Hi,
Can someone point me to a good source on general statistics for the chance of losing all three babies, in a triplet pregnancy, by not reducing vs. the chances by reducing, or other similar statistics (for a friend of mine recently pregnant with triplets and who seems to be getting some dodgy numbers from her doctor)
lisaash did not intend to be a trouble-maker and is *not* an expert on this subject. Link removed.
I researched it a lot on google when I was pregnant with triplets in the first trimester. You'll find different statistics. In one of the articles I read, they said the risk for miscarriage carrying triplets was up to 25 %. I'm not sure if that means losing all three or if it means the risk of a vanishing twin in the early weeks.
I\'ve read some articles recently that say triplet pregnancies are getting safer because of better medical care.
When the doctor at my fertility clinic mentioned selective reduction, she said the risk of losing all three was usually around 10 %, but with the doctor she was recommending it was only 5 % because he was so good.
If you google it, you'll find a lot of articles.
The woman who writes the blog that lisaash mentions below is NOT pro-choice. She's pro her OWN choice and expects every woman to see things the way she does. She doesn't think other women should have the right to make their own decisions, they have to choose what she chooses. I'm very familiar with her because I used to read the comments on tripletconnection.com and she writes on there A LOT.
I actually am pro choice Stacy and always have been. (Followed the link here from my blog!) I believe women should make choices based on accurate information, not on the misconception perpetuated by REs. If a choice is made for financial, emotional, or way of life decisions, then that's a choice I accept. If a woman truly wants to carry triplets, but is told she's making an irresponsible decision, or feels that she's being pressured, I want her to know she's not. She CAN do it with proper prenatal care.
Good luck original poster for your friend in whatever decision she makes. I realize she is at a very hard place, as I was there myself once.
Here is a direct quote from her site (one of the mild ones):
"I don't like when people reduce from triplets to twins.
There, I've said it. "
The woman who writes the blog that lisaash mentions below is NOT pro-choice. She's pro her OWN choice and expects every woman to see things the way she does.
Yep, Stacy is right on the money here. The blog is actually not informative at all, I have no idea why LisaAsh referenced that site here. In fact, I can't imagine any intelligent woman using that woman's blog as an informative way to gather info on s/r or having triplets.
To salam73: read her blog if you are interested in her perspective (FYI - she uses words like "gruesome" and "kill" when referring to s/r - *I* can read that and not flinch these days because it doesn't hurt me, but I don't know where you are at emotionally right now). I did not see any stats in her blog. I saw a couple of alarming falsehoods about s/r, and then mainly her opinion...if you don't feel up to reading something like that just yet (or ever) - skip her blog.
I agree that you should stop reading my blog and probably stop hanging out in triplet support groups too. (That's just weird!) Those are for the "stupid" people who had triplets anyway and as the PP said, I couldn't possibly have any information on HAVING triplets. (Huh?)
For the record, you guys linked ME and since only ignorant people decide not to reduce when faced with the decision, if you are "smart" then don't read opposing viewpoints. It's MY blog and MY platform and I don't mince words or sugar coat things. In fact, why don't you get your moderator to delete the post containing my link? That seems like a no-brainer.
Michele - I wholeheartedly agree the link to your blog should be taken down. I can only imagine the devastation a poor woman would feel if she stumbled unkowingly into your blog. It is your blog and you are entitled to your views plain and simple. I do take issue with you coming on to this safe space. While your life and thoughts and decisions are good for you, you cannot possibly know or place yourself in the shoes of every woman who is faced with this decision.
You yourself in your blog state that a woman SHOULD consider reduction if she's pregnant with quads or more, so gee, thanks for that. I'm curious where you are getting your statistics from. The ones I got were from the CDC (Canadian data central bank) and not from RE's. The outcomes were stated for singleton, twin, triplet, quads, and HOM's above quads. In fact, the difference between twins and triplets was significant ( as stated in the medical journals, of pregnancies carried between 2000-2003).
Furthermore, your understanding of long term problems with preemies is quite lacking, and I strongly suggest you look deeper into long term outcomes.
Previously, outcomes were tracked through neonatal clinics, usually ending at discharge between 18 months and 24 months. New studies are now following preemies into their school years, and as it turns out, the long term effects of even mild prematurity (34 weeks plus) can sometimes not rear their ugly heads till kindergarden and beyond.
