right to choose. The mother is pro-choice. The newspaper is the NYT.

Yes, I agree we have no legal right to tell anyone what to do.

She didn't use fertility drugs so the chances of having a "litter" were small. I too have problems with people implanting many embyros . . . just to make sure that at least one survives.

I don't know . . .this just struck me in a weird way. Not a pro-life argument at all. Just sorta "no big deal". Left me a little queasy.

I don't think I could look at a screen and choose which ones to selectively reduce. And what do you tell your son someday?

steph

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Let me just say that I respect a woman's right to choose. If I were having multiples, anything over three, I would probably choose to reduce too. I don't believe in people having "litters" of children and every time I see that story about the couple who had 8, I get angry :angryfire ...but that's another post entirely.

However, I don't agree with how this person presented the story. But then again, it was probably intended to be presented this way so that it would make people angry about a woman's right to choose.

IMHO....I have NO right to tell another person what they can and can't do with their body....and until the child is old enough to survive outside the womb, then it is still the woman's body!!!

I agree ! If I see that litter of kids on the cover of another "Women's" magazine during another holiday season I think I will gag.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
And what do you tell your son someday?

steph

Why tell him anything?????????

Up Vote Up Vote ×

This is why some hospitals will not implant tons of embryos anymore when doing IVF. My last hospital's policy was to only implant 2.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Why tell him anything?????????

Well, in this particular case she talked about the experience in the New York Times. She is going to have to tell him someday.

On the otherhand, if you kept the whole thing private in the first place you could keep the information from him. But if it is ok to choose this option, why not tell him?

You could go round and round here. :o

And if one is enough, why is she thinking about getting pregnant again?

steph

Up Vote Up Vote ×
This is why some hospitals will not implant tons of embryos anymore when doing IVF. My last hospital's policy was to only implant 2.

Thank God. What a mess otherwise. Such heartrending ethical dilemmas unnecessarily . . (I was going to say "forced" but that doesn't really work. . .. ummm) . . . asked of people desperate to have children.

Since my son is still in Africa and I still look at the photos of the orphans and since I realize there are so many older kids who need homes here in the US I guess I wish people would look at adoption more. Having your own biological kid is NO guarantee that you will have a perfect kid. Just look at all of us who have struggled with at least one kid. :)

steph

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I'm with you on that Steph. Obviously, having been adopted myself makes me a little biased, but I think adoption is a great way to have a family. I would like to see it made easier and less costly though.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Hemodialysis, Home Health.

Steph, I'll have to say the article left me feeling much as you did. Sad. Disturbed. Wish I hadn't read it feeling. :stone

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I'm with you on that Steph. Obviously, having been adopted myself makes me a little biased, but I think adoption is a great way to have a family. I would like to see it made easier and less costly though.

Easier and less costly - that is the truth. We've been looking into it and you do get discouraged with the paperwork, time and money involved.

Lots of times in a foreign adoption, you may have chosen a child and it can take up to a year to bring him/her to the U.S. Could I leave my little Danny for a year waiting for paperwork to get processed??? Once you make a commitment to a child, it should NOT take a year to bring the child home.

And it is expensive. There is one organization that helps with the cost that I have been looking into. But still . . .

Jnette . . .sorry about making you feel worse. It made me wince too . . .

steph

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion