Adjustment [and] Disorder

Social worker has a baby. Five months later she figures out that motherhood is just one long adjustment disorder.

IVF and Twins

Posted by SWMama on October 11, 2009

The New York Times ran an article today about the high rate of twin births associated with IVF, and all of the related risks.  And it got me thinking… which gets me writing.

I’m not going to rehash the entire article, but it makes a few good points about why there are so many more twins and why that’s not actually a good thing (twins are much more likely to be born prematurely, which can lead to a host of short- and long-term problems).  But before I get into it, I want to say this to all of the parents who have gone through IVF and ended up with twins:

I get it.

I totally get it.  I so understand the difficulty of the decision, the desire after so many months of trying, after so many months of appointments, injections, tests, and procedures, to do anything you can do to maximize your chances of getting pregnant.  And so you hear that your chances of getting pregnant will increase if you transfer two embryos instead of one, and you know that your chances of getting pregnant with twins increases, and that having twins is risky, but then you think about all of your friends who have had healthy twins and it doesn’t seem like such a big deal.  And if you only want two kids, well, how great would it be to never have to go through IVF again?  And, if you’re paying for all of it (which Josh and I didn’t – we’re lucky enough to live in a state where fertility is covered through insurance), then the pressure is even higher.  What if it doesn’t work this time?  Will we be able to pay for it again?

Like I said, I get it.  I’ve had all of these thoughts, and more.  Josh and I really struggled with the question of how many embryos to transfer.  Our doctor would have transferred two if we had really pushed, although she strongly recommended only one.  In the end, we transferred one, and I delivered a healthy, full-term baby, for which I feel very blessed.

Anyway, back to my thoughts about the article.  It points to two financial incentives for transferring more than one embryo, one which is patient-initiated, and one which is physician-initiated.  I already mentioned several reasons why patients might want to transfer multiple embryos.  Physicians are motivated by their success rates – first, they got into the profession to help people get pregnant and have healthy babies, so they feel better when it all works.  Secondly, and more cynically, fertility clinics’ stats are public record, and fertility treatments are big money.  The more embryos transferred, the more likely you are to get a pregnancy, the better the clinic looks, the more patients seek treatment there.  Despite the guidelines of several national organizations discouraging multiple births (as noted in the article), fertility docs keep transferring multiple embryos.

So, what can we do about this?  First, this is yet another reason why we need serious health care reform (and, in my perspective, a public option plan, but let’s not focus on that here).  If fertility treatments were covered by insurance, patients wouldn’t feel compelled to transfer multiple embryos because of an inability to pay for a second IVF round if the first one didn’t work.  Furthermore, the cost of a single IVF treatment pales in comparison to the astronomical costs associated with taking care of premature babies, both in the immediate aftermath of birth and in the long-term.

Secondly, although I do appreciate that doctors need to earn a living, and I do believe that most doctors make decisions based on their patients’ well-being, I also think that doctors are only human.  Thus, I think fertility doctors who have high rates of multiple transfers need to review and re-evaluate their practices and procedures.  Perhaps they are making the best decisions possible, perhaps they aren’t, but they need to seriously consider what is motivating the choices they make.  Health insurance reform might take some pressure off these doctors, because it would take pressure off the patients to want to get it all done in one shot.

The reality is, it’s a hard decision, and having been there, I don’t envy any of us who end up having to make it.  I guess the best we can do is to stay informed, seek support, and make the best choices possible.  Read the article and share your thoughts – I’m interested.

7 Responses to “IVF and Twins”

  1. Marc said

    And even with insurance, if there if there is a benefit limit on the number or total cost of treatments, you might as well be paying out of pocket, because there will be a strong incentive to get pregnant before you “use up” your insurance benefits.

  2. Zozo's Mom said

    Even having to think about thinking about that stuff makes me feel a little ill. Very tough choice. I just don’t think I could handle even the possibility of twins. But that’s just me and my limits. It’s terrible that is might have to come down to a financial decision (i.e. – insurance doesn’t cover it). Must get better health care. MUST.

  3. Rebecca said

    I read this article yesterday and had many thoughts about it. As a parent of IVF twins (who did not receive NICU time), I hate to read some of this stuff. We did do the single embryo transfer–and it didn’t work. We didn’t pay for IVF since we live in MA, but I only had it in me to do one more round of IVF. This was our last chance–we had two frozen embryos–so we decided to thaw both and transfer however many survived the thaw. Even our doctor, who is a big proponent of single embryo transfer (Toth at MGH) supported this decision. And…there were twins. Having been seen at an anti-multiples IVF clinic, I have to say that there are fertility clinics that push against multiples and are very unhappy when you get pregnant with twins. However, for us….this was our best possible outcome. Two healthy babies and no need to do IVF again. And my friends have all had the same experience with twins. That said, I get the price of NICU time—and of a multiple pregnancy. I just have trouble thinking of someone else making this difficult choice for me—either pushing for transferring more (if we do IVF for a 3rd child, I will not transfer more than one) or pushing to transfer only one. It seems so personal…

  4. SWMama said

    Rebecca – I really appreciate you sharing your thoughts, and experience. You’ll notice that none of my suggestions for change involved the patients choosing to only transfer one embryo more often – the situation is just too personal and so fraught and difficult that I would never assume to tell someone else what to decide. I just think the decision shouldn’t be complicated by financial pressures, either from the patients or the doctors. Mostly I’m just glad that you ended up with two healthy babies!

  5. Rebecca said

    I’m with you on that one! We should all live in states where infertility treatment is covered. I can’t even try to imagine going through it all knowing that each round will cost $10,000 to $15,000. It’s too hard a situation to be complicated by money issues also. I know you aren’t judging any of the rest of us—and I also know I have so many mixed feelings on this issue that it’s hard to think/write clearly about it. You did a much better job than I could writing clearly about your feelings/thoughts about this!

  6. HawkMom said

    “We should all live in states where infertility treatment is covered.”

    This is an incredibly arrogant view, in my opinion. Giving birth is a want, not a need. The Earth will continue to spin if the small infertile percent of the population doesn’t procreate. Chemo and radiation therapy should be covered, as they save lives. Becoming pregnant is actually more of a risk than a life-saver. To do so through artificial means is a personal choice that should be funded on your own dime. What logical reason is there for the rest of society to help you get pregnant? Because you want it?

    Infertility is a symptom, not a disease. I’m fine with my insurance premiums increasing to cure or treat actual diseases like PCOS or certain STDs, as they are the leading causes of infertility. Someone else’s desire to be pregnant or have a baby that “looks like them”? Not so much.

  7. HawkMom – I think you raise valid points, though I disagree. I would hate, though, to think that it was government policy, rather than a decision made with the advice and guidance of a physician, that led someone to choose one treatment over another. Wider coverage means that everyone gets to choose the most appropriate treatment.

    What I do know is that regardless of coverage mandates, people all over the country are choosing reproductive assistance. I read somewhere that between 1/4 and 1/3 of all births in the US involved some assistance. I also believe that outcomes will be improved when payors have an incentive to make sure that each family chooses the most appropriate treatment. IVF is associated with excellent outcomes and going straight to IVF often costs less per-live-birth than starting with less aggressive methods.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>