IVF Children and health problems.

I could not find a thread on this and was not sure where to put it but I do believe it to be relevant to the whole situation. I have read that it may have been suggested that medical records were not available to the PJ. A The behaviour of a child can have a great effect on the behavjiur of a parent and if the child in question had a medical issue , with two other children under three, a mother having to cope with such a situation quite late in life (late thirties) would find it extremely tiring and sometimes fraughthaving to dealwith possible illness on top of the usual characteristics such as teething, terrible twos and tantrums. In addition a professional person and correct me if I am wrong also an only child suddenly finding themselves as a parent of three small children 3 and under and not being used to the lack of me time and with an absent partner who was absorbed in work, would fined the whole situation extremely stretching .



I found this article in the Guardian of 26th November 2006. and I believe there is somewhere in here a relevant point.

Children born to couples who have undergone fertility treatment are more likely to be diagnosed with autism, cancer and other disorders such as cerebral palsy and mental retardation, researchers claimed yesterday.

The higher risk to child health is believed to be caused by medical problems in the parents, such as diabetes and hypertension, damaging the child in the womb, but doctors conducting the study said IVF and other fertility treatments may also play a role. Medical records of children born after their parents sought fertility treatment showed they were four times more likely to have autism than those born to fertile parents. Childhood cancers including leukaemia and brain tumours also rose.

The risk of more minor problems, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, rose by 40%, and other medical conditions affecting hearing and sight nearly doubled. Children had a 30% higher chance of being admitted to neonatal intensive care units and to stay in hospital for more than three days if they were born following fertility treatment, the study found.

The researchers stressed the figures represent relative risks. In July researchers at Guy's and St Thomas' hospital in London reported the prevalence of autism to be 0.39% in the general population, a figure that will include some children born to parents aided by fertility treatment. A fourfold rise in the risk of autism would see a child's chances of having the condition increase to 1.56%.

Mary Croughan at the University of California in San Francisco studied 2,000 women who either gave birth naturally after a long period of infertility, or conceived after a variety of fertility treatments, and compared them with 2,000 fertile mothers who gave birth between 1994 and 1998. More than 19,000 medical records were used to build up a picture of the women's pregnancies and deliveries and the health of their children up to six years of age.

The researchers found infertile women had more complications such as pre-term labour and pre-eclampsia, more delivery difficulties and caesarean sections. Children born to infertile women were 20% more likely to have low birth weights and were twice as likely to show evidence of poor growth in the womb. Speaking at the American Association for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) conference in New Orleans, Dr Croughan said that medical conditions more common in infertile couples may be to blame for the rise in childhood health problems. She said: "The vast majority of children born to infertile couples are healthy, but if a couple has any risk factors that could lead to a child not being born healthy, then those should of course be taken into consideration."





"

PeterMac wrote:There is an old thread on the subject, but I don't know where to find it.
It is, sadly true. And for fairly obvious biological reasons.
If fertilisation is failing to take place, or a conceptus is being rejected before, or shortly after implantation, there are probably good biological and evolutionary reasons for this.
IVF by passes some of those reasons, "Plays God" in that rather stupid expression, and the results are statistically important.
The very first IVF child is , sadly, not a good example.

Peter Mac,

Has the fact that dr Gerald Mc Cann is cited as a collaborator at Labome. Org (please google) ever been an issue?

Please google: VU ziekenhuis Mccann

Is it correct that if Madeleine is a ward of court that SY have access to her full medical records without the permission of K & G?

There is also the issue of parental attachment. Unfortunately I don't have the statistics to hand, but I do know studies have shown that the chances of not bonding with your baby are far higher in the IVF situation. Similarly, post-natal depression and post-partum psychosis are also higher in IVF mums.
So, feasibly, it is possible that there is a 'double-whammy' of health and behavioural problems in the child coupled with a sense of detachment in the parents. A recipe for disaster, on occasion?

aquila wrote:Is it correct that if Madeleine is a ward of court that SY have access to her full medical records without the permission of K & G?

