4th Sextuplet in Minn. Dies in Hospital

[kskiska]

Source: The Guardian

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - Only two of the sextuplets born to a Minnesota couple were still alive Monday, and both remained in critical condition, hospital officials said.

The fourth sextuplet to die, Cadence Alana Morrison, died Saturday morning, officials at Children's Hospital in Minneapolis said. Three of her brothers died within the first week of their June 10 birth.

(snip)

Sextuplets Lucia Rae and Sylas Christopher, remained in critical condition Monday in the hospital's neonatal intensive care unit.

The babies were born about 4 months early. The smallest of the six weighed only 11 ounces at birth, and the largest was a little over a pound.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6736204,00.html

[barb162]

1. This sounds pretty bad for the last two, doesn't it.

I feel sorry for the parents

[Scairp]

11. Don't feel too sorry for them

Feel sorry for those fetuses born at barely half term. The parents knew this was a very real possibility when they found out they were having six children at one time. Almost no babies who are single births survive at only 22 weeks gestation, let alone multiples. This is wrong in every conceivable way (no pun intended), and people need to take more responsibility when they are undergoing fertility treatments, whether it's fertility drugs or in vitro. I think they are being selfish by not doing reductions after being told they have 4, 5, 6 or more fetuses developing. It's beyond selfish really, it's cruel, to everyone involved.

[youngdem]

13. Perfectly stated. Thank you.

It is a selfish, ego-driven decision to birth a litter of sickly, underdeveloped children.

She should have done a reduction to get down to 2 children.


Sad for everyone involved indeed, and all while driving health care costs up for all insured people - as I am sure this sad stunt cost hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars.

PLEASE let's have some ethics decisions within the medical community to reduce down to triplets at least to reduce this absurd and painful circus that seems to be in town somewhere here in the country nearly every month.

[barb162]

28. You're right

[redqueen]

35. "ethics decisions within the medical community "

Hear, hear!

I wonder if the profit motive figures into the failure to adopt some kind of standards in fertility treatments. It's certainly not healthy for the mother or the babies for a woman to try to bear a litter of children.

[LostinVA]

14. Excellent post

[barb162]

29. You're right

I didn't know there was such a thing as "reductions" ... never heard of it.

[haele]

65. My brother and sister-in-law went through in vitro and had to reduce.

She had gotten her tubes tied during her first marriage after three children, but she wanted a child with Rob when they got married, and they went through in vitro because she couldn't get her tubes untied to have a natural conception...they tried three times before a treatment finally took.
No way she could have carried four that took to term, nor could they afford more than one with the other three kids still at home. So they opted for the reduction after the 5th or 6th week, sticking to just the "strongest" embryo that was developing.

From the way they discussed it, after the first hour discovering the process worked - and the doctor was on top of things enough to tell them everything that was going on instead of just "hey, it took!", the decision to reduce wasn't very hard. He admitted to my folks later that it would probably been far more difficult the longer they waited.

Haele

[superconnected]

33. Excellent post.

[Arkansas Granny]

38. Although I agree with some of what you say about the selfishness

of the parents, I still feel sorry for them. Unless you have lost a child at birth (which I have) or have had multiple miscarriages (which I have) you cannot even imagine the pain involved. I think they made an unwise decision by trying to deliver all six fetuses, but I can still feel sorrow at the outcome for all involved.

[yardwork]

61. I do feel sorrow, for everyone involved.

I think of all the dying babies in the world - many of them starving to death. Rather than attempting to have six children at once, couldn't the couple have considered adoption?

[LeftyMom]

2. Human beings are not adapted to reproduce in litters.

Those poor kids would have faced poor health and probably serious cognitive issues if they'd survived.

Something really needs to be done about fertility clinics that let this happen.

[frogcycle]

3. yeah, need to abort all but one once they get implanted

now that'll fly, won't it? Can't even frigging dispose of the unimplanted ones!

