Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Selective reduction

Selective reduction, also termed multifetal reduction, is a procedure in which one or more fetuses are intentionally terminated in a multiple —typically high-order multiples like or quadruplets—to diminish maternal and fetal risks and optimize outcomes for the survivors. Performed via ultrasound-guided of to halt the targeted fetus's heartbeat, usually between 10 and 14 weeks , it addresses complications inherent to multifetal pregnancies, such as extreme prematurity, , and maternal morbidity including and hemorrhage. Empirical demonstrates that the intervention prolongs , reduces preterm deliveries prior to 32 weeks by up to 70% in reductions to twins, elevates mean birth weights of viable offspring, and lowers overall compared to unreduced multiples. Indications often stem from assisted reproduction yielding unintended high fetal counts, where observational data link order of multiplicity to dose-dependent rises in adverse events: triplets face roughly triple the rate of singletons, escalating further for quadruplets. Selective targeting may prioritize fetuses with anomalies detected via nuchal translucency or early , though reductions among chromosomally normal fetuses occur when parental capacity or medical risks dictate. Risks include of all fetuses (5-12% for triplet-to-twin, higher for greater reductions), , and preterm labor, with procedure success exceeding 95% in experienced centers but varying by and implantation status. Controversies center on ethical permissibility, particularly twin-to-singleton reductions absent fetal anomalies, where causal trade-offs pit aggregate harm minimization against individual ; some analyses justify it via non-identity principles, arguing no "worse-off" survivor exists without reduction, while others contend it equates to impermissible among equivalents. Longitudinal trends show rising utilization in IVF cohorts, correlating with improved singleton-equivalent outcomes, yet underscore tensions between reproductive and intrinsic value of nascent life.

Overview and Indications

Definition and Purpose

Selective reduction, also termed multifetal reduction, is a medical intervention performed during the first of to terminate one or more es in cases of multiple , thereby decreasing the total fetal number to twins or a . This procedure is distinct from selective termination, which targets a specific with diagnosed anomalies or complications, whereas multifetal reduction primarily addresses numerical excess in otherwise viable pregnancies. It is typically undertaken via transabdominal needle insertion under guidance to inject a solution or similar agent into the targeted fetal heart, inducing . The primary purpose of selective reduction is to lower the substantially elevated risks inherent to high-order multiple pregnancies (three or more fetuses), which include preterm delivery before 32 weeks in up to 60-80% of cases without , , and rates exceeding 20% for compared to under 2% for singletons. By converting a triplet or quadruplet to twins, the procedure reduces maternal morbidity—such as , hemorrhage, and cesarean delivery necessity—and enhances neonatal outcomes, with studies reporting term delivery rates rising from approximately 20% in unreduced to over 70% post-reduction. This risk mitigation is particularly relevant for pregnancies arising from fertility treatments like fertilization, where iatrogenic higher-order multiples occur in 5-10% of cycles without limits. In scenarios involving fetal anomalies, selective reduction serves to prevent transmission of severe genetic or structural defects to the surviving (es) while preserving the pregnancy's viability, though ethical considerations often emphasize parental in weighing probabilistic benefits against procedure-related losses. Overall, the aims for causal improvement in and metrics, supported by longitudinal data showing reduced long-term in reduced cohorts versus unreduced multiples.

Medical Indications and Prevalence

Selective reduction is medically indicated in higher-order multifetal pregnancies (three or more fetuses) to mitigate elevated risks of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes, including before 32 weeks (occurring in up to 60% of untreated ), , neonatal intensive care admission, and maternal conditions such as and hemorrhage. The procedure reduces the fetal number—typically to twins or a —to enhance survival rates and at , with showing improved outcomes compared to expectant of quadruplets or higher. Selective termination within multiples is also warranted when one fetus demonstrates a severe anomaly or incompatible with life or causing significant morbidity, such as , severe cardiac defects, or chromosomal abnormalities like trisomy 13, while co-fetuses appear viable; reported cases include reductions for , , and thalassemia major. In twin pregnancies, reduction to may be indicated for maternal contraindications to multiples, including prior severe preterm delivery or conditions like or that heighten risks. Prevalence has diminished due to protocols favoring elective single-embryo in fertilization, which lowered U.S. higher-order multiple births by 46% from 1998 to 2015, to 1.036 per 1,000 deliveries. Most remaining cases arise from assisted reproduction, with one center reporting 88.8% of multifetal reductions linked to IVF among 108 procedures involving 123 fetal reductions. In the , selective reductions rose modestly from 90 in 2009 to 131 in 2018, primarily under legal grounds for fetal anomalies or . Overall, the procedure remains rare, confined to specialized fetal medicine units, as spontaneous higher-order multiples constitute less than 0.1% of pregnancies.

