80 IVF foetuses are aborted a year

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

80 IVF foetuses are aborted a year

I can understand terminating for severe disability or genetic problems, or even because too many foetuses implanted. But how can a woman go through IVF and then change her mind? Anyone any insight?

Agree totally with SGB and others - it is an utter non story.

Women who have IVF and terminate are just like women who conceived naturally and terminate - there are thousands of myruad reasons why continuing the pregnancy will not be good for the mother. End of. Termination is legal.

A bit of sympathy for these women should be in order. I have never had to have the pain of infertility and subsequent fertility treatment, but can imagine it pulls you to pieces. Who knows why these women abort. But I am sure it is a difficult decision for them all and not decided upon idly.

Total sense spoken by SGB and GOML. I have had fertility treatment (didn't work) then became pregnant with dd unexpectedly. while having the treatment both me and dh decided that if it did work and we had more than twins we would reduce the number. The same went for terminating if baby was disabled. We hadn't decided which disabilities would be included which, in retrospect was naive.

As LG says, these days they really try to avoid creating too many embryos in the first place - and also, if selective reduction is necessary, it's because the alternative is all the foetuses dying.

This article/news report is just misogynistic bullshit TBH, trying to stir up further condemnation of women's 'selfishness' on extremely spurious evicence.

I think you'd need to know the percentages to make a real judgement.

The norm now is for two embrios to be put back so selective reduction surely no longer applies.

I imagine that as pre implantation diagnosis becomes more advanced, ie where the embrios can be screened for genetic defects, more and more people undergoing ivf might look to this option in the future rather than going through the process only to discover some unwanted disability down the line.

Wonder how many of those cycles were funded on the nhs?

"So heartless to be created and then terminated if there was one too many in the womb."

it's unusual to put in more than two embryos these days.

My cycle was funded on the NHS. If I discovered my child was unlikely to survive the birth because of some abnormality I would certainly rather terminate than have to go through with the birth.

Hopefully no one would ever be crass enough to suggest that an NHS funded IVF be immune to these kinds of heartbreaking decision.

Yes but in theory two implanted embryos could still split into multiples naturally (depending on the stage they are implanted).

Also selective reduction is a possibility even of there are only twins. I was offered this as T1 may have jeopardised T2.

Bad reporting IMO.

That Bill Ledger quote sounds like half a quote to me "I had no idea that there were so many post-IVF abortions and each one is a tragedy, but [goes on to explain selective reductions etc.]"

yes, what are we meant to think?? These heartless fickle women, one minute so grabby wanting the state to fund them a baby, next minute wanting rid of it as they decide to concentrate on their careers
Of course it's sad these babies are being aborted, but no more sad than any baby being aborted and the reasons I'd imagine are equally valid and equally agonised over.
Actally, I wonder whether this includes privately funded IVF and if so, would that make a difference

Yep, that's what they want people to think SPB.

People moaning about women taking money for this kind of thing forget that IVF usually involves 2 people anyway, the mother and the father or in some cases the two mothers. If I was being feckless then so was my husband. the NHS funding was spent on him as well as on me.

Quite often IVF is done because without it there is no way the man's sperm would make it to an egg. It's just doing what can't be done naturally otherwise. Any decision about the baby after that point shouldn't be moralised about and questioned as if it's different to a natural pregnancy.

Many people who go down the route of IVF do so because they have poor quality ova or sperm. In nature the conception would never happen. The chances of having a baby with a conditon which is completely and utterly compatible with life is far higher than for a naturally concieved baby.

I know someone who wife had an IVF termination. The baby had anencephaly (an extreme form of spina bifida where the baby has no brain) and there was no point in continuing the much wanted pregnancy. The lady is still grieving for her dead child.

Please grow up and don't paint all those who have terminations as murderers.

I read the article but it was very vague but very saddening. To go through all that IVF and then decide not to proceed once its worked.

I think if the IVF was paid for by the NHS it should have to be repaid if a termination is then requested - the money could have been far better spent on cancer treatments, prem babies etc.

its to do with nhs resources, not morality. but totally agree with thte point about unviable pregnancies having to be terminated. the heartbreak that must coz the parents is unimaginable

HappyMummy, did you read ReallyTired's post? And even if your suggestion was desirable - which it ain't - do you think it would be a good thing to force women to continue pregnancies against their will? Do you think that would create happy families with happy children?

And do you have any idea how horrendously complicated and administratively expensive it would be to create a payment mechanism for patients to 'refund' the NHS?

The NHS funds (limited) IVF for some people on the pragmatic grounds that is is cheaper than women going off abroad and having multiple embryos implanted then returning for a multiple birth in the UK, btw. Not out of the goodness of health ministers' hearts.

very few of those who terminate an IVF pregnancy will be doing so for "social" reasons eg failed relationship/finances, most will be selective reductions, some will be for serious abnormalities. many will be people who have had problem conceiving naturally because of age, or egg/sperm quality, many may have a history of repeated miscarriage - often natures way of discarding something which went wrong, & which is statistically likely to recurr - and in any case 80 is a tiny tiny number

a much more newsworthy story would be about the numbers of perfectly healthy pregnancies aborted JUST because they are STILL being misused as a form of contraception

I have an acquaintance who found out while she was pg that she had breast cancer.

in order to give her the best chance of survival for her other kids, she chose a termination

who's gonna judge an IVF mum in similar circs

or was this always intended to be JUST an anti abortion thread?

I had IVF to conceive DD. At the early scan (7w) DD was growing well with a good heart beat. The other embryo had also implanted and had a weak heart beat. It was half the size of DD.

I miscarried the second baby at 10w, otherwise I was told it would probably have to be aborted to ensure DD could continue to grow properly. I would not have jeopardised a healthy baby by refusing to have an abortion if it came to it.

Without a proper analysis of the stats, its just bullshit really.

That is quite possibly the most jaw-droppingly stupid thing I have ever read on mumsnet and believe me that is up against some pretty stiff competition.

Last year a friend of mine terminated a much-wanted baby conceived by IVF as it had a condition incompatible with life. A few weeks later she attempted suicide . If at that point someone had "asked for the money back" I would myself have made a few headlines for murder.