With all due respect to people who want children and can't have them, I think society puts far too much effort into this - hell, the global population is going to destroy the environment and its all going to come crashing down, and we're spending thousands to make one baby, ending up with six that die

the justification for some medical procedures seems to be "because we can" - like saving the life of a profoundly brain-damaged accident victim...

[LeftyMom]

5. The smart and ethical thing to do, especially with couples who won't do a reduction

is to either implant a reasonable number of embryos (2, 3 at most) or when doing clomid or something like that to do ultrasound and skip trying to conceive on cycles where there are too many eggs maturing.

My best friend, who is personally anti-abortion but for legal access, looked into this and discussed it with her doctor before starting treatments, because she would not do a selective reduction.

[seriousstan]

6. When do we start legislating "the smart and ethical thing to do"?

[Mind_your_head]

8. Who ever said that people who could afford such procedures were smart?

It shouldn't be regulated by government. Presumably people who 'have the money' to afford such procedures could 'govern their own selves' morally, etc. in such matters.

'Wretched excess' AGAIN rears it's ugly head....apparently 'they' can't be trusted to do so.

[LisaL]

17. It sounds like they did do that, based on their website.

According to their website, she had two eggs maturing, and two undeveloped.
Of course they were encouraged to do selective reduction after it turned out she was carrying 6 babies, but they are religious so they say it wasn't an option. Of course now there are only two of the babies left alive.

[spotbird]

20. Did two twin?

Still, even with four eggs in the hatcher they should have been advised to wait.

[Coventina]

21. If they were so fucking religious why didn't they accept that

God obviously didn't intend for them to breed?

(this anger isn't directed at you lizzy, I'm pissed at these parents)

But oh no, it's perfectly OK to have secular, humanist science impregnate you, but NOT OK to have secular, humanist science tell you that 6 in one womb is too much.

Seems to me they would be doing the Lord's work by taking in a child that desperately needs a home.

Fucking idiots.

Ok, all of you "pro-life" people out there: IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE MORALLY OPPOSED TO THE OUTCOME OF A MEDICAL PROCEDURE, DO NOT UNDERGO SAID MEDICAL PROCEDURE!!!!!! HAVING 4 OF YOUR 6 CHILDREN DIE IS NOT "PRO-LIFE"!!!!!!!

:rant:

[superconnected]

34. Another excellent post!

:)

[redqueen]

36. but that's just it... they're not religious.

they're confused. very, very confused.

[LNM]

39. Sorry, they are religious

When the found out they were having six they declared it a gift from God. Therefore they couldn't selectively reduce. I'll try to find the Star Tribune link for you.

Here's the link.
http://www.startribune.com/462/story/1250380.html

Edited to add link.

[redqueen]

41. no. they think they are, sure... but they're not.

sorry, but having a litter? they are not religious. they are crazy.

[LNM]

43. Oh, I agree with you that they are crazy, I think this is horrible,

but why do you say they aren't religious? Did you read the link?

[redqueen]

44. because phony religion doesn't fool me.

people declaring that they're religious and going to all the meetings and making the payments to the right institution don't convince me at all.

they seem to be in the majority among those who consider themselves to be religious... but i tend to think they're really not. they're just noisier.

[LNM]

45. Okay, I get it.

Makes sense to me and I agree.

[yardwork]

62. A gift from God helped along by tens of thousands of dollars.

Tens of thousands of dollars that they could have sent to a poor family to help feed God's children that were already born.

It does make me angry.

[theHandpuppet]

58. EXCELLENT POST!!!!

Right there with you.

:thumbsup:

[SemperEadem]

50. It would appear that in the end, her God stepped in and did the

selective reduction for her... while I'm sorry for her that she's lost her babies, I have to wonder why knowing that not doing a selective reduction carried a high potential for avoidable problems for those fetuses not strong enough to make the journey, why she chose to put her own interests above those of these 'babies' she claims to love? Is going ahead in light of what she knew negligence? If she's that religious, then why did she not accept God's judgement for her life to not be one who could produce her babies in the manner in which her God intended for babies to be conceived? Was she playing God when she let her will have its head? It would seem that God's will won out for her life, if we're to take the religious arguement that she's using to justify her selfishness.