Procedure Details

Techniques Employed

Selective reduction techniques are selected based on gestational age, chorionicity, and the specific clinical scenario, with ultrasound guidance essential for all procedures to ensure precise targeting and minimize risks to surviving fetuses. In multifetal pregnancies involving fetuses with independent placentas (dichorionic or trichorionic), the standard approach is intracardiac or intrathoracic injection of potassium chloride (KCl), performed transabdominally under local anesthesia and aseptic conditions. A 20- or 22-gauge needle is advanced into the targeted fetal heart, followed by injection of 0.5–2 mL of 15% KCl in the first trimester (11–14 weeks) or up to 5–10 mL in the third trimester until cardiac asystole is confirmed via real-time sonography. This method induces rapid fetal demise without vascular disruption, preserving placental function for remaining fetuses, though it carries a 2–6% risk of overall pregnancy loss in early applications. For monochorionic pregnancies, where shared placental circulation precludes KCl injection due to potential embolization to the co-twin, vascular ablative techniques are employed to occlude blood flow selectively. Bipolar cord coagulation, typically at 18–27 weeks, involves fetoscopic insertion of bipolar forceps (2.7–3.3 mm port) to apply 30–50 W of electrical current for 60 seconds to the umbilical cord, achieving coagulation confirmed by absent Doppler flow; survival rates for the co-twin reach 79%, but preterm premature rupture of membranes occurs in about 23% of cases. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA), suitable from 15–27 weeks, uses a 17-gauge needle to deliver thermal energy (110°C for 3 minutes) to the cord or intrahepatic vessels, yielding co-twin survival of 85% in conditions like twin reversed arterial perfusion (TRAP) sequence, with fetal loss rates of 14–17%. Laser ablation serves as an alternative for monochorionic cases, particularly when cords are inaccessible, by inserting an 18-gauge needle and 400-μm fiber into the or vessels to coagulate at 40 W until flow cessation, often between 12–27 weeks; this achieves 78% in but requires careful monitoring for incomplete occlusion. Less common methods, such as suture after 26 weeks for thicker cords, involve ultrasound-guided needle placement of sutures to ligate the cord, though procedural complexity limits its use. Overall, monochorionic techniques entail higher risks (up to 20% pregnancy loss) compared to KCl methods (<10%), necessitating specialized centers with expertise in .

Timing, Preparation, and Execution

Multifetal pregnancy reduction, including selective targeting of affected fetuses, is generally performed between 10 and 13 weeks of gestation to allow sufficient time for chorionicity determination and fetal assessment while minimizing risks of and technical difficulties associated with later procedures. Earlier timing, such as before 16 weeks, has been associated with lower rates of compared to reductions at 20 weeks or later in dichorionic twin pregnancies. For monochorionic gestations or cases requiring advanced imaging for anomalies, procedures may occur between 15 and 27 weeks using alternative techniques. Preparation begins with detailed counseling provided by multidisciplinary teams, including fetal medicine specialists, clinical geneticists, neonatologists, and psychologists, to discuss procedure indications, potential outcomes, and emotional implications. Pre-procedure evaluations include high-resolution ultrasound to confirm gestational age, label individual fetuses by nuchal translucency and crown-rump length measurements, assess for structural anomalies, and establish chorionicity, which must be determined before 14 weeks. Invasive diagnostics such as chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis may be performed if needed to verify genetic or chromosomal issues guiding selective reduction. Patients are typically advised on post-procedure monitoring for cramping, spotting, or signs of infection, with the procedure often conducted on an outpatient basis under local anesthesia. Execution involves real-time transabdominal ultrasound guidance to insert a 20- to 22-gauge needle percutaneously into the target fetus, selected based on accessibility, anomaly presence, or random criteria in multifetal cases without specific indications. For fetuses with independent chorionicity, 0.5 to 2 mL of potassium chloride is injected intracardiacally until fetal asystole is visually confirmed, ensuring feticide without vascular crossover risks. In selective cases, the abnormal fetus is prioritized; the procedure concludes with verification of heartbeat cessation in the reduced fetus and persistence in survivors, followed by immediate ultrasound surveillance for complications like bleeding or infection. For monochorionic multiples, alternatives such as radiofrequency ablation or bipolar cord coagulation may be employed to avoid intertwin vascular risks.

