Twins?

[Anonymous]

Huh...I am a twin mom and surprised that there seems to be such a strongly negative consensus about the experience.

My pregnancy was fine. The babies arrived four weeks early, but were healthy and spent no time in the NICU.

They are about 1.5 years old now, and are absolute angels. It hasn't been that hard to take care of them. And I already had two older kids.

All that said, we've been particularly lucky in some ways that have helped out a lot:
1. We have a nanny (our older kids are in school, so the nanny watches just the twins)
2. The twins have been sleeping through the night since three months
3. The twins are very easygoing
4. The twins are both healthy, aside from the occasional cold

I'm not writing this to suggest that having twins is a breeze. It's certainly more work and can come with more complications than a singleton. But I do want to point out that it's certainly possible to have a wonderful experience.

FWIW...When I first found out that I was pregnant with twins, I was so scared and sad. Now that they are here, it's amazing.

[Anonymous]

Most drs will be fine putting in two. Unless there is some very obvious reason not too. My dr said he wouldn't do three or more but on the day of transfer offered to put the third one in because he said he it didn't look good anyhow and the best place for it is in me, not the lab. I declined and the third one stopped growing the next day.

[Anonymous]

You risk your twins being premature. You don’t want to deal with that OP. My twins are 3. They are my world and I love them with all my heart. However, they have issues. My week is consumed with speech therapy and OT. I wouldn’t trade it for the world, but you need to be aware of these risks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Huh...I am a twin mom and surprised that there seems to be such a strongly negative consensus about the experience.

My pregnancy was fine. The babies arrived four weeks early, but were healthy and spent no time in the NICU.

They are about 1.5 years old now, and are absolute angels. It hasn't been that hard to take care of them. And I already had two older kids.

All that said, we've been particularly lucky in some ways that have helped out a lot:
1. We have a nanny (our older kids are in school, so the nanny watches just the twins)
2. The twins have been sleeping through the night since three months
3. The twins are very easygoing
4. The twins are both healthy, aside from the occasional cold

I'm not writing this to suggest that having twins is a breeze. It's certainly more work and can come with more complications than a singleton. But I do want to point out that it's certainly possible to have a wonderful experience.

FWIW...When I first found out that I was pregnant with twins, I was so scared and sad. Now that they are here, it's amazing.

Please don't conflate your individual experience with statistical facts.

-Close to 60 percent of all twins and more than 90 percent of triplets are born prematurely (before 37 weeks). The average twin pregnancy lasts 35 weeks. Triplet pregnancies average 33 weeks, and quad pregnancies average 29 weeks.
-Preeclampsia develops in roughly 10 to 15 percent of women carrying twins, two to three times the rate of women carrying one baby.
-Gestational diabetes is more common in women carrying more than one baby.
-Placental abruption is three times more likely to occur in a multiples pregnancy.
-Multiple birth babies have about twice the risk for problems present at birth (congenital) such as spina bifida and other neural tube defects, and problems of the digestive tract and heart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh...I am a twin mom and surprised that there seems to be such a strongly negative consensus about the experience.

My pregnancy was fine. The babies arrived four weeks early, but were healthy and spent no time in the NICU.

They are about 1.5 years old now, and are absolute angels. It hasn't been that hard to take care of them. And I already had two older kids.

All that said, we've been particularly lucky in some ways that have helped out a lot:
1. We have a nanny (our older kids are in school, so the nanny watches just the twins)
2. The twins have been sleeping through the night since three months
3. The twins are very easygoing
4. The twins are both healthy, aside from the occasional cold

I'm not writing this to suggest that having twins is a breeze. It's certainly more work and can come with more complications than a singleton. But I do want to point out that it's certainly possible to have a wonderful experience.

FWIW...When I first found out that I was pregnant with twins, I was so scared and sad. Now that they are here, it's amazing.

Please don't conflate your individual experience with statistical facts.

-Close to 60 percent of all twins and more than 90 percent of triplets are born prematurely (before 37 weeks). The average twin pregnancy lasts 35 weeks. Triplet pregnancies average 33 weeks, and quad pregnancies average 29 weeks.
-Preeclampsia develops in roughly 10 to 15 percent of women carrying twins, two to three times the rate of women carrying one baby.
-Gestational diabetes is more common in women carrying more than one baby.
-Placental abruption is three times more likely to occur in a multiples pregnancy.
-Multiple birth babies have about twice the risk for problems present at birth (congenital) such as spina bifida and other neural tube defects, and problems of the digestive tract and heart.

