Selective Reduction

Any expecting mother wants to do what’s best for their child while at the same time knowing their own limits. That’s what I learned from reading Grievous Choice on Risky Path to Parenthood, a New York Times article that is part of a series about twenty-first century fertility treatments in America.

This series opened my eyes to the lengths women go to get pregnant, as well as the risks associated with the options they choose. The particular article I read was about two women, Amanda Stansel and Kiera Sorrells, who chose to become pregnant through intrauterine insemination, which consists of multiple injections into the uterus. Following the treatment, both women found out that they were carrying not one, but multiple babies. Amanda Stansel was carrying six and Kiera Sorells was carrying five.

But with the initial shock that they were carrying more than one baby came some more tough information to digest: doctors support and suggest a process known as selective reduction, where some of the fetuses are eliminated early in the pregnancy giving “others the best chance for survival.” With this information, both families were forced to make a decision that would affect the rest of their lives. By keeping all of the babies, there is a great chance that some- if not all- could die, and those that do survive could have severe disabilities. By eliminating some of the fetuses through selective reduction, it gives the remaining babies a chance for better lives, but there is no guarantee that these babies will be fully healthy, either.

Faced with this decision, the two families opted for different solutions. The Stansels decided to carry all six babies while the Sorrells decided to eliminate two of their five fetuses using selective reduction. Unfortunately, neither Mrs. Stansel nor Mrs. Sorrell gave birth to all healthy children. The Sorells lost four of their six babies, one of which died last night after battling Phenomena for the past month. The Stansels lost one of their three baby girls fourteen months after she was born.

Regardless of their painful losses, both families feel that what they did was right. I fully support both of their decisions and I respect how difficult it must have been for them. I'm not saying that either family was wrong. They both did what they thought was best for their children, which is all they can do as parents. When faced with this heartbreaking dilemma, how do you know what the right thing to do is? Do you do what the Stansels did and carry all your babies hoping that you will defy statistics and all your children will be healthy? Or do you do what the Sorrells did and go through the process of selective reduction with the hope that the remaining babies will be born healthy and live longer lives? Is there a universal right, or just what's personally right for you?

I found the stories of these two families deeply touching. If this story resonates with you and you want more information, the Stansels keep a blog documenting their decision as well as their lives since giving birth. The Sorellses have created the Zoe Rose Memorial Foundation (in honor of their daughter that passed away) to help parents giving birth to premature children.