Clinical Outcomes and Risks

Benefits and Success Metrics

Selective reduction in multifetal pregnancies, particularly from triplets or higher to twins or singletons, has been associated with prolonged gestation and reduced rates of preterm birth compared to expectant management of high-order multiples. A systematic review of triplet pregnancies reduced to twins or singletons reported mean gestational ages at delivery of 35.1 weeks for reductions to twins and 36.4 weeks to singletons, versus approximately 32-33 weeks for unreduced triplets, thereby lowering severe preterm delivery risks from 27.9% in unreduced cases to under 10% post-reduction. Perinatal survival rates improve markedly with the procedure; for instance, perinatal death occurs in 5.6% of pregnancies reduced to twins, compared to 10.0% in unreduced triplets, reflecting decreased and incidences. Multifetal pregnancy reduction also mitigates maternal complications such as and , with studies showing lower overall pregnancy loss rates of around 4.7% across large cohorts. Technical success rates for methods like or injection approach 100%, with fetal survival of remaining gestations exceeding 80-90% in uncomplicated cases.
Outcome MetricUnreduced TripletsReduced to TwinsReduced to Singleton
at Delivery (weeks)~32-3335.136.4
<32 Weeks (%)55<20<10
(%)10.05.62-4
These metrics underscore causal improvements in fetal maturation and viability, though reduced pregnancies still carry higher risks than primary dichorionic twins or singletons due to underlying factors like assisted reproductive origins. Long-term neonatal outcomes, including reduced NICU admissions, further support efficacy, with birth weights averaging 500-1000 grams higher in reduced cohorts.

Adverse Effects and Complications

Selective reduction procedures carry risks of immediate maternal complications, including , , and , with reported rates of maternal anxiety and occurring in approximately 29.4% of cases. Procedure failure, often due to technical difficulties or maternal distress, has been documented in up to 2% of attempts. Post-procedure pregnancy losses, encompassing miscarriage of all fetuses or selective loss of remaining ones, occur in 4-12% of cases, with higher rates observed in reductions from triplets to singletons compared to triplets to twins. Adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as preterm delivery before 28 or 32 weeks' gestation, affect about 4.1% of reduced dichorionic twin pregnancies. Premature contractions, premature rupture of membranes, and emergency deliveries are additional risks, particularly in later-trimester selective terminations at or after 15 weeks, where preterm delivery before 33 weeks is threefold higher than in earlier interventions. Neonatal complications following successful reductions include increased incidences of and small-for-gestational-age infants, contributing to a composite of serious morbidity or perinatal , though these are mitigated relative to unreduced multifetal gestations. Transabdominal approaches, common between 7-12 weeks, are associated with lower overall complication rates than transcervical methods, but risks escalate with higher initial fetal numbers or delayed timing.