Just wondern....

[Gormy Cuss]

19. In some countries, IVF transfers are limited

Britain limits it to two per cycle, for example. There was a Belgian study which concluded that two embryo transfers were the optimal level for reducing the number of multiples without restricting the success rate by too much (paraphrasing, but article here: http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/14/1/83 )

It is well within the bounds of medical ethicism to restrict procedures that put the patient or patients at an intolerable risk for greater harm (can't sell both your kidneys, for example.)

[LNM]

40. This pregnancy wasn't IVT

She was taking fertility drugs.

[Gormy Cuss]

46. Yes, thank you, but IVF was mentioned in the post by LeftyMom

a post which was generically about ethical ways to avoid high multiples pregnancy while undergoing fertility treatments. I was responding to her post.

What happened in the MN case is sad all the way around because they chose a procedure with a high likelihood of multiple egg fertilization and had a very high success rate. From a medical ethics point of view, it's important to question whether there are sufficient tools available with sort of methods to ever recommend it to a woman who will not consider selective reduction in view of the costs (physical, emotional and last of all financial) associated with managing a very high risk high order multiple pregnancy. If there is a highly reliable way of knowing that there are, for example, only two or three eggs ready and the protocol requires such testing before proceeding, that would probably pass muster as medically ethical.

Still, I do feel sorry for the couple because they had six children delivered alive and now have only two, two who will be in for months of neonatal ICU care in all likelihood.

[barb162]

30. You seem to know this stuff. How many do they typically implant?

[LeftyMom]

59. Depends on the clinic

Some will only do 2 or 3 really good ones, others will do 6+. As a general rule, any place that makes pie in the sky promises or says the won't charge the full amount for a non-sucessful cycle is going to implant more embryos, often of lower quality in order to increase the chances something catches. Those are also the same clinics that generally won't do an ultrasound before ovulation and tell a couple to skip that cycle if too many follicles are developing on the ovary and the chances of many eggs being released are high (this is common with clomid and similar drugs.)

A responsible clinic will tell a couple that the acceptable goal is one or two healthy, term or near term babies per pregnancy. A bad clinic will not do enough in the above situations to prevent couples who are (understandably, if they don't realize the health risks) willing to choose many babies over their fear of never having any from risking the health and lives of the expectant mother and their future children.

My personal opinion is that any couple who isn't willing to do selective reduction should be limited to two embryos a cycle in IVF. Unfortunately with clomid, you really don't have as much control at the medical level once those eggs are ripening on the ovary, because you can tell a couple until you're blue in the face that this is not a good cycle to do the deed, but some of them will make the stupid and selfish choice and go for it anyhow.

[Thor_MN]

16. I believe normal litter size is between 1/2 and 1 times the number of teats.

A litter size greater than the number of teats is abnormal, meaning statistically rare.

Implanting large numbers of fertilized eggs to save money by literally putting all your eggs in one basket should not be allowed. They should implant just two at a time to prevent situations like this. The costs to get pregnant might be higher (more attempts) but the costs for multiple premature infants... I wouldn't be surprized to see insurance companies start offering a gambling, I mean, insurance package to cover these situations.

[StarryNite]

4. I didn't know until I read this post that

any of them had died. A huge deal was made about it when they were born. This is so very sad. :cry:

[uppityperson]

7. This whole thing is very sad

[Hekate]

9. I don't understand why this YOUNG couple was taking fertility drugs AT ALL

The article says the couple is only 24 years old, and that they had "spent more than a year trying to conceive."

First, that's very young. Second, the time span is well within normal parameters. Something is really wrong with this picture.

When I was impatiently trying to conceive my first baby my gyn told me to not even ask him if anything was "wrong" until my husband and I had tried at least a full year. My understanding is that even today that's the norm, unless the woman is already at the age where first conception becomes ever more difficult -- like late 30's and early 40's -- or if the woman is already known to have scarring of the fallopian tubes or the like.

