Abstract
The first child born after in-vitro fertilisation, (IVF)-treatment, just passed its 26th birthday in July 2004. Since that birth-assisted reproduction techniques (ART) became a practicable technology, they had been used all over the world, and more than 2 million children were born after IVF-treatment. Despite all success in this field, ART is neither accepted nor used for all infertile couples, although this might be the only possibility of becoming pregnant. Two different kinds of ART refusal are distinguishable: the primary refusal being for financial, psychosocial, moral, ethical and medical reasons including the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, the risk of multiple pregnancies and the risk of malformations. The secondary refusal includes dropouts after one or more unsuccessful IVF-treatments mainly influenced by the outcome of previous cycles (prognostic factors: oocyte and embryo count, embryo quality, females age) associated with psychological and emotional aspects. However, financial factors seem to be the most potent reasons for ART-refusal.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AIHW National Perinatal Statistics Unit (1992) Assisted Conception. Australia and New Zealand, 1990. Sydney, Australia
ASRM Practice Committee Report (2000) Multiple pregnancy associated with infertility therapy. Birmingham (AL), ASRM
Ben-Rafael Z, Mashiach S et al (1986) Treatment-independent pregnancy after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer trial. Fertil Steril 45:564–567
Beral V, Davis JA et al (1990) Births in Great Britain resulting from assisted conception. BMJ 300:1229–1233
Berg BJ (1995) Listening to the voices of the infertile. Indiana University Press, Bloomington
Bollen N, Camus M et al (1991) The incidence of multiple pregnancy after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer, gamete or zygote infrafallopian transfer. Fertil Steril 55:314–318
Bonduelle M, Wennerholm UB et al (2004) A multi-centre cohort study of the physical health of 5-year old children conceived after intracytoplasmic sperm injection, in vitro fertilization and natural conception. Hum Reprod (in press)
Buckett W, Bentick B (1997) The epidemiology of infertility in a rural population. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 76:233–237
Chandra A, Hervey SE (1998) Impaired fecundity in the United States: 1982–1995. Fam Plann Perspect 30:34–42
Chief Justice Joseph Kennedy (1999) IVF is not a medically necessary treatment. Nova Scotia Surpreme Court
Collins JA (2001) Cost-effectiveness of in vitro fertilization. Semin Reprod 19:279–289
Collins JA, Rowe TC (1989) Age of the female partner is a prognostic factor in prolonged unexplained infertility: a multicentre study. Fertil Steril 52:15–20
Dalton M, Lilford RJ (1989) Benefits of in vitro fertilization (letter to the editor). Lancet 2:1327
De Vries MJ, De Sutter P et al (1999) Prognostic factors in patients continuing in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment and drop outs. Fertil Steril 72:674–678
Dohle GR, Veeze HJ et al (1999) Teh complex relationships between cystic fibrosis and congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens: clinical, electrophysiological and genetic data. Hum Reprod 14:371–374
Donderwinkel PF, van der Vaart H et al (2000) Treatment of patients with long-standing unexplained subfertility with in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 73:334–337
Ericson A, Kallen B (2001) Congenital malformations in infants born after IVF: a population-based study. Hum Reprod 16:504–509
Faber K (1997) IVF in the US: multiple gestation, economic competition, and the necessity of excess. Hum Reprod 12:1614–1616
Fritz MA (2002) Infertility treatment and the multifetal gestation epidemic: too much of a good thing. Cont Obstet Gynecol 47:65–92
Gerris J, De Neubourg D et al (1999) Prevention of twin pregnancy after in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection based on strict embryo criteria: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Hum Reprod 14:2581–2587
Goldfarb J, Austin C et al (1997) Factors influencing patients decision not to repeat IVF. J Assist Reprod Genet 14:381–384
Haney AF, Hughes CL et al (1987) Treatment-independent, treatment-associated, and pregnancies after additional therapy in a program of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 47:634–638