Ethical and Philosophical Debates

Arguments Supporting the Procedure

Selective reduction in multifetal pregnancies is supported by evidence demonstrating improved perinatal outcomes, particularly through decreased rates of preterm delivery, , and infants compared to expectant management of higher-order gestations. Reduction to twins or singletons prolongs and maximizes survival of remaining fetuses, with studies showing substantial decreases in overall pregnancy loss rates; for instance, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists notes the most pronounced survival benefits when reducing to twin gestations, as multiplicity exacerbates risks like respiratory distress syndrome and long-term neurodevelopmental impairments in survivors. In complicated monochorionic twin pregnancies, such as (TRAP) sequence, selective reduction of the non-viable acardiac twin via or cord coagulation enhances pump twin survival, with reported success rates of 80-90% in early intervention cases by alleviating cardiac overload and reversing hemodynamic instability. Similarly, for (TTTS), reduction of the donor twin in severe cases preserves the recipient, reducing combined fetal demise risks that approach 70-100% without intervention. Maternal health benefits include lowered incidences of obstetric complications tied to extreme prematurity, such as , postpartum hemorrhage, and emergency cesarean sections, as reduction permits better placental and extended gestation. Cohort analyses confirm higher mean birth weights (e.g., +365 grams in triplet-to-twin reductions) and fewer admissions, correlating with reduced maternal morbidity from managing critically ill neonates. Empirical data from large series underscore these advantages, with perinatal survival exceeding 90% in reduced twin pregnancies versus under 70% in unreduced , attributing gains to causal mitigation of overcrowding-induced and preterm labor.

Criticisms and Moral Objections

Critics argue that selective reduction violates the intrinsic by intentionally terminating viable fetuses, treating them as rather than ends in themselves. From a pro-life perspective, the procedure constitutes the deliberate killing of an innocent unborn , an intrinsically irrespective of parental intentions or potential benefits to survivors, as it directly injects a lethal substance like into a 's heart. This objection rests on the principle of the sanctity of life, which holds that each possesses full moral status from , rendering any non-therapeutic termination morally equivalent to . Philosophical arguments against the procedure emphasize distinctions in intent and harm compared to standard . The argument posits that selective reduction involves actively choosing which specific to eliminate to benefit others, implying a discriminatory judgment among equals that lacks moral justification, unlike abortion of a where no such selection occurs. Similarly, the harm argument highlights the direct harm inflicted on the targeted in a shared uterine environment, potentially affecting survivors psychologically or biologically, while underscoring the procedure's role in prioritizing quantity or quality of outcomes over individual rights. A slippery-slope concern arises from the procedure's , potentially eroding ethical boundaries by extending to reductions for social or economic reasons, such as family size preferences, rather than strict medical necessity. Critics note that even informed does not resolve the moral distress, as reductions below twins for non-medical motives challenge for life's inherent and may desensitize to eugenic-like practices. Conservative ethicists maintain that such acts remain unjustifiable, prioritizing deontological prohibitions against killing over utilitarian calculations of net benefit. Religious objections, particularly from Catholic doctrine, frame selective reduction as incompatible with , which forbids direct harm to the innocent even in high-risk multiple pregnancies resulting from assisted reproduction. This view critiques the fertility industry's role in creating multiples—accounting for about 50% of IVF survivors being twins or more—arguing it fosters a culture where "unwanted" fetuses are expendable for convenience.