Thank you. I could not have written a better response. Sure, there are great twin outcomes. I actually had one, but statistically, I was lucky. To pursue multiples purposefully for one’s convenience is reckless at best.

It should also be noted that the stats PP gives will actually be higher for AMA moms -which OP would be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh...I am a twin mom and surprised that there seems to be such a strongly negative consensus about the experience.

My pregnancy was fine. The babies arrived four weeks early, but were healthy and spent no time in the NICU.

They are about 1.5 years old now, and are absolute angels. It hasn't been that hard to take care of them. And I already had two older kids.

All that said, we've been particularly lucky in some ways that have helped out a lot:
1. We have a nanny (our older kids are in school, so the nanny watches just the twins)
2. The twins have been sleeping through the night since three months
3. The twins are very easygoing
4. The twins are both healthy, aside from the occasional cold

I'm not writing this to suggest that having twins is a breeze. It's certainly more work and can come with more complications than a singleton. But I do want to point out that it's certainly possible to have a wonderful experience.

FWIW...When I first found out that I was pregnant with twins, I was so scared and sad. Now that they are here, it's amazing.

Please don't conflate your individual experience with statistical facts.

-Close to 60 percent of all twins and more than 90 percent of triplets are born prematurely (before 37 weeks). The average twin pregnancy lasts 35 weeks. Triplet pregnancies average 33 weeks, and quad pregnancies average 29 weeks.
-Preeclampsia develops in roughly 10 to 15 percent of women carrying twins, two to three times the rate of women carrying one baby.
-Gestational diabetes is more common in women carrying more than one baby.
-Placental abruption is three times more likely to occur in a multiples pregnancy.
-Multiple birth babies have about twice the risk for problems present at birth (congenital) such as spina bifida and other neural tube defects, and problems of the digestive tract and heart.

Thank you. I could not have written a better response. Sure, there are great twin outcomes. I actually had one, but statistically, I was lucky. To pursue multiples purposefully for one’s convenience is reckless at best.

It should also be noted that the stats PP gives will actually be higher for AMA moms -which OP would be.

From a statistical point of view, your outcome -- minimal problems -- is typical.

Even though risks are higher for twin pregnancies, it's still more than likely that both mom and babies will be fine.

I write this as a stats person. I am not a twin booster in any way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because twin pregnancy is risky. Because caring for twin infants is grueling. Because parenting twins is hard. Really hard. We have twins, including one with relatively minor special needs and it is rough and they’re in upper elementary school. We got through it because you do what you must, but I really think that unless you’ve already had an infant you can’t really fathom how unrelenting twins can be.

I already have an almost-one-year old. I am concerned that it will be even more grueling caring for 3 at 45.

How would having 2 kids compare to having 1 because you lost the twin pregnancy? To me, that's the most important question.

I know that raising twins is hard, and it wouldn't be my first choice. But losing twins would be much harder, and it's a significant risk, especially at 43.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most drs will be fine putting in two. Unless there is some very obvious reason not too. My dr said he wouldn't do three or more but on the day of transfer offered to put the third one in because he said he it didn't look good anyhow and the best place for it is in me, not the lab. I declined and the third one stopped growing the next day.

Not necessarily. These are the guidelines that most REs follow for ethical reasons. If you have PGS tested normals, most will only do 1.

https://www.sart.org/globalassets/asrm/asrm-content/news-and-publications/practice-guidelines/for-members/guidance_on_the_limits_to_the_number_of_embryos_to_transfer-pdfmembers.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Twin mom here - stop it. You don't want twins.

May I ask why? If I am lucky enough to get pregnant now, 9 months later, wait a year, and get pregnant at THAT point again, I will be 45 when the second one is born. I would rather avoid that. I think 43 is old enough. And yes I would like two.

The recurrent theme of your posts is it’s all about you and your plans, not about what is best for any future potential children. A lot of us would like a bigger family than what we have, that doesn’t mean it is in anyone’s best interests to pursue it.

This. If you wanted three kids you should have started earlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because twin pregnancy is risky. Because caring for twin infants is grueling. Because parenting twins is hard. Really hard. We have twins, including one with relatively minor special needs and it is rough and they’re in upper elementary school. We got through it because you do what you must, but I really think that unless you’ve already had an infant you can’t really fathom how unrelenting twins can be.

I already have an almost-one-year old. I am concerned that it will be even more grueling caring for 3 at 45.

it's way too early to worry how grueling it will be to have 3 at 45. if you think you can handle twins+1 at 43 surely you can handle 3 at 45?

in any case - do not ask doctor for twins. they can't give them to you anyway. just signal that you are open to transferring more than one embryo and that you are aware of the risk of twins but comfortable with that. do not ask the doctor to plan for twins and really, do not plan on the yourself. if it happens and something goes wrong it will be a terrible burden to bear. just focus on your existing child and the next child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another twin mom here saying don't do it. One at a time is better for all kinds of reasons.

I gave birth to my twins just days before I turned 45. I had a pretty straightforward pregnancy, scheduled c-section at 37 weeks, two healthy 6 lb babies who went home w/ me, easy recovery from c-section, etc... Basically the dream scenario. I was very lucky and perhaps you would be also.

But I still STRONGLY wish I'd had one at a time, and tell anyone who asks that I don't recommend twins. I wish my kids had my undivided attention at infancy, or at any individual developmental stage. I wish I only had one baby to breast feed at a time - perhaps it would have been easier and I would have done it longer. I wish they didn't compare themselves to each other so relentlessly and unforgivingly ALL THE TIME. I wish they didn't have hurt feelings over who had more friends show up for their b'day party. Etc..,.

There are wondeful and fun things about having (or being) a twin, for sure. But the kids really do pay a price that I wish I could spare them. Maybe I'll feel differently when they're adults but so far (still in elementary school) I have consistently felt that they would have been better served by being one at a time in each developmental stage.

my older kids are 2.5. years apart and they do this all the time. sibling rivalry is a thing. there is also personality... neither of those has anything to do with twins.

[Anonymous]

If your twins have life long issues, can you look them in the eye and explain to them how difficult their life will be because you didn't want to have singletons?

[Anonymous]

Making this decision is all about risk analysis. Yes, there are many twins who are find and healthy. But there are many that aren't. And as a Stillbirth Mama (not due to multiples), they pain of giving birth to a dead baby is a pain you never want to experience. And I carry that pain everyday. Do whatever you have to do to decrease your chance of stillbirth.

[Anonymous]

For those who haven't done IVF in a while - even within a year or two - most of the reputable REs won't do 2 anymore anyway... for all the risks mentioned. Nothing against twins - mine are awesome - but I had an intensely scary and unhealthy pregnancy, one kids with mild disability issues and one born with a slight physical malfunction from basically being smushed in the womb. I have loved every minute of life with my twins, but in retrospect & with science knowing now what it didn't know then, there's really no excuse for transferring multiples anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another twin mom here saying don't do it. One at a time is better for all kinds of reasons.

I gave birth to my twins just days before I turned 45. I had a pretty straightforward pregnancy, scheduled c-section at 37 weeks, two healthy 6 lb babies who went home w/ me, easy recovery from c-section, etc... Basically the dream scenario. I was very lucky and perhaps you would be also.

But I still STRONGLY wish I'd had one at a time, and tell anyone who asks that I don't recommend twins. I wish my kids had my undivided attention at infancy, or at any individual developmental stage. I wish I only had one baby to breast feed at a time - perhaps it would have been easier and I would have done it longer. I wish they didn't compare themselves to each other so relentlessly and unforgivingly ALL THE TIME. I wish they didn't have hurt feelings over who had more friends show up for their b'day party. Etc..,.

There are wondeful and fun things about having (or being) a twin, for sure. But the kids really do pay a price that I wish I could spare them. Maybe I'll feel differently when they're adults but so far (still in elementary school) I have consistently felt that they would have been better served by being one at a time in each developmental stage.

my older kids are 2.5. years apart and they do this all the time. sibling rivalry is a thing. there is also personality... neither of those has anything to do with twins.

I'm not talking about standard sibling rivalry. I'm talking about one child being painfully aware of ways in which his twin is ahead of him - developmentally, socially, physically, etc... It is incredibly painful for him - in ways it simply wouldn't be if the answer was "she's two years older than you Johnny - of course she can run faster." Or, if he were the big brother who was ahead of her. Or if they weren't counting how many friends showed up on the day of their birthday party - because they don't have the luxury of two different birthdays. Or if they didn't see their sibling being rewarded for something in school when their class does not yet have that privilege (or that teacher does things differently). And so on...

Please do not presume to lecture me about my kids.