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.
Gompers . . . . I have to laugh *now* at the advanced maternal age concerns of doctors but when I was preggers with my son at 43 those same docs scared the heck out of me for NO GOOD REASON. Pushed diagnostic sonograms and amnio on me. My AFP test came back positive for Down's Syndrome and the only reason was my age. I don't think that is fair . ..don't you have to look at the blood?
I wasn't talking about birth defects or chromosomal disorders. I was talking about the fact that after age 35, for a woman carrying multiples, especially triplets or more, the risk of premature delivery skyrockets. The older the mom is, and the more babies she's carrying, the higher the risk. Even if she made it to 24 weeks, preemies from multiple gestations usually have tougher courses than those who were singletons. In addition to that, the increase in hormones with these multiple pregnancies can sometimes result in higher rates of pre-eclampsia. In cases like this, selective reduction is given as an option to help ensure the health of the mother and to increase the odds of her delivering at least one healthy baby at term.
Again, JMHO, just explaining my reasoning.
Doctors do strongly recommend 'selective reduction' for over two fetuses. For example, the McCoys. The mom had a stroke which prompted an immidiate delivery of the babies, and at least two children have serious life long health issues. Multiples are at risk to a host of disorders etc. Not all multiples have happy outcomes. Alot end in a total loss of all the babies. We see the happy outcomes on TV, with bouncing babies happily cooing. I see babies who will never make it out of a crib. Maybe the poster was thinking along the lines of 'save' one child? The post did have a guilty feel to it. What a shi**ty choice to have to make. Techniques are being developed to reduce the risk of multiples, however, unless a couple is willing to plant only one egg at a time, the risk of multiples are present. A good fertility team will tackle topics like selective reduction, miscarrage, etc, BEFORE an actual attempt at implantation. She shouldn't be slammed for her choice. Also a suggestion, there are organizations for women who are post abortion that she should maybe try. I honestly don't know what I would do. Wanting a healthy child is not selfish, but choosing a selective reduction would probably haunt. I would probably do the 'I wonder what would have been' senerio until I died.
I personally didn't slam anybody BUT if one does it for convenience over safety one really can't be expected to be surprised when people are either upset or in disagreement. I still wonder what, if anything, she might tell her son about his formerly potential siblings and whether, even if the termination was early on, if he senses their presence , as twins sometimes do when separated..Interesting to say the least. The McCaughey mom had a csec at 32 weeks not because she had a stroke but because she just couldn't take it any longer ( don't blame her), or so she said...
As far as prospective parents who cannot "stomach" adoption, you just finished making a moral judgement about this woman because she couldn't "stomach" parenting 3 kids by herself for 18 years. But it's okay to completely forsake all of the potential adoptive children because you can't stomach adoption? It's okay to be put your own biological urge to procreate in front of the needs of innocent children who are ALIVE and fully developed? It's okay to bring yet another kid into the world when, as I said before, the ones already here are not cared for? This is what I say PUUUUHLEEZE to.
My husband and I ALSO are not interested in adoption whatsoever. We want a child that has our biological make-up and is a part of US.
I have been trying to get pregnant for over a year now and I'm going on 32. Even if I can't conceive, we are still not, nor will we ever, be interested in adoption or donor eggs.
Judge me.
My husband and I ALSO are not interested in adoption whatsoever. We want a child that has our biological make-up and is a part of US.I have been trying to get pregnant for over a year now and I'm going on 32. Even if I can't conceive, we are still not, nor will we ever, be interested in adoption or donor eggs.
Judge me.
I just wanted to say that you are NOT alone in your feelings regarding adoption. I can completely understand your wanting a child that is part of both of your biological makeup. Isn't that the natural progression of life?
My husband & I went through IVF to get pregnant with our son. He is now 5 years old. We are going through the adoption route for baby # 2. We feel blessed that we are able to have both sides (so to speak) to complete our family. I am GLAD that I was able to have a biological child. It is a miracle.
Have you gone to an infertility clinic in your area? That's really important if you have been trying over a year and not conceived. Fortunately 32 is still considered "young enough" to keep trying. Good luck! Don't give up on your dream to have your biolocial child.