Selective Termination for Traits Like Disability or Sex

Selective termination of a fetus diagnosed with a disability, such as Down syndrome (trisomy 21), in multifetal pregnancies discordant for anomalies aims to improve outcomes for the unaffected fetus(es) by mitigating risks like preterm delivery or maternal complications associated with carrying an anomalous twin. In twin gestations, discordant anomalies occur in 1-2% of cases, prompting offers of selective termination when prenatal testing, such as amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling, identifies conditions like trisomy 21 confined to one fetus. Data from U.S. centers indicate that selective terminations for fetal abnormalities, including chromosomal anomalies, constitute a significant portion of procedures, with one review of 200 cases reporting high survival rates for remaining fetuses post-reduction. Proponents justify this on grounds of non-directive counseling and parental autonomy, arguing it prevents potential suffering from severe anomalies while adhering to principles of beneficence and proportionality in resource-limited pregnancies. Critics, including disability rights advocates, contend that selective termination for conditions like implies a lesser value on lives with disabilities, potentially reinforcing societal and echoing eugenic practices by prioritizing "healthy" fetuses over accommodation of differences. This perspective holds that such decisions often stem from misinformation about with disabilities, as many individuals with lead fulfilling lives, and termination rates for diagnosed cases exceed 90% in some Western contexts, raising questions of implicit . Ethicists note that while severe lethal anomalies may warrant reduction under utilitarian frameworks minimizing overall harm, milder disabilities blur lines between medical necessity and preference, complicating to therapeutic abortions. Empirical trends show selective terminations for anomalies performed increasingly earlier, between 10-12 weeks in about 33.5% of cases in one cohort, reflecting advanced but also amplifying debates over commodifying fetal traits. Selective termination for sex selection in multifetal pregnancies, though rarer than for anomalies, occurs in jurisdictions permitting nonmedical reductions, often framed as "family balancing" to achieve desired gender compositions. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists acknowledges counseling for reductions to singletons on nonmedical grounds, including preferences that may encompass sex, without explicit prohibition, though prevalence data specific to sex-based reductions remain limited due to underreporting and ethical sensitivities. Globally, sex-selective practices in multiples parallel broader feticide trends driven by son preference, contributing to skewed sex ratios at birth, as seen in analyses of Asian diasporas where female-selective abortions persist despite legal bans in singletons. Ethically, opponents decry it as discriminatory, particularly against females, violating principles of equality and potentially exacerbating demographic imbalances, with some viewing it as a form of gendercide incompatible with human dignity. Supporters invoke reproductive liberty, arguing autonomous choices in private pregnancies, akin to sperm sorting or preimplantation genetic diagnosis, should not be coerced, provided no harm to third parties is proven beyond speculative population effects. In practice, such reductions are constrained by professional guidelines emphasizing medical risks over elective traits, with unclear legal status in places like the UK potentially rendering nonmedical cases criminal.

Psychological and Familial Impacts

Effects on Parents and Decision-Making

The decision to undergo selective reduction in multifetal pregnancies often involves profound for parents, as they weigh the elevated risks of , maternal morbidity, and neonatal complications associated with higher-order multiples against the of fetal and procedural uncertainties. Counseling typically emphasizes empirical data on improved perinatal outcomes, such as reduced rates of very low birth weight and in reduced twin pregnancies compared to unreduced , yet parents report struggling with moral qualms, including perceptions of "choosing" which to sacrifice. Qualitative analyses indicate that is rarely unilateral, with mothers frequently deferring to medical recommendations while fathers express under-discussed fears of family strain from multiples, though both partners cite successful singleton or twin births as primary motivators. Post-procedure, parents commonly experience acute psychological distress, with over 65% reporting intense emotional pain, stress, and fear during the reduction itself, often accompanied by immediate for the terminated (es). This initial can manifest as depressive symptoms, guilt, and sadness, persisting in approximately one-third of mothers one year postpartum, particularly when linked to reflections on the lost rather than overall success. Fathers, historically underrepresented in studies, describe comparable long-term emotional burdens, including suppressed and relational tension, underscoring the need for paternal-inclusive support protocols. However, when the remaining yields healthy outcomes, the majority of parents report resolution of distress without enduring psychiatric morbidity, attributing adaptation to the perceived necessity of the procedure for family viability. Regret remains rare but bidirectional, with some parents later questioning non-reduction decisions amid triplet caregiving demands.

Long-Term Emotional Consequences

Studies on the long-term emotional consequences of selective reduction, particularly multifetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR), reveal a spectrum of outcomes for parents, with many reporting overall psychological resilience following successful pregnancies, though a notable subset experiences persistent distress. A 2-year follow-up study of 34 women who underwent MFPR found that one year post-birth, approximately one-third reported ongoing depressive symptoms linked to the procedure, primarily manifesting as sadness and guilt, with some symptoms enduring from a few months to up to 6 years in duration. Similarly, research on first-trimester reductions indicated that while acute anxiety and depression often subside, residual sadness and guilt persist in an identifiable subgroup of parents, potentially influenced by factors such as ethical dilemmas or identification with the reduced fetus. For fathers, the emotional toll appears understudied but significant, with qualitative analyses highlighting extensive, long-lasting impacts including unresolved and relational , often compounded by societal expectations to suppress during and recovery. In contrast, broader reviews of successful MFPR outcomes suggest that long-term emotional responses and postnatal risks align closely with general norms, provided the remaining results in healthy live births, though chaotic procedural experiences can leave lingering disturbances for some couples. remains rare but documented, as in cases where one parent explicitly mourned the decision years later. Empirical data underscore that while bearing surviving children often facilitates , it does not universally alleviate associated with the reduction, challenging assumptions of complete emotional post-success. Occasional reactions for reduced fetuses have been noted even in otherwise stable families, persisting sporadically over time. These findings, drawn predominantly from small cohort studies of patients undergoing assisted , highlight the need for tailored psychological support to address subgroup vulnerabilities, as baseline history may amplify guilt and loss.

