to think that it is wrong for someone to have treatment that enabled them to have eight babies.

[wannaBe]

Of course it's good that the babies in question here are alive and appear to be doing well.

But this should never have been allowed to happen.

Women are not designed to give birth to litters of babies - this is evidenced by the fact it is not possible to carry this many babies to term, or even close to term. In fact it is pretty much accepted that if you fall pregnant with that many babies it is unlikely that they will all survive.

This woman was obviously desparate enough for a baby to have some kind of fertility treatment, and now she has eight babies, (eight children is something which most families do not contemplate over a lifetime, let alone in one go). Presumably she would have been offered the option of selective reduction when it was discovered she was carrying so many, but IMO it shouldn't get to that point - she should never have been given the kinds of drugs that enabled her to conceive that many babies in the first place.

It is just wrong on every level.

Yes but we don't know what KIND. Everyone is just aussuming she had IVF. And if she did, she feasibly could have had just 2 or 3 embryos implanted which have split.

afaik the woman in question did receive fertility treatment of some kind but it would be worthwhile for certain people to remember that these things can and have happened naturally.

the first recorded case of live born octuplets was in mexico city in 1967...... clearly not a result of fertility treatment. sadly those babies died after birth.

maybe we should be gratful that medical intervention these days means babies like these have a chance of survival rather than certain death awaiting them upon birth.

fertility treatments have given hope and joy to so many women i think it's wrong to suggest they should not be allowed because of the one in a million (2 million/5 million/billion?) chance of having larger multiple births.

i think there are very few women who after years of heartbreak and agony longing for a child could willingly abort any baby she conceived, therefore selective reduction is unlikely to be availed of, especially when she's being told that the feotus' might die natuarally anyway and she has no way of knowing which, if any, will survive by themselves.

i'm glad the woman and he babies are doing well and deeply impressed that they all managed to make it to 31 weeks gestation, and did you read that she plans to breastfeed?

i think this woman should be given respect and admiration for what she's managed to do and for the challanges she faces now, the ethics of fertility treatment have nothing to do with it at all really...

From today's LA Times:
"In the case of the Bellflower octuplets, the hospital wouldn't say whether the mother had been using fertility drugs -- but most experts consulted by the media say there is little doubt that she had"

Until people can be certain that a) she had treatment and b) what kind of treatment she had, it's surely a little soon to be condemning her fertility programme,

pinkTulips lovely post

i can't think of a better trigger for discussion of the ethics of fertility treatment than this case

i do agree that this woman does deserve admiration and respect, she has a tough few months ahead, and let's hope all 8 babies come home healthy.

but i don;t think that the rights and wrongs of these sorts of 'unnatural' births should not be discussed

i mean unnatural in that the cahnces of it occuring in nature are so so so rare

i thikn that fertility treatment is a right and proper treatment

i don;t thikn it should be taken away on the off chance somoene has 8 babies

but i really don;t see anything wrong with surmising and discussing, even based on what ifs

un sure if octo-mum had fertility treatment. am a bit gobsmaked by the whole thing TBH. the statement that she intends to breastfeed all eight herself is eye watering, dont see how she could manage(unless she grows extra nipples! lol).just glad the mums ok ,and the babies seem to be ok- breathing by themselves! wow!, anyone know how far the pregnancy got before they were born?

by the way ,i think fertility treatment is a good thing for many people, some of the best parents are desperate before conceiving, (on the other side some who have kids and neglect/abuse them should have forced sterilisation)(flame away!)

31 weeks gestation i think

"dont see how she could manage(unless she grows extra nipples! lol)~"

there's another mother in the US who had octuplets (only 7 survived sadly - 1 died at one week old) and she breasfed them all apparently!

I agree with PinkTulips post.I do not see a problem with it, even if she used fertility drugs. She now has 8 children that she is planning to raise and educate the best she can, like the rest of us. It is certainly going to be more of a challenge for her than it is for the avarage mum but yet, she feels up to it so I can't help but think : "Who are we to criticise her decision?"

I think these things should be discussed.

