Time magazine published an article this week about a recent study that suggests that the most effective and inexpensive IVF method may also be the least likely to result in dangerous multiple births –
single embryo transfer.
In 2005, during my first IVF cycle to achieve pregnancy (not my
egg freezing cycle), my doctor and I discussed single embryo transfer. I was desperate to have a baby and adamantly against it. That was 4 years ago and research come a long way since then, but I am still not sure my answer would be different today. While I have no interest in becoming the octomom, I like the idea of having twins. When I really dig deep though, the root of my decision is cost and convenience.
I have been through 6 IVF cycles thus far. On average it takes me 2-3 cycles to get pregnant, each cycle costing $22,000 or more (IVF + ICSI + PGD + Medications). Even with partial insuarnce coverage, it is expensive. Somehow, I just didn't feel comfortable spending that money and only transferring 1 embryo. I also liked the idea of twins in that it would get me to my goal of a big family faster. 2-3 fewer IVF cycles down the road, 1 less pregnancy, etc. The reality of all of the risks of multiples are scary though and if cost wasn’t a factor, they would trump convenience for me.
So, I wonder, would more people be willing to do single embryo transfer, if insurance paid for IVF? And, would insurance be more willing to cover IVF, if people did single embryo transfer? Maybe this is the answer we’ve all been waiting for…