I seriously question what kind of medical advice these youngsters were given all along the way. Isn't she the one whose heart stopped on the delivery table? This was a horribly risky pregnancy -- for her. It's like they gambled everything, and have almost lost everything.

So sad.

Hekate

[Mind_your_head]

10. I agree with you. eom

[Scairp]

12. No, she isn't the one who almost died after delivery

There was another sextuplet birth in the southwest, AZ I think. She had heart failure afterward. Haven't heard anything more about that family, but even if all the children survive, it is still morally wrong for couples to make a decision to go forward and have all of them. Selective reduction is the only humane thing to do. The medical community needs to take more responsibility when aiding infertile couples. They are beginning to see that super multiples are a serious issue and policies are changing, but not soon enough to prevent this tragedy.

[spotbird]

22. It's nothing I would do,

and I agree it is irresponsible of the medical professionals to allow it to happen, but choice means choice to me.

There definitely should be laws prohibiting the implantation of more than two embryos. But this case didn't involve IVF as far as I know.

[Scairp]

68. I am not sure

I think she was taking fertility drugs.

[LeftyMom]

23. They must have started trying young.

I have a friend that age who is on fertility drugs (I posted about her above) and if anything it took her longer to get proper diagnosis and treatment. She has PCOS, thought to be the most common cause of infertility in women, and does not ovulate at all with out clomid or something similar, plus other drugs to correct her hormone levels.

[colinmom71]

25. It's likely she already had a diagnosis...

That is known to impede normal fertility, such as Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome. My SIL was diagnosed with PCOS at age 22, but she's got a few years before she's worried about conceiving, if she decides to at all (she's 30 now)...

But yes, normally most OB/GYN's will tell a couple to wait one year to try to conceive naturally before worrying about fertility problems and seeking fertility testing. It sounds like this couple's doctor followed normal protocol before they resorted to fertility treatments. And unfortunately, even exercising extra care by trying to monitor the number of follicles released after Clomid treatments can give false results. Some follicles may not be fully visually appreciated by the ultrasound or even twinning can happen after conception, leading to the development of more embryos than anticipated... The science of fertility treatments has advanced greatly over the last two decades but it's still not perfect, and sadly mistakes can be made even when intentions are to avoid a higher order multiple pregnancy.

[leftchick]

27. you are exactly right

her physician acted in a very unethical manner treating her this way. I was 32 years old and told to try for a year before they would use fertility drugs.

[LeftishBrit]

15. This is so sad.

In the UK, there are rules against implanting more than 2 or at most 3 embryos at once. This does reduce the chances of success, but it also prevents this sort of tragedy.

[LisaL]

18. She wasn't implanted with embryos. She was taking fertility drugs.

[Bridget Burke]

24. Fetal Implantation costs more.

(Dr Theodore) Nagel, who is not involved in the Morrison case, said managing infertility treatments is important. In vitro fertilization allows control of the number of eggs implanted in a woman's uterus. When patients use drugs to increase ovulation, the number of eggs a woman produces can't be controlled as precisely.

Skilled fertility doctors monitor egg production and advise couples against intercourse when it appears too many eggs have been produced. But sometimes, he said, fertility drugs are administered by obstetricians, gynecologists and internists without special training.

"Sometimes it is well done, and other times it is inappropriately done," he said.

http://www.twincities.com/ci_6224936?source=most_viewed

Fertility drugs cost less than more invasive procedures. (But are not cheap.) www.babycenter.com/refcap/preconception/fertilityproblems/1228997.html

I join with those who wonder why such a young couple took these steps. Why they used science to conceive, then "turned to God" when they realized she was carrying so many fetuses. "Sacrificing" fetuses is no light matter--but less sad than dead babies. To me, at least.

[leftchick]

26. should have done selective reduction way back in the first trimester

:(

[Javaman]

31. This just in...

Upper Volta (ap)-

Woman gives birth to entire nation. Yesterday, Mrs. Matilda Phlapswitch gave birth to the nation of Swankenstien after giving birth to an unprecedented number of babies.

Last count as of 10 PM last night was 20 million. The mother is said to be doing fine but still doesn't believe in birth control.