Because while I think that fertility treatment is a teriffic advance in medicine, it is also something which is connected to one of our strongest instincs - the ability to reproduce, and so those who undergo such treatments are massively open to exploitation by those who are supposed to be helping them fulfill their ultimate goal of having a child.

Whether we like to admit it or not, the fertility industry is big business. And there are people out there who will pay whatever it takes to have a baby. Therefore it is not beyond consideration that there are doctors out there who will do whatever it takes to ensure that they get the highest success, and thus attract the most customers, even if that means putting more women and babies at risk in the process.

i thikn that deciding to take drugs that could potentially lead to a big multiple birth is not a decision beyond question

if that is indeed what happened.

fertility treatment and the issues and ethical debates surrounding it are worthy of discussion

Gorionine no-one is criticising the mother though.

The fact she managed to carry those babies to 31 weeks is fantastic. The fact they were all born alive and are currently still all alive is fantastic.

but there was a far greater chance than not that those babies would not have survived at all.

I once watched a programme about multiple pregnancies, these were all women who had conceived four or more babies while on fertility drugs, and they were all the most heartbreaking stories I've ever seen. One woman had been trying for a baby for something like twelve years, and when told of this drug by doctors she was desparate to try whatever it took. So she took the drug and conceived quintuplets. They were born young, at about 28 weeks iirc, and over the next three weeks she watched them die one by one until they had all died. . And to top it all, the strain of carrying five babies was too much for her uterus, and she was told that she would never be able to carry a baby again.

So while for the woman who has had the octuplets the outcome is still looking positive, for the majority of women who end up in this situation it is all but a positive outcome, (and it doesn't matter whether some of the babies survive or not, watching any of your babies die in scbu must be horrendous), and so I think that the ethics of giving these types of treatments are very valid indeed.

Because it doesn't matter if the treatments enable some people to conceive healthy babies, if the side effect is that for some women the hurt will be made ten times worse by conceiving and then losing several babies, then we should question whether it is appropriate to use these treatments, or whether more research should be done before we get to this point.

drs the biggest anti forced stelrilisdation issue is the local family whose conviction has recently been overturned and their kids joyously returned to them; had those kids beena dopted out yet the conviction for abuse been overturned should they not have been allowed further childreN?

Anyway

Agree that this needs debating but probably more on a general basis than necessarily haulng this woman into it- until we know the story (if).

my guess is BF means mixed feeding; perfectly do-able.

interesting read- history of multiple births

from that it would seem (unless fertility treatments were out in 1875) that multiple births of 4 or above do happen- and the jump from 4 / 5/ 6 to 8 is possible; certainly now that bettr nitrition means more babies might survive in utero (we knoe many twin pg's end up with a singleton, maybe that happens in larger conceptions also?) and there is as somone says the risk of ovum division hapening to enlarge an already multiple pg I guess.

I suspect of course that this was IVF or other assisted conception, but we shouldn't think we know.

Fertility treatment is very expensive and costs anywhere between $8,000 to $15,000 (or more) for one round. And only 35% of women who use invitro go on to conceive. (All this info is taken from babycenter)

So figure in that it's expensive, and has a relatively low success rates I can't blame them for implanting 8 or more embryos with an expectation of multiples, but figuring that some wouldn't take.

I can't imagine being told that she was carrying 7 babies. Most people have a hard time dealing with the idea of twins or triplets. Imagine her worry. Worrying the whole pregnancy if her babies would even survive. Imagine her surprise when she was told there was an 8th one hiding in there.

Also imagine what she must have looked like and what her body went through to carry all those babies as long as she could.

Imagine what her life will be like when the novelty of her story goes away and she doesn't have the type of support system she needs.

This woman has had to make a lot of hard decisions and I don't envy her one bit.

I'm not certain that I agree with the last line of your post wannabe- from experience (my Mum lost the 5th baby she cnceived to termination of severely disabled baby- rubella) and yet despite having ahd 4 stillbirths / 1 termination she chocse to continue having abbies (me! then my 2 sisters) because that's what she truly felt she had to do. I don't think think we should refrain from assisting many women achieve motherhood (and I know there's adoption) because of what is an incredibly tiny risk- is it twice in a decade? more than 11,000 in the UK in 2005 (www.hfea.gov.uk/en/1626.html).