I would imagine that would be the case if they asked for them, yes... No need for permission, though would they have to get permission from Justice Hogg?
It is my understanding that in suspected abuse cases Social Services are able to access children's medical files without even telling the parents, so I would think the answer is yes, Aquila.
Something really bugs me with this WOC thing. Can't put my finger on it, but I'm sure the reasons for its implementing weren't those given by Kate - its odd...

Portia wrote:

PeterMac wrote:There is an old thread on the subject, but I don't know where to find it.
It is, sadly true. And for fairly obvious biological reasons.
If fertilisation is failing to take place, or a conceptus is being rejected before, or shortly after implantation, there are probably good biological and evolutionary reasons for this.
IVF by passes some of those reasons, "Plays God" in that rather stupid expression, and the results are statistically important.
The very first IVF child is , sadly, not a good example.

Peter Mac,

Has the fact that dr Gerald Mc Cann is cited as a collaborator at Labome. Org (please google) ever been an issue?

Please google: VU ziekenhuis Mccann

I doubt that that is significant. I looked at the resultant paper for a year's work in Amsterdam - I find it fairly average. The poster on Pat's blog is making the mistake that publishing papers or taking part in such an exercise is significant and must mean GM is above average.
I have read several papers by him and I think he has written very few just by himself. The Labome. org in is attached to many hospitals - looking at Google.
He got a fellowship in 2005 to LEARN how to use MRI for cardiovascular purposes and I think he got some or other grant in 2007, which obliges him to publish. The VU (Free University Hospital) is a well respected hospital in NL.
I wouldn't rate GM's intelligence above average. Far from it. I've also read his paper on drug taking in sports. About A level without any original content.

The only interesting thing is that they probably got the IVF free in Amsterdam - for the twins. In the book, Kate didn't like the doctors, so went home near the end to have the twins in the UK. She wasn't working and one of the many things I find missing in the bewk again is anything about Maddie in Amsterdam. But then the book wasn't about Maddie.

The only interesting thing is that they probably got the IVF free in
Amsterdam - for the twins. In the book, Kate didn't like the doctors, so
went home near the end to have the twins in the UK. She wasn't working
and one of the many things I find missing in the bewk again is anything
about Maddie in Amsterdam. But then the book wasn't about Maddie.

Peter Mac,

Funny thing is, there normally is a six month (or more) waiting list for IVF in the Netherlands

So somebody pulled rank with the VU hospital?

PeterMac wrote:There is an old thread on the subject, but I don't know where to find it.
It is, sadly true. And for fairly obvious biological reasons.
If fertilisation is failing to take place, or a conceptus is being rejected before, or shortly after implantation, there are probably good biological and evolutionary reasons for this.
IVF by passes some of those reasons, "Plays God" in that rather stupid expression, and the results are statistically important.
The very first IVF child is , sadly, not a good example.

The act of making a child naturally is normally one of a joyous union. Even if the conception was an accident, after some coming to terms with the situation, the birth of the child is welcome.

I understand though that conception via IVF is an horrendous process? I read recently that the man has to give the female injections? If that is correct then compare the two processes and imagine a difficult child resulting from either. I could well imagine having gone through a lot of pain and desire to conceive, then to give birth to a difficult, almost in the mind of the mother, an ungrateful child after what she suffered for her, very difficult to cope with.

On the other hand, all that pain and stress would stand the new mother in good stead for a difficult child. Thinking during the colic episodes that I've withstood worse than this, I'll cope. My only worry would be for my girl.

aquila wrote:Is it correct that if Madeleine is a ward of court that SY have access to her full medical records without the permission of K & G?

The whole point regarding court and children is secrecy, rightly so of course but I guess the application for medical records would be made to the court, not her parents. I did on searching for WOC come across a case where the WOC was up for adoption to a relative. I hope the child is now in a loving and happy home.

I was reading about Lord Lucan's chidren who were made WOC. Apparently the rules re taking the children out of the country have changed more than once over the years, but granted by a judge. Again secrecy is to protect the child, so all our guessing will get us nowhere I'm afraid.