She was quoted as saying, "it's god will for me to be birthin' a nation".

medical scientists are still at a loss to explain the massive birth. Dr. P.F. Pealy of the New College of Medicine in the new capital of Phlipsberga in Swankenstein said, "well, we knew she was getting big when we had to use a military heavy lift helicopter to transport her to the hospital.

Mother and nation are reported doing find. She was last seen breast feeding the children via a mass cow herd milking device.

[saigon68]

37. LOL

Who said the posters here were dull

[Binka]

48. I Just Burst Out Laughing In My Office!

"it's god will for me to be birthin' a nation". What a FUCKING riot!!

[Occulus]

32. This seems criminal, somehow n/t

[OldschoolDem]

42. Children die premature all the time

There is nothing criminal about it. These people had good intentions and I'm sure the parents are completely broken hearted about what happened to there children. People here demanding restricting how many children people can have are idiotic. Since when did the United States turn into Communist China? There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a big family provided you can feed and cloth them. If you can't provide for a big family then it is irresponsible.

[redqueen]

47. clothe

people here aren't saying don't have big families. they're saying don't have litters. substantial difference.

[OldschoolDem]

51. It sounds like these people

weren't trying to have multiple kids or litters. They were just trying to get pregnant. Normally you can't control whether you have multiple kids. It does sound like they were a little anxious considering they were both 24 years old.

Also I have heard people on the DU say they support cutting the birth levels and trying to trim the world population to 1 billion people. I personally think that is completely wrong, but that is what a discussion is all about.

[redqueen]

52. They may not have intended to, but that is what they did...

and they did it fully aware of the risks it posed to both the mother and all the children. No, you can't control it, but fertility treatments do indeed increase the risks of the mom becoming pregnant with a litter of babies. You can control that, and they *chose* not to. It's a monumentally stupid choice.

I don't see the point in starting another discussion in this thread. This one is about the irresponsible practices going on in fertility treatments. Maybe you could find an overpopulation thread to rant about evil DUers and their awful opinions in? :shrug:

[Shakespeare]

54. Oh, yes, you certainly can control it.

Do you know anything about how this particular fertility treatment works? Responsible couples go back in and have the number of viable embryos reduced to a lower-risk number after they see how many successfully implant. At this point, the embryo has developed no nerve endings or any other signficant parts of the central nervous system. How much more pain do you think those poor premies went through because of their parents' arrogance, stupidity, irresponsibility and selfishness?

This isn't about population control; it's about using fertility treatments in a responsible way.

[Binka]

49. They Are Fucking Idiots I Don't Give A Shit What Their Intentions Were

Welcome to my ignore. Have fun hanging out at DU. :hi: Bye-Bye.

[Bjornsdotter]

60. A one word solution

.....adoption.

[Scairp]

70. Wow, are you waaaayy off

First off, your argument is suspiciously wingnut-ish. Second, no one is saying that people should be told how many kids they can have; you should read more before you accuse people of wanting our country to operate like "Communist China". It isn't the people on this board who are doing that, it's the maroons currently running our country who advocate restricting choices when it comes to whether our citizens have the right to decide when and how many children they should have. But that isn't even the problem I and others here are having with this couple and other couples having super multiples, it's that they went ahead knowing that they were taking a terrible risk of losing them all. It is morally wrong. And do you really think they are wealthy and could have handled six extremely premature infants at once? The medical bills alone are going to run into the millions. Every time one of these super multiple births occur, someone sets up a fund to donate formula, diapers, clothes, etc, precisely because they cannot afford all the stuff a baby needs times five, six or seven. These fetuses, and that's what they were at 22 weeks, were forced out of the womb before they could survive on their own. IMO, these people were caught up in the attention they received by the news that the the woman was carrying 6 fetuses and continued the pregnancy for their own selfish reasons. They should have selectively reduced so as to have a better chance of delivering a healthy child, or even twins. The human female is not meant to carry to term that many fetuses at once, and the terrible odds they faced are not worth the parents' self-centered choice to go ahead under some BS religious premise that "God" must have wanted it, or he wouldn't have given them six fetuses. Did God also want them delivered at half the gestational time and to suffer and die one by one? And let's talk about how many adoptable kids are languishing in foster homes, kids that people like this couple don't want because they aren't cute little Caucasian infants, or they came from abusive parents, and/or are most likely minorities or they have special needs. But the right-wingnut cases who are infatuated with the fetus don't want to get into that. If they wanted 6 kids, they could have called a social worker and gotten as many as they could provide for.

