Infertility, defined as the inability to conceive after one or more years of sex without any type of contraception or barriers, affects approximately one in five women<\/a> in the United States [1]. Whether it is primary (the couple have never conceived a child) or secondary (the couple has had at least one previous pregnancy), medical literature on infertility suggests that couples suffering from it may experience emotions typical of bereavement<\/a> [2]. One study<\/a> cites infertility as \u201cthe fourth most dramatic life event in the lifespan of a woman, compared with the death of parents and the unfaithfulness of a partner\u201d [3].\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n While on the one hand, assisted reproductive technologies (ART) like in vitro fertilization (IVF) have never been more popular and widely accepted, on the other hand, a growing number of women and couples are dissatisfied with the failure of IVF to address the why<\/em> behind their infertility. For these women, restorative reproductive medical solutions like NaProTechnology may provide the hope and healing they need\u2013if only they knew about it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The birth of Louise Brown in 1978 by means of IVF<\/a> heralded a new era in the field of reproductive medicine and in the treatment of infertility. ART has since become the dominant approach to the management of infertility, primarily through intrauterine insemination (IUI) and IVF. Although ART procedures such as IVF are celebrated as having created greater reproductive opportunities for women and infertile couples, these approaches are very costly<\/a> and can also negatively impact<\/a> women\u2019s psychological and emotional well-being. As discussed in a recent Natural Womanhood article<\/a>, the use of ART also comes with the possibility of serious health risk for mothers and their children. <\/p>\n\n\n\n A hallmark of ART\u2013which is reflective of the current state of women\u2019s healthcare as a whole\u2013is bypassing or suppressing women\u2019s natural reproductive functions, that is, \u201coverriding the system\u201d without addressing the root causes of infertility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In stark contrast to this approach, some women\u2019s health advocates<\/a> have pointed out that a woman-centered approach to healthcare<\/a> ought to have as its central goal, the screening, diagnosis, and management of conditions that are more common, serious, or unique to women. Women-centered healthcare should also promote the holistic wellbeing of women, rather than treating their reproductive system as separate from the woman herself [4]. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Proponents of this approach to women\u2019s health have raised concerns that health issues specific to women, such as polycystic ovary syndrome<\/a> (PCOS) and endometriosis<\/a>, which can seriously impact fertility and quality of life, have not received enough attention, and have expressed their desire for more preventative and restorative approaches to infertility and women\u2019s health issues. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In my doctoral research, completed in 2018 [5], I conducted in-depth interviews with women and couples in the United Kingdom on both their experience of infertility and their subsequent use of NaProTechnology<\/a>, \u201ca women\u2019s health science that monitors and maintains a woman\u2019s reproductive and gynecological health\u2026 [and] provides medical and surgical treatments that cooperate completely with the reproductive system.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n In the treatment of infertility, the primary goal of NaProTechnology<\/a> is to identify and treat underlying health problems that prevent couples from conceiving a child or maintaining a pregnancy. All 28 study participants in my study had experience in mainstream medicine in their infertility treatment journey. Some had engaged in consultations with fertility specialists, or had recourse to ART prior to the use of NaProTechnology.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The overwhelming takeaway from my study was that assisted reproductive technologies, such as IVF, are failing to serve women\u2019s legitimate health interests. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Study participants communicated that one of the most challenging aspects of ART is that it does not address underlying conditions that affect a couple\u2019s ability to conceive or maintain a pregnancy, many of which can significantly impact a woman\u2019s short- and long-term health, and her quality of life. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Even if IVF leads to a successful live birth, the root causes of infertility often go unresolved, and in many cases, are left undiagnosed. In the event that IVF treatment fails, not only do women and couples suffer the pain of a failed cycle, but they are no better off health-wise, and many times, the reason for failure is not understood. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Some prominent healthcare professionals have publicly recognized the limitations and challenges of ART. Professor Robert Winston, a British infertility expert, has argued that, strictly speaking, IVF is not a \u201ctreatment\u201d for infertility, as it does not address or resolve the underlying causes of infertility. Significantly, he has asserted that \u201cmore than half of the women referred to IVF clinics would be better served by alternatives\u201d and has underlined that doctors are failing to diagnose the root causes of infertility and are using IVF as a \u201cblanket treatment\u201d<\/a> [6]. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Sharing Professor Winston\u2019s sentiments is Professor Adam Balen, former Chair of the British Fertility Society, who expressed concern that \u201cIVF is sometimes embarked upon before all other treatment modalities have been exhausted\u2026\u201d Professor Balen also stresses that \u201cthe notion that IVF is the high-tech modern answer to every couple\u2019s infertility is erroneous\u201d [7]. <\/p>\n\n\n\n What was particularly difficult for some participants in my doctoral study was being told that they had \u201cunexplained infertility<\/a>.\u201d This was the case with one participant, Moya*, who felt she was referred to IVF too quickly, without a comprehensive investigation into the reasons for her infertility. For Moya, not knowing the reasons behind her failure to conceive a child increased her mental and emotional anguish. <\/p>\n\n\n\n She explained the following: <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIf I had known what was wrong and that there was an issue, and known that they were treating it, then I would have been happy to know that something was being done. But, every time I went [to the clinic] they would say, \u201cWe can\u2019t see a reason why you shouldn\u2019t be [getting] pregnant\u201d\u2026 If they would have said to me, \u2018We found that there is a problem and you can\u2019t have children,\u2019 well, I would have learnt to deal with that and would have accepted that. But the fact that they weren\u2019t coming up with anything made it so much worse for me.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Another participant, Leah, was also offered IVF after being told that she had unexplained infertility. She highlighted her frustration with this \u201cdiagnosis,\u201d and with what she felt was a lack of interest in providing her with the answers she so desperately sought: \u201cThere is no illness called \u2018infertility,\u2019\u201d she stated. \u201c[I thought] there must be something behind [it] and they aren\u2019t able to tell me what it is.