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.

I wouldn't call it a "freak show", but yes. Can you imagine finding $20,000 a year to send 8 children to a university?

peachy - the charge is the same whether the treatment is successful or not. I suppose that some doctors could push up the number of embryos to increase the % of pregnancies resulting - which they would use as advertising for the clinic.

It seems like some people on here think that US private health care = patient gets whatever they want. Perhaps I've been lucky to have good doctors, but I've never experienced or heard about that happening.

By the way, I know of one premature baby costing half a million dollars in hospital fees. Almost bankrupted the parents. In fact, medical fees are the most common cause of bankrupcy. I hope the octuplet mother had good insurance.

well you would both have to stay off work to look after the babies, wouldn't you? So the family wouldn't have an income and I expect you more or less have to do the whole media circus thing to earn some money. You can't spend the first 3 years living on donations. They may be getting a lot of donations now while the story is fresh but two or three years down the track..?

I never said that Wannabe and I hope you don't think I did!

I just said I heard donations we re coming in: nothing more.

FWIW I think the entire medical system in the US is morally bankrupt.

The chances of having 4 embryos implanted which all split is I would have thought so statistically unlikely as to be impossible (although I'm no statistician).

I do think it's irresponsible to have that many embryos implanted (and I am speaking as someone who has had fertility treatment)

ah no peachy I was never suggesting that you'd said that I was responding to the poster that said the parents of these children ended up having to go on chatshows etc in order to keep up their publicity and earn money in order to be able to support their children.

Obviously these babies are not freaks, but let's be honest - the only reason why the media pay good money for the stories of these situations is because they know that people will pay to read it in order to satisfy their curiosity.

afaik there was a woman recently who had two embrios implanted which in turn divided into two sets of identacle twins. I think it was the first recorded case ever, so I imagine the chances of that happening to 4 embrios would be so slim as to be impossible.

What strikes me about the press coverage of this is the contrast between the way this mother is being shown, and the way Mandy Allwood was shown by the british press when she conceived multiple babies. The American mother is shown as heroic and lucky- her babies survived. Poor Mandy Allwood, it was tragic, I think none of her babies did survive- was hammered by the press and made to look irresponsible. Is that just the difference bewteen the british and american press,as in the british papers can be very vitriolic. Or is it like well if your babies are ok all is forgiven, you're wonderwoman.

Thats a really good point thesundaymarket I remember Mandy Allwood was almost vilified (sp?) in the press.

iirc the British woman fell pregnant after being explicitly told to abstane from sex while she was taking a certain drug, and so her failure to do so was seen as somewhat irresponsible.

Also, the chatshow industry in America is quite big, so perhaps this woman is being given all this positive publicity because they know that it will do good for their ratings.

mandy allwood emplyoed an agent and her story was subject to a bidding war between two red tops. it was not pleasant at all

her babies died before birth

it was horrific

"So slim as to be impossible" still happens though. I can't find the figure for the USA, but in the UK in one year alone, 10,000 babies were born as the result of IVF alone. So over 10 years, there would be 100,000 babies born. Plus all the other forms of fertility treatment, plus the numbers will be a lot higher in the USA and in the rest of Europe. That gives you a lot of rolls of the dice of pregnancies that could result in something very very rare.

Personally if I was told that I could have a treatment that would result in a 40% chance of pregnancy and a 0.1% chance of something bad happening (to pluck figures out of the air) I think I would go for it. But that would result in something bad happening to 1 in every 1000 treatments.

Just a question--Does the NHS cover IVF and other fertility treatments?

yes the NHS does but usually only one course depending on PCT.

depends where you live - it's very much a postcode lottery.

Some pct's cover IVF/fertility treatments if you do not already have any children, but afaik the criteria is that if you alreay have children you are not entitled to treatment on the nhs. Other authorities don't cover any ivf at all - ours doesn't, neither to berkshire - my sil is having to have ivf and she will have to pay for it even though she doesn't have any children.

There is a mn'er who did carry a baby to term but as he was stillborn she was entitled to IUI and one cycle of IVF...

Thanks for the info--I'm always learning something new on MN.

Lots of strict criteria too with PCT, apparently I'm too old at 36 for fertility treatment on the NHS but 'just' old enough to foster according to local authority (bizarre).

There are some very weird ideas going around about who is a suitable parent.