I agree neonatology has made great strides, and the longevity of a child born prematurely from a HOM pregnancy has become much longer. I'm also happy for you that your own triplet journey ended so well. But try to be a little more sensitive on this particular board. I'm sure on triplet connection your views may come off stinging a little less than they do here.
I agree that you should stop reading my blog and probably stop hanging out in triplet support groups too. (That's just weird!) Those are for the "stupid" people who had triplets anyway and as the PP said, I couldn't possibly have any information on HAVING triplets. (Huh?) For the record, you guys linked ME and since only ignorant people decide not to reduce when faced with the decision, if you are "smart" then don't read opposing viewpoints. It's MY blog and MY platform and I don't mince words or sugar coat things. In fact, why don't you get your moderator to delete the post containing my link? That seems like a no-brainer.
Stupid and ignorant are your words Michele, not mine. The OP was asking for stats, your blog doesn't have any as far as I could see. All I am really saying about your blog is it is slanted against s/r - and if someone wants helpful info on having triplets versus s/r, your blog is not a great place to go...it is all opinion.
For the record, I don't think "stupid" people have triplets and "smart" people have s/r. What a weird thing to say.
"Previously, outcomes were tracked through neonatal clinics, usually ending at discharge between 18 months and 24 months. New studies are now following preemies into their school years, and as it turns out, the long term effects of even mild prematurity (34 weeks plus) can sometimes not rear their ugly heads till kindergarden and beyond."
My kids were only in the NICU eight days, but there were clearly two types of people in there. There were people who had multiples and had early births for that reason alone, then there were the crackheads and druggies and people on the low end of the socioeconomic ladder, who didn't obtain proper prenantal care. When tracking statistics from prematurity, one doesn't divide the groups and track the ones from just multiple births, who then grow up in a nuturing environment, with the competition of having same-aged siblings driving them to succeed and parents who are involved.
I can tell you that the longterm look of prematurity with the triplets in my city is fantastic. Because s/r isn't pushed in my city, we have a very very very large group of women with them. I was with 11 other triplet moms for dinner last Thursday. I had five sets of triplets at my children's fifth birhtday party a couple weeks ago. I have a set of triplets with my kids in gym. There's another set of triplets in my singleton's preschool class.
All of our kids are thriving. I know what the face of prematurity for these kids looks like long term and it looks good. They are all growing up in homes with stay-at-home moms, who are ultra-involved. My own children are so far ahead of the kindergarten curriculum, I'm stumped as to what to do with them next year. I have one reading at a first grade level! We have another lady in our group with 9 year old triplets, and they tested in to a highly academic private school and they are all succeeding.
I noticed, while I was here, that nobody on this board gives any advice for NOT reducing. Why is that? If this is a place for people to come who are facing selective reduction and don't know what to do, why isn't there anyone here telling the other side of the story? By reading the posts on here, you would think that this is your only option.
Or is the intent of this board to tell people how to reduce only? Is that the intent?
I noticed, while I was here, that nobody on this board gives any advice for NOT reducing. Why is that? If this is a place for people to come who are facing selective reduction and don't know what to do, why isn't there anyone here telling the other side of the story? By reading the posts on here, you would think that this is your only option.Or is the intent of this board to tell people how to reduce only? Is that the intent?
Come on, you're not dumb - right? Have you seen the title of this board? Almost all of the women on this board have reduced...that is the decision they have made and so they cannot offer any helpful and nonjudgemental advice on the other side of the coin. Any bright woman who wants to see that side of things would clearly visit a multiples board or website. This is the s/r board. Don't feel so threatened, nobody is trying to insult your decision to raise triplets
I cannot tell you the intent of this board as a whole - my intent is to offer support, experience and info to those who want it, on s/r.
Michele
It\'s so inappropriate to have this discussion here.
What I can say is this - you have a local experience. You are clearly not educated well on the global aspects of the subject, and for that reason I will not debate with you. I have a more academic and statistics based opinion formulated, and I learned a long time ago not to argue with emotion.
As for why there aren't people here to talk others out of SR on this board, you will find that this is a safe space (if you read the rules of this board) for those CONSIDERING SR as an option. So clearly people like you who use ugly language and make people feel awful are not the norm here. In fact, there are those on this board who regretted it and came back to tell others of their experience. The rest of us listen, hold hands, and try not to encourage or discourage those who haven't made up their minds yet. That's what SUPPORT is.