Limits on embryo transfer setting a maximum of two per transfer came about in 2004 iirc. America is of course different.

\mkg \i don't know what the US system is but in the UK I was able to refer any Mum of triplets or more (never had one but was a possibility in my role) for SS home based help.

I don't know about social services involvement. All the interviews I've seen of parents with 4+ babies have said they got by with the help of family, friends, and community volunteers. I would hope that the government would step in.

but peachy, although the conception of eight babies is incredibly rare (as you say twice in ten years), the conception of four or more is much more common than that. And even four/five/six babies is a hell of a risk.

In this country a twin pregnancy is considered a risky pregnancy, in fact if you look in conception there is a poster who wants to conceive twins who has been told by everyone how risky it is, so for each additional baby the risk increases.

I think it is right that there should be a limit.

i think it would be almost impossible to carry more than 8 babies surely..
the risks to the mother must be enormous , once you get to 3 or more

twin pregnancies are higher risk, but more common, therefore easier to manage by medics.

3 or 4 + babies are not and therefore a bit of an unknown quantityt

i wonder if this women has had to have a hysterectomy? the uterus would be so streched i wonder if it would actually contract back down after the c section? certainly must be a big risk of heavy bleeding

the strain on a mothers' body must be beyond belief.

i imagine she would have been on bed rest almost permanently

Technically they could MKG- however we dont get help with 2 autistic kids so can and will differ immensely!

Wannabe I also agree with the limit. But I think it would be very wrong to stop IVF altogether, cruel indeed. I also think it's worth noting that in many multiple births of the past the morbidity rate my have been hugely reduced with contemporary medical treatment; from the last birth 10 years ago of 8 babies 7 made it after all.

Yes twins are at risk pg and I know of a close friend whodeliverd boys with twin to twin transfusion last year, but identical (so no excess transfer implicated) are at far higher risk than fraternal pregnancies- a lot of organisations freely promote home births for fraternal twins.

I also don't think they should implant more than 2.

Once pregnant I do think it should be up to the parents to decide whether to abort the embryo's/foetuses to ensure a greater chance of life.

However a society does it, it will always be easier for people that can afford multiple ivf's.

There are always going to be people who have to come to terms with not having a baby naturally or by ivf if they can't afford it or it fails.

I am one of them and am very happy being a foster parent instead. I won't have ivf, my desire to parent someone is being satisfied.

My little sister has been undergoing fertility treatment. Not ivf, but using fertility drugs as she has the same issues as me. Does not ovulate.

Last year she fell pregnant, it was twins. Both babies died during pregnancy.

I've spoken to her about this case, she said that she was warned lots of times during the start of her treatment that there was a risk of multiple birth.
My family has a high incidence of twins and triplets anyway.
She felt (with her partner) that it was a risk she would have faced with a natural pregnancy anyway.

I think the op makes far too many assumptions. You don't know what type of treatment the mother had. Your op almost implies that she was irresponsible for not choosing selective reduction, which, in my opinion is nobodies business but the mother and fathers.
I don't agree with implanting many embryos, but then again, i don't rerally agree with selective ivf full stop. That is entirely my own view though.

I wondered about that too lulu. I would imagine the damage to the uterus must be immense, I can't imagine she would ever be able to carry another child, if the uterus even survived the csection.

"There are always going to be people who have to come to terms with not having a baby naturally or by ivf if they can't afford it or it fails." I think that is a very valid point. We seem to have this notion that everyone is entitled to have a baby whatever it takes, when actually that's not necessarily the case. I don't think that implanting an unlimited amount of embrios should ever be justified, regardless of whether the couple concerned can afford multiple ivf attempts.

peachy's link on the history of multiples is a facinating read. lulu, it also answers a few of your questions.

the mother who had quints as part of a family of 11, one of those born less than a year after the quints is mind boggling... and that was back before modern intervention! i guess the uterus can recover from almost anything it goes through if that's any indication