We cannot sit in judgement of eachother. I respect your
I personally didn't slam anybody BUT if one does it for convenience over safety one really can't be expected to be surprised when people are either upset or in disagreement. I still wonder what, if anything, she might tell her son about his formerly potential siblings and whether, even if the termination was early on, if he senses their presence , as twins sometimes do when separated..Interesting to say the least. The McCaughey mom had a csec at 32 weeks not because she had a stroke but because she just couldn't take it any longer ( don't blame her), or so she said...
Really? On the news special I saw, they said it was a stroke. Her left or right side of her face started to droop. The story I saw a few years ago said the doctors had to convince her to c-sect the babies. She had faith that Jesus would let her carry longer. That's interesting if that news version was inaccurate. Thanks for the info. However, doctors do recommend selective reduction for multiples because of the risks.
Gosh, the viewpoint about not wanting to adopt was interesting and certainly well worth respecting. The challenge to be judged was not...Even a bit offensive...Hope it works out for you and hope the child is the perfect child you anticipate....I respect that viewpoint but found it to be highly defensive...Guess that would happen these days ( the need to be defensive, that is)
In this case they both knew there would be no birth control. He had no say in the result of that decision.
Then he was relinquishing his choice right there and made a conscious choice to do so. If you are having unprotected sex with a woman, you should know what her thoughts are on these issues, because if you do not want an abortion to take place and you know that is an option for her, you should just wrap it up. There's his say.
My husband and I ALSO are not interested in adoption whatsoever. We want a child that has our biological make-up and is a part of US.I have been trying to get pregnant for over a year now and I'm going on 32. Even if I can't conceive, we are still not, nor will we ever, be interested in adoption or donor eggs.
Judge me
If it's me that you are addressing your "Judge me" comment to, try reading my entire post before you decide to make such statements.
I will say this again, one more time...my point is that none of us should be judging others based on reproductive choices. If you (I use the word "you" generally, I am not referring to anyone in particular) are looking down at this woman, pretending you are morally superior, but you have had in vitro - you need to wake up. Anyone who has in vitro is essentially guilty of the same thing as this woman - not giving embryos life. If you are anti-abortion, and you are participating in in vitro, isn't that just a bit hypocritical?
Furthermore, if you believe you are morally superior, but you have fought nature, scientifically created a child - as opposed to adopting, let's refrain from judging her. I have a very good friend - she is Catholic - and we have had many discussions about in vitro. I did not have any real opinions about it at that time, I was pretty neutral, but I was curious to see what her thoughts on it were. Her view was this - if you are infertile (and I am not trying to be insensitive here, just relaying this) - perhaps you should try to bear that cross (she was found of that phrase) and turn it into a blessing. Perhaps you are supposed to take all that love, all that maternal instinct, and give it to a child who needs you - adopt. Instead of fighting nature, adopt. Again, these are her thoughts, not necessarily mine, so avoid flaming me. I am not saying I entirely disagree with her - but I have already said that I've never been in that situation, so I have no idea how I would approach it. When you live through something, it definitely changes your perspective.
Society is much more accepting of in vitro than it is of abortion. I have to wonder why this is. The two are, essentially, the same - in terms of dying embryos. The only difference is that one is due to a lack of planning, whereas the other is due to infinite planning. But maybe in vitro is so much more widely accepted because it takes money - because the people typically using it are wealthy, white, married, your average middle to upper class family dropping several thousand on creating a baby. Whereas, abortion clients are (or are at least stereotyped as) poor, often of minority background, and poor - your average lower class, irresponsible, unmarried "slut" who happened to get knocked up. Perhaps that's why we see the two so differently, despite the similarities. The thing is - I have more sympathy for someone who denies an embryo life out of desperation, because they had an "accident," than someone who knowingly creates one and then lets it die in a calculated, highly thought out method. However, I am pro-choice, and I still believe that embryos do not have the brain function to be classified as human. Human embryo, but not human.
I think these thoughts need to be put out there. I honestly feel that abortion is NOT immoral, nor do I feel that in vitro is always immoral. But I think that if you hold such opinions on abortion - if you are prolife - you need to live those beliefs, not just spew them out when an easy target violates them. That is what irritates me - the hypocrisy that people display in regard to this issue.
If it's me that you are addressing your "Judge me" comment to, try reading my entire post before you decide to make such statements.
Yes, it was you I was addressing and yes, I did read your entire post. I read it again after your post to me and I now understand the parallel you were making. So, I apologize. I see exactly the point you were trying to make.
Peace.
PegRNBSN
167 Posts
In this case they both knew there would be no birth control. He had no say in the result of that decision.