Historical Development

Origins in the 1980s

The procedure of multifetal reduction, commonly known as selective , originated in the mid- amid a in higher-order multiple gestations resulting from assisted reproductive technologies and agents. The first successful fertilization birth in 1978 had spurred widespread adoption of these methods by the early , leading to elevated rates of triplets, quadruplets, and beyond, which carried substantial perinatal risks including preterm delivery and fetal loss. Pioneering efforts focused on reducing the fetal number to twins or singletons to enhance overall viability, with initial techniques involving ultrasound-guided transabdominal or transcervical injection of hypertonic solutions like or sclerosing agents into targeted fetal hearts to induce demise. These methods aimed to minimize maternal complications and improve neonatal outcomes, drawing from prior selective terminations for anomalies but adapted for non-anomalous multiples. Early adopters, including centers and , reported the first case in , followed by procedural refinements to address ethical and technical challenges. By 1988, formalized reports documented first-trimester reductions in pregnancies with three or more fetuses, typically performed between 9 and 13 weeks' gestation under , with success defined by retention of viable remaining fetuses. Physicians such as Mark Evans contributed to early implementations, emphasizing risk reduction in high-order gestations where natural outcomes often yielded low survival rates. Initial series showed variable results, with risks exceeding 10-20% post-procedure, prompting iterative improvements in patient selection and technique.

Key Advancements and Statistical Improvements

Following the initial development of selective reduction in the mid-1980s, which relied on rudimentary methods such as mechanical disruption or under ultrasound guidance, techniques evolved toward safer, more precise interventions. By the early 1990s, transabdominal injection of (KCl) into the fetal heart or became the standard for dichorionic pregnancies, minimizing maternal complications and improving technical success rates to near 100%. For monochorionic multiples, advancements included bipolar cord introduced in the late 1990s and in the 2000s, enabling vascular occlusion without widespread disruption to shared circulations. Integration of pre-procedure (CVS) with fluorescent in situ hybridization () for rapid genetic screening—now routine in approximately 80% of cases—allowed selection of fetuses based on chromosomal normality, further refining outcomes. Procedures shifted to earlier gestational ages, often 10–12 weeks, reducing the interval for potential complications like preterm labor. Statistical improvements reflect these technical refinements and broader perinatal care advances. Early collaborative series from the reported pregnancy loss rates of 12–16% post-reduction, but by the , rates for reduced to twins fell to 4.5%, with take-home baby rates exceeding 95%. Quadruplets reduced to twins achieved 92% take-home rates, while higher-order reductions (e.g., ) saw losses of 11%. Modified KCl techniques yielded rates of 8.8%, down from 12.6% in prior methods. Reduced pregnancies to twins mirrored outcomes of spontaneous twins, including gestational ages and preterm risks, while reductions to singletons surpassed unreduced twins in metrics like and small-for-gestational-age incidence. Overall, in reduced-to-twin pregnancies dropped to 5.6%, compared to 10% in unreduced . These gains parallel a 46% decline in higher-order multiples from 1998 to 2015, driven by elective single-embryo transfers in assisted reproduction.

National Variations in Legality

In the , the legality of selective reduction varies by state following the 2022 decision in Dobbs v. , which returned regulatory authority to states; procedures are generally permitted in states with permissive frameworks but restricted or prohibited in others