Hansen M, Kurinczuk JJ et al (2002) The risk of major birth defects after intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 346:725–730
Heck KE, Schoendorf KC et al (1997) Delayed childbearing by educational level in the United States. Matern Child Health 1:81–88
Howe G, Westhoff C et al (1985) Effects of age, cigarette smoking and other factors on fertility: findings in a large prospective study. Br J Med 290:1697–1700
Hughes EG, Giacomini M (2001) Funding in vitro fertilization treatment for persistent subfertility: the pain and the politics. Fertil Steril 76:431–442
Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (1996) The Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority annual report. London
Jain T, Hornstein MD (2003) To pay or not to pay. Fertil Steril 80:27–29
Jenkins JM, Mathur RS et al (1995) The management of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 102:2–5
Jones HW Jr, Cohen J (1999) IFFS Surveillance 98. Fertil Steril 71:1S–34S
Katalinic A, Rosch C et al (2004) Pregnancy course and outcome after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)- a controlled, prospective cohort study. Fertil Steril 81(6):1604-1616
Katz P, Nachtigall R et al (2002) The economic impact of the assisted reproductive technologies. Natur Cell Biol (Suppl):S29–S32
Martikainen H, Orava M et al (2004) Day 2 elective single embryo transfer in clinical practice: better outcome in ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod 19:1364–1366
Martin JA, Hamilton BE et al (2002) Births: final data for 2001. Natl Vital Stat Rep 51:1–102
Morgan KP (1989) Of woman born? How old-fashioned! New reproductive technologies and women’s oppression. The Women’s Press, Toronto
Navot D, Bergh PA et al (1992) Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in novel reproductive technologies: prevention and treatment. Fertil Steril 58:249–261
Neumann PJ (1997) Should health insurance cover IVF? Issues and options. J Health Polit Policy Law 22:1215–1237
Pringle D (1995) Deinsuring medical services: practical or perverse? Annual Meeting of the Canadian Health Economics Research Association
Roh SI, Awadalla SG et al (1987) In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: treatment-dependent versus -independent pregnancies. Fertil Steril 48:982–986
Schenker JG, Ezra Y (1994) Complications of assisted reproductive techniques. Fertil Steril 61:411–422
Segal S, Casper RF (1990) The response to ovarian hyperstimulation and in vitro fertilization in women older than 35 years. Hum Reprod 5:255–257
Sharma V, Allgar V et al (2002) Factors influencing the cumulative conception rate and discontinuation of in vitro fertilization treatment for infertility. Fertil Steril 78:40–46
Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology and The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (1999) Assisted reproductive technology in the United States: 1996 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/ Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry. Fertil Steril 71:798–807
Soliman S, Daya S et al (1993) A randomized trial of in vitro fertilization versus conventional treatment for infertility. Fertil Steril 59:1239–1244
Templeton A, Fraser C et al (1990) The epidemiology of infertiltiy in Aberdeen. BMJ 301:148–152
Templeton A, Morris J (1998) Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 339:573–577
The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (1999) IFFS Surveillance 98: Chapter 3: ART-the number to transfer. Fertil Steril 71:12S–13S
Vilska S, Tiitinen A et al (1999) Elective transfer of one embryo results in an acceptable pregnancy rate and eliminates the risk of multiple birth. Hum Reprod 14:2392–2395
Wennerholm UB, Bergh C et al (2000) Incidence of congenital malformations in children born after ICSI. Hum Reprod 15:944–948
Westergaard JB, Tranberg AM et al (1999) Danish National In-Vitro Fertilization Registry 1994 and 1995: a controlled study of births, malformations and cytogenetic findings. Hum Reprod 14:1896–1902
Yoshida A, Tamayama T et al (1995) A cytogenetic survey of 1007 infertile males. Contracept Fertil Sex 23:103a
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dawson, A.A., Diedrich, K. & Felberbaum, R.E. Why do couples refuse or discontinue ART?. Arch Gynecol Obstet 273, 3–11 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-005-0010-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-005-0010-5