So, I knocked down your straw man. Any response?

[hedgehog]

53. What most people posting here are ignoring is that there have

been many cases in recent years in which sextuplets survived and did very well. To you, it would have been selective reduction. To the parents, and especially the mother, it would have been choosing to kill some children so the others could survive. We don't have the details of the medical history, and I doubt anyone here is an expert in assisted reproduction. My guess (and I admit it is a guess) is that they thought they had a reasonable chance of bringing all six children to a healthy birth. My guess is that by the time it was clear that things were going wrong, it was too late medically and/or emotionally to do anything but allow events to unfold as they have.

[Beaverhausen]

55. In many cases the children have some handicaps or birth defects

Don't assume they are all healthy. Even the one's Diane Sawyer visits every year. Many of them have big medical problems.

[Shakespeare]

57. Their physician is supposed to EDUCATE them about the reality of the situation.

And the reality is that the ones that get written up in the news are exceptions. It is not safe to carry that many fetuses to term (or near-term), and physicians strongly counsel their patients against doing so.

[LisaL]

64. Yea, and I wonder if those reality TV shows about multiple children

influence those other couples who think -those 6 made it, why should I have selective abortion? Of course it doesn't work this way for everyone.

[fortyfeetunder]

The woman ovulated at least 10 eggs!!!

"Since then we’ve learned that Brianna had ovulated at least ten eggs. The doctors at our infertility clinic say that they’ve never seen anything like this before, and can’t explain why it happened. They strongly encouraged us to consider selective reduction, explaining that the risks of carrying and delivering six babies are too great. They said that reducing the number of fetuses now would increase the chance of survival for the the remaining fetusus as they develop, and would decrease the chance of long-term health risks for the babies that were carried to term. However, we knew right away that this is not an option for us. We understand that the risk is high, but we also understand that these little ones are much more than six fetuses. Each one of them is a miracle given to us by God. He knows each one of them by name and we will trust Him absolutely for their lives and health."


Makes me wonder if all ten eggs had been fertilized would they have gone for a selective reduction then.....

[fortyfeetunder]

67. deleted n/t

[marlakay]

56. I am not a abortion fan but if you mess with mother

nature on adding that many eggs to yourself who are you to then say we can't abort them because they are babies? That is like playing God to me.

My sister-n-law had twins and it started out 3 and she aborted the smallest one. She was older and had a hard time getting pregnant.

Naturally women are meant to have children when they are younger, but more and more women have them older now, spend a fortune like my sister-n-law and then she had to have abortion to have two healthy ones.

I know most of you won't agree with me, but something just doesn't seem right to me about all this playing around with sperm & eggs. Its like we are spoiled kids and want our way, kids when we want them on demand...

[NoodleyAppendage]

63. This couple had a CHOICE to pair down the litter to increase viability.

I fault no one other than the mother and father. It is medically recommended to pair down the number of fetuses in cases such as this to increase the viability of a successful birth of (generally) two children. But, in this age of bullsh*t Dark Ages thinking, medically recommended gets trumped by stupid faith-based decisions. It is the parent's fault that these premature infants are all in serious trouble. Pure and simple.

J

[fortyfeetunder]

66. Let's hope other n-tuplet parent wannabes take note

I didn't realize the newborns were 4.5 months early! The poor little things were half-done!

I only hope other n-tuplet parent wannabes take note of these last two sextuplet births (one mom with a damaged heart, the other family losing 4 babies of the six) and think about the risks and consequences of attempting for multiple births.

[Vinca]

69. I sure wish people would adopt instead. nt