**********
MicheleIt's so inappropriate to have this discussion here.What I can say is this - you have a local experience. You are clearly not educated well on the global aspects of the subject, and for that reason I will not debate with you. I have a more academic and statistics based opinion formulated, and I learned a long time ago not to argue with emotion.As for why there aren't people here to talk others out of SR on this board, you will find that this is a safe space (if you read the rules of this board) for those CONSIDERING SR as an option. So clearly people like you who use ugly language and make people feel awful are not the norm here. In fact, there are those on this board who regretted it and came back to tell others of their experience. The rest of us listen, hold hands, and try not to encourage or discourage those who haven't made up their minds yet. That's what SUPPORT is.
My experience is local, that is true. But that makes for an interesting aspect, because I live in Las Vegas. It's not like we are the Bible Belt. I don't know anyone in my triplet mom circle who is even religious, so it's not like we made our decisions based on radical religious views. We even have a lesbian couple I see every month.
I find it interesting and perplexing that in a diverse and progressive city like ours, triplet pregnancies are managed in a completely different way than they are managed in a different city, such as D.C. Why? Why are triplets more risky there? Why are we seeing such a different way of managing care depending on where you live? Don't you find that ODD?
So, yes, I understand now that you direct people to triplet support groups for the "other side" of the coin. I will now say goodbye and good luck, since I'm clearly not the right person to give an objective opinion, and I'll agree with that!
I will now say goodbye and good luck, since I'm clearly not the right person to give an objective opinion, and I'll agree with that!
Thank you, Michele. Much appreciated.
I'm a mom of triplets, and I'll be the first to say the idea of triplets is VERY daunting. Yes, there are many many things that can go wrong. I don't have a lot of stats, but I think the numbers are 25% to lose the entire pregnancy (those are close to the numbers for a miscarriage of one baby in certain age groups though), 50% lose at least 1 baby along the way, and I think that only 10% make it to 37 weeks gestationally. The average triplet gestation is 32 weeks. Most triplets will need a few weeks of NICU time, and learning disabilities and physical disabilities are much higher than with singletons. Forgive me if I'm wrong on the stats. I looked up so much of this info. online from research papers and through pregnancy books, so some of the numbers stuck in my head, while others have not.
Triplet pregnancies, like all HOM pregnancies, are a real gamble. Fortunately, ours came out very well with high birth weights, no NICU time and 36 weekers. We are NOT the norm. The whole pregnancy was very stressful, because you always hope yours will be the "good story", but there's a good chance it won't be too. If you are pregnant with triplets, please know it can work out well, but know that if it's not for you, it's not for you! I think the best mothers are the ones that really weigh these factors in very carefully, because you want the best possible outcome. No one can fault you for wanting quality over quantity.
Good luck!!!
PS. oops...just saw the date stamp on these posts. I think I'm a little late on this thread. Sorry...
Nadia--
Even if late, I and I suspect others appreciate your input. As someone who had triplets with good outcome, but also recognizing your good fortune in doing so, you present a rational and sensitive perspective for anyone who might be making this decision. THANK YOU for taking the time to visit this board!
YG
Nadia--Even if late, I and I suspect others appreciate your input. As someone who had triplets with good outcome, but also recognizing your good fortune in doing so, you present a rational and sensitive perspective for anyone who might be making this decision. THANK YOU for taking the time to visit this board!YG
Ditto this, Nadia!
** child mentioned **
My kids were only in the NICU eight days, but there were clearly two types of people in there. There were people who had multiples and had early births for that reason alone, then there were the crackheads and druggies and people on the low end of the socioeconomic ladder, who didn't obtain proper prenantal care.
Is this lady serious? What an insult! My child was born prematurely and it had nothing to do with lack of prenatal care. I am definitely not some crack wh**e living on welfare and to imply that everyone other than multiple birth moms who end up NICU are there because they didn't take care of themselves and their babies is just rude and ignorant. 
A friend in my IF support group also had a preemie due to complication with preclamsia. A singleton. And not a crackhead. I can think of other posters (and famous bloggers, like 'alittlepregnant') who have had singleton preemies.
The sweeping generalizations just boggle my mind.
You must log in to post.