After the reproductive technologies presentation I did a little research. I found an article that discusses assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and their risks. Assisted reproductive technologies are fertility treatments were both eggs and sperm are handled in the laboratory. In vitro fertilization (IVF) is an assisted reproductive technology. In the article she discusses how women who undergo IVF are much more likely to deliver multiple-birth infants than women who conceive without it. The problem with these multiple births is that it raises health risks for both the woman and her infant. For women, the health risks can be a higher probability for the need of a cesarean section, maternal hypertension, preeclampsia, hemorrhage, and death. For the infant, the health risks include a higher chance that they will require neonatal intensive care, and experience higher rates of low birth weight, preterm birth, and cognitive and physical impairments. Should these reproductive technologies be used if there are these health risks present? There is another reproductive technology that can be used single embryo transfer (SET) which has far less health risks because only one embryo is being transferred so it is far less likely for the woman to have multiple births. Surprisingly SET isn't used that much due to current federal policies like The Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 which creates incentives for physicians to use multiple embryos to obtain better success rates. Do you think that the emphasis should be on better health for the infant and mother or on higher success rates?
Reproductive technologies and multiple births
Categories:
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/131990
1 Comment
Leave a comment
Search
About this Entry
This page contains a single entry by hans3002 published on November 21, 2010 4:51 PM.
Mission to Abort. was the previous entry in this blog.
Couple wants you to decide: should they abort? is the next entry in this blog.
Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.
Categories
- 1: Introductions (Sep 8/10) (3)
- 2: Scientific Foundations (Sep 13/15/17) (26)
- 3: Inventing Identities I (Sep 20/22/24) (26)
- 4: Inventing Identities II (Sep 27/29/Oct 1) (25)
- 5: Beyond Dualisms (Oct 4/6/8) (18)
- 6: Feminist Science (Oct 11/13/15) (16)
- 7: Queer Natures (Oct 18/20/22) (23)
- 8: Democratic Science (Oct 25/27/29) (11)
- 9: Animal Research (Nov 3) (8)
- 9: Environmental Justice (Nov 1) (6)
- 9: Genetic Engineering (Nov 5) (10)
- 10: Biofears (Nov 10) (8)
- 10: Diet, Health, Body (Nov 12) (9)
- 10: Public Health (Nov 8) (7)
- 11: Cosmetics (Nov 15) (5)
- 11: Reproductive Tech (Nov 17) (14)
- 12: Floating Days (Nov 22/24)
- 13: Virtual/Realities I (Nov 29/Dec 1/3)
- 14: Virtual/Realities II (Dec 6/8/10)
- 15: Wrapping Up (Dec 13/15)
- 14: Virtual/Realities II (Dec 6/8/10)
- 13: Virtual/Realities I (Nov 29/Dec 1/3)
- 12: Floating Days (Nov 22/24)
- 11: Reproductive Tech (Nov 17) (14)
- 11: Cosmetics (Nov 15) (5)
- 10: Public Health (Nov 8) (7)
- 10: Diet, Health, Body (Nov 12) (9)
- 10: Biofears (Nov 10) (8)
- Beyond the Classroom (3)
- Events (6)
- Extra Credit: Film Reviews (4)
- Petri Dish (12)
Tag Cloud
Recent Entries
Categories
- 1: Introductions (Sep 8/10) (3)
- 2: Scientific Foundations (Sep 13/15/17) (26)
- 3: Inventing Identities I (Sep 20/22/24) (26)
- 4: Inventing Identities II (Sep 27/29/Oct 1) (25)
- 5: Beyond Dualisms (Oct 4/6/8) (18)
- 6: Feminist Science (Oct 11/13/15) (16)
- 7: Queer Natures (Oct 18/20/22) (23)
- 8: Democratic Science (Oct 25/27/29) (11)
- 9: Animal Research (Nov 3) (8)
- 9: Environmental Justice (Nov 1) (6)
- 9: Genetic Engineering (Nov 5) (10)
- 10: Biofears (Nov 10) (8)
- 10: Diet, Health, Body (Nov 12) (9)
- 10: Public Health (Nov 8) (7)
- 11: Cosmetics (Nov 15) (5)
- 11: Reproductive Tech (Nov 17) (14)
- 12: Floating Days (Nov 22/24)
- 13: Virtual/Realities I (Nov 29/Dec 1/3)
- 14: Virtual/Realities II (Dec 6/8/10)
- 15: Wrapping Up (Dec 13/15)
- 14: Virtual/Realities II (Dec 6/8/10)
- 13: Virtual/Realities I (Nov 29/Dec 1/3)
- 12: Floating Days (Nov 22/24)
- 11: Reproductive Tech (Nov 17) (14)
- 11: Cosmetics (Nov 15) (5)
- 10: Public Health (Nov 8) (7)
- 10: Diet, Health, Body (Nov 12) (9)
- 10: Biofears (Nov 10) (8)
- Beyond the Classroom (3)
- Events (6)
- Extra Credit: Film Reviews (4)
- Petri Dish (12)

This is interesting, eye-opening, and slightly horrifying at the same time. While reading your post I was thinking to myself on why multiple embryos are used. It's all because there is a "better" success rate. As I read further, I saw that you addressed this point, but also brought up SET. I had never even heard of SET because I've been in this mindset that IVF transfers involve more than one fertilized egg, and that's how the procedure is done. I always took the risks for the mother and infants involved to be necessary risks that were just part of the process. Seeing how there is a way that is better for the mother and the child, I'm in shock as to why this isn't talked about more. News stories of people like octomom giving birth to a ridiculous number of children at the same time can spark controversy on the practices of IVF. No matter how many stories about this that I've seen, I have yet to see anything about SET.
Personally, I think the emphasis should be on better health for the infant and mother. Thinking about it on a small scale, personal health is important for everybody, as everyone should have a good quality of life. Putting more consideration into the health of the mother and child will start to weaken the business aspect of birthing that was touched on during the presentation. On a much larger scale, are higher success rates really that important? The world obviously needs more children because our orphanages are full yet. C'mon people!!!!!