\u201d It was only later, through NaProTechnology treatment, that she discovered she had celiac disease<\/a>, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), Vitamin D deficiency, and potential endometriosis<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n For Ruth and her husband, who were facing secondary infertility, the proposal to use IVF in the absence of any in-depth investigation into the causes of their infertility, felt like \u201cgoing from zero to a hundred.\u201d Their desperation for answers, alongside the ethical concerns related to IVF<\/a>, led them to pursue NaProTechnology in their quest for another child. Ruth told me: <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI hope that there is an answer at the end of it\u2026 I think for me that\u2019s why we contacted the [NaProTechnology] clinic, because we just wanted to know, rather than go every month hoping and then being crushed, and then hoping and then being crushed, and thinking, \u2018Well, we\u2019ve had three children, why can\u2019t we have another one?\u2019 It just doesn\u2019t make any sense, but there\u2019s obviously a reason, and I just hope we discover what the reason is.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Participants emphatically described this hunger for answers when speaking about previous miscarriages<\/a>. All participants who had suffered a miscarriage wanted to know what had caused it and what they could do to prevent this painful loss in the future<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Take the case of Ivy and Tom, who experienced a miscarriage at eleven weeks of pregnancy. They got married in their early forties, started trying for a child soon after marriage, and wasted no time in approaching Ivy\u2019s physician for medical advice because of her irregular menstrual cycles<\/a>. But the doctor was dismissive of their concerns. Following a miscarriage, they were keen to find answers about any potential causes, but they were met with the same indifferent attitude: <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe doctors were very unsupportive of the miscarriage and they said, \u2018Oh, it happens,\u2019 which I understand, but you are kind of looking for something to explain why.\u201d (Ivy) <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Unanswered questions as to why they suffered a miscarriage left them feeling abandoned by the medical establishment and fearful that future miscarriages would occur. For Ivy, charting her cycle as part of infertility treatment through NaProTechnology was revelatory. At the time of the interview, her doctor had already been able to identify\u2013thanks to her cycle charting\u2013that her progesterone levels were very low and could have been a contributory factor to the infertility and miscarriage<\/a>. Ivy said of her experience charting her cycle: <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cMy cycles were so irregular, and lots of things were identified while I was doing the charting\u2026 the charting gives signs that something isn\u2019t right somewhere\u2026 You get to know your body so much, things that you take for granted, things that you should know but you are not concentrating on every day or every week, and you don\u2019t see the signs. It\u2019s really interesting.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Like many study participants, Ivy and Tom hope that other couples facing the heartache of infertility will gain knowledge of, and have access to, therapeutic and restorative approaches<\/a> to infertility like NaProTechnology. A recurring theme in the interviews was disappointment and frustration with <\/em>the lack of awareness of alternatives to ART. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n As one participant, Sarah, explained, <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI was very much told, \u2018it\u2019s IUI or IVF or nothing else, you know. There are no other options.\u2019\u2026There are lots of people who need to know that there are options.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Restorative options such as NaProTechnology offer a positive departure from \u201cone-size-fits-all\u201d approaches to women\u2019s reproductive healthcare, by providing more individualized treatment and by aiming to identify and address issues that can seriously affect a woman\u2019s health and daily life, as well as her ability to conceive a child. <\/p>\n\n\n\n *Pseudonyms have been used in the study. <\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n References:<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n[1] Seepana, S. and Allamsetty, S. \u201cInfertility.\u201d Innovait<\/em>, vol 3, no. 2, 2010, pp. 76-82 https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1093\/innovait\/inp242<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n[3] Harvard Medical School. \u201cThe psychological impact of infertility and its treatment.\u201d Harvard Mental Health Letter<\/em>, vol 25, no. 11, 2009, pp. 1-3 http:\/\/www.mindingmatters.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/03\/PsychologicalimpactofIFanditsRx.pdf<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n[3] Lykeridou et. al. \u201cThe impact of infertility diagnosis on the psychological status of women undergoing fertility treatment.\u201d Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, <\/em>vol. 27, no. 3, 2009, pp 223-237 https:\/\/www.tandfonline.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1080\/02646830802350864<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n[4] See also: The Boston Women\u2019s Health Book Collective. 2011. Our Bodies, Ourselves. <\/em>NY, USA: Simon and Schuster, Touchstone Books. <\/p>\n\n\n\n[5] Butau, L. 2018. An Analysis of the Lived Experience of Infertility and NaProTechnology in the Context of Catholic Theological Ethics<\/em>, University of Surrey, England. <\/p>\n\n\n\n[6] Winston, R. 1999. The IVF Revolution. <\/em>NY, Crown Publishing Group <\/p>\n\n\n\n[7] Balen, A.H. 2008. Infertility in Practice. <\/em>3rd Ed. London, Elsevier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Additional Reading:<\/p>\n\n\n\n FAM in the UK: Obstacles to fertility awareness education and restorative reproductive medical care<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n IVF and restorative reproductive medicine stories: What they have in common, and how they differ<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The affordable, effective alternative to IVF no one talks about<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The dark side of the IVF industry, from a survivor<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nAssisted reproductive technology (ART) is the dominant treatment approach for infertility<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The need for a woman-centered approach <\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Couples share their lived experience of infertility <\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Even when IVF results in a live birth, underlying problems remain<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Infertility expert: Most women referred for IVF \u201cwould be better served by alternatives\u201d<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\u201cUnexplained infertility\u201d is an unsatisfactory catch-all term <\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Major knowledge gaps regarding the cause of miscarriages<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Couples need to know before experiencing IVF failures, there are better alternatives <\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n