On my blog, http://www.mloknitting.com/?p=523 , I posted about how paternalistic her article in the NYT mag ( http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/magazine/20wwln-lede-t.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin )was and how it offends me to think that I need to be "protected" from myself because I'm "desperate" to have a baby. The woman pretends to be some sort of expert on ART but magically conceived her daughter "naturally."

Maybe it's the lupron, but this burned my bottom!

I also read the NYT piece. And the De piece she did last year.

She is one of my favorite writers about women's issues, I have read several of her books. Waiting for Daisy was amazing.

But, yes, I feel like since ART did not work for her, and she luckily got pregnant naturally, she has suddenly got a hair up her arse for ART. It irks me. The only thing I can deduce is that she is unaware that emotionally, she is probably putting her bad feelings about her IF experience onto the shoulders of the entire ART profession.

I can guarantee you, my RE is not taking advantage of me. I appreciate all she has done to try to help us, from fair and reasonable fees, to trying to convert to a natural cycle when it was not looking good, to getting us credited and discounted cycled, to giving us free drug samples.

Oh, if only I could get pregnant naturally, and then, be able to talk about ART and the good REs who do it with grace and gratitude. Sure, there are creeps, but that is not the majority.

MLO, I completely understand your reading of Orenstein's article, and I get why the tone bugs you--bugs me, too!--but I think her basic message is pretty sound and is something most of us echo a lot--and you refer to quite eloquently in your blog post--which is that if we only were all told the whole story when entering into advanced reproductive technology and given a good survey of the risks involved we'd be better able to make informed choices for ourselves. Wouldn't change our decisions for the most part, but we'd be more in control at a time when control is so fleeting that it's precious.

For instance, most docs behave as if twins are no big deal (my RE included), but the risk of complications goes up tremendously with twins, and I think more couples should know that before making choices that encourage twins.

I'll be moving to DE after our next round of IVF, and I'm going to ask my RE when, God willing, we get to transfer with DE, to only transfer one back at a time. Not because I am afraid of raising twins, but because I'm afraid of getting that far and losing twins because the risk is higher.

For all her faults and irritating attitudes, Orenstein is kind of an authority from the personal side. She went through the mill TTC--even had a failed DE attempt--and I do think her daughter was conceived the old-fashioned way after they had given up TTC. One of the ironies about her situation is that strangers ask her all the time "Where did you get your daughter?" because they think she was adopted, since Orenstein's husband is Chinese-American. Her standard answer is, "My uterus."

It just does not bear out when there is proper prenatal care. All of the people with twin pregnancies that I have known - both natural and IVF - that have had complications had OTHER mitigating factors that would have placed them in high risk with a singleton.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "bogus" about the risks associated with carrying twins. If you read any IF blogs you will surely have seen the numerous devastating miscarriages that seem to happen when IF patients are combined with multiples. My co-worker carried her twins almost full term only to lose them in the 8th month, after being on bed rest for more than half of her pregnancy. She had no other mitigating circumstances.

I think you are correct that health care has come a long way. There is so much that they can do to help high-risk pregnancies go to full-term. But, there are still very real risks.

Me: 37
DH: 40
Highest FSH: 12
TTC since Dec. 2006
Planning to do IUI with injectibles by end of summer 2008
Currently taking micronized DHEA, Co Enzyme Q10, R-alpha lipoic acid, folic acid, Omega 3, and chinese herbs.
Acupuncture once a week.

Unfortunately, by being an IVF pregnancy, the reasons behind our IF can make us automatically high risk. I am beginning to think - from reading here and elsewhere - that us high-fsh girls either have deep endo or some thyroid issues or autoimmune issues that have not yet been identified.

The blogs you are reading are IF blogs. I actually know a LOT of people in my own family who had uneventful "natural" twin pregnancies - both fraternal and identicial. It is not twinning that makes the pregnancy high risk - it is the co-morbidity. Because most twin pregnancies today are IVF pregnancies, doctors just lump them all into high risk pregnancies to cover themselves.

In my family - and others from my ethnic group - NONE of the twins born - even the IVF twins - have been premature. I have found this to be true when speaking to women from families in which twins run. By the same token, in a weird twist, singleton pregnancies seem to be at higher risk for m/c. I know of no relatives who had a twin pregnancy - even the IVF ones - end prematurely, only the singleton ones. (And my family is very, very open about these issues.)