Contemporary view of m ultifetal pregnancy management at early stages

The present review gives a wide coverage on the problems of etiology and management of multifetal pregnancy during first trimester. Particular attention is paid to multifetal pregnancy reduction, which aims at improving prenatal outcomes in case of multiple gestation. On the basis of literary data the issues of the operation are generalized and analyzed, clinical aspects are considered and potential directions of future investigations are determined.

Ethics of fetal reduction: a reply to my critics

In the article, Twin pregnancy, fetal reduction and the ‘all or nothing problem’, I argued that there is a moral problem in multifetal pregnancy reduction from a twin to a singleton pregnancy (2-to-1 MFPR). Drawing on Horton’s original version of the ‘all or nothing problem’, I argued that there are two intuitively plausible claims in 2-to-1 MFPR: (1) aborting both fetuses is morally permissible, (2) aborting only one of the twin fetuses is morally wrong. Yet, with the assumption that one should select permissible choice over impermissible choice, the two claims lead to a counter-intuitive conclusion: the woman ought to abort both fetuses rather than only one. It would be odd to promote such a pro-death view. Begović et al discuss my article and offer insightful criticism, claiming, that there is no ‘all or nothing problem’ present in 2-to-1 MFPR. In this short reply, I respond to some of their criticism.

Twin pregnancy reduction is not an ‘all or nothing’ problem: a response to Räsänen

In his paper, ‘Twin pregnancy, fetal reduction and the ‘all or nothing problem’, Räsänen sets out to apply Horton’s ‘all or nothing’ problem to the ethics of multifetal pregnancy reduction from a twin to a singleton pregnancy (2-to-1 MFPR). Horton’s problem involves the following scenario: imagine that two children are about to be crushed by a collapsing building. An observer would have three options: do nothing, save one child by allowing their arms to be crushed, or save both by allowing their arms to be crushed. Horton offers two intuitively plausible claims: (1) it is morally permissible not to save either child and (2) it is morally impermissible to save only one of the children, which taken together lead to the problematic conclusion that (3) if an observer does not save both children, then it is better to save neither than save only one. Räsänen applies this problem to the case of 2-to-1 MFPR, arguing ultimately that, in cases where there is no medical reason to reduce, the woman ought to bring both fetuses to term. We will argue that Räsänen does not provide adequate support for the claim, crucial to his argument, that aborting only one of the fetuses in a twin pregnancy is wrong, so the ‘all or nothing’ problem does not arise in this context. Furthermore, we argue that the scenario Räsänen presents is highly unrealistic because of the clinical realities of 2-to-1 MFPR, making his argument of limited use for real-life decision making in this area.

Abortion and multifetal pregnancy reduction: An ethical comparison

In recent years, multifetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) has increasingly been a subject of debate in Norway. The intensity of this debate reached a tentative maximum when the Legislation Department delivered their interpretative statement, Section 2 - Interpretation of the Abortion Act, in 2016 in response to a request from the Ministry of Health (2014) that the Legislation Department consider whether the Abortion Act allows for MFPR of healthy fetuses in multiple pregnancies. The Legislation Department concluded that the current abortion legislation [as of 2016] allows for MFPR subject to the constraints that the law otherwise stipulates. The debate has not subsided, and during autumn 2018 it was further intensified in connection with the Norwegian Christian Democratic "crossroads" policy and signals from the Conservatives to consider removing section 2.3c and to forbid MFPR. Many of the arguments in the MFPR debate are seemingly similar to arguments put forward in the general abortion debate, and an analysis to ascertain what distinguishes MFPR from other abortions has yet to be conducted. The aim of this article is, therefore, to examine whether there is a moral distinction between abortion and MFPR of healthy fetuses. We will cover the typical arguments emerging in the debate in Norway and exemplify them with scholarly articles from the literature. We have dubbed the most important arguments against MFPR that we have identified the harm argument, the slippery-slope argument, the intention argument, the grief argument, the long-term psychological effects for the woman argument, and the sorting argument. We conclude that these arguments do not measure up in terms of demonstrating a morally relevant difference between MFPR of healthy fetuses and other abortions. Our conclusion is, therefore — despite what several discussants seem to think — that there is no morally relevant difference between the two. Therefore, on the same conditions as we allow for abortions, we should also allow MFPR. Keywords: abortion, ethics, medical ethics, MFPR, selective MFPR

Fetal Deaths in High-Income Countries

Fetal death refers to the death of a post-embryonic product of conception while in utero or during childbirth, and it is one of the most distressing events faced by women and families. Birth following spontaneous fetal death is termed “miscarriage” if it occurs early in gestation, and “stillbirth,” if it occurs beyond the point of viability. There are substantial between-country differences in the criteria used for reporting stillbirths and these differences compromise international comparisons of stillbirth rates. In high-income countries, a majority of fetal deaths occur due to genetic causes, fetal infection, or other pregnancy complications. Congenital anomalies, placental insufficiency, and/or intrauterine growth restriction are frequent antecedents of fetal death. Maternal risk factors include advanced maternal age, high body mass index, smoking and substance use during pregnancy, prior stillbirth, chronic morbidity, and multifetal pregnancy. Disparities in education and socioeconomic status and other factors influencing maternal health also contribute to elevated rates of stillbirth among vulnerable women.

Physical Activity Behaviors and Barriers in Multifetal Pregnancy: What to Expect When You’re Expecting More

The health benefits of prenatal physical activity (PA) are established for singleton pregnancies. In contrast, individuals with multifetal pregnancies (twins, triplets or more) are recommended to restrict or cease PA. The objectives of the current study were to determine behaviors and barriers to PA in multifetal pregnancies. Between 29 May and 24 July 2020, individuals with multifetal pregnancies participated in an online survey. Of the 415 respondents, there were 366 (88%) twin, 45 (11%) triplet and 4 (1%) quadruplet pregnancies. Twenty-seven percent (n = 104/388) of respondents completed no PA at all during pregnancy, 57% (n = 220/388) completed PA below current recommendations, and 16% (n = 64/388) achieved current recommendations (150-min per week of moderate-intensity activity). Most respondents (n = 314/363 [87%]) perceived barriers to PA during multifetal pregnancy. The most prominent were physical symptoms (n = 204/363 [56%]) and concerns about risks to fetal wellbeing (n = 128/363 [35%]). Sixty percent (n = 92/153) felt that these barriers could be overcome but expressed the need for evidence-based information regarding PA in multifetal pregnancy. Individuals with multifetal pregnancies have low engagement with current PA recommendations but remain physically active in some capacity. There are physical and psychosocial barriers to PA in multifetal pregnancy and future research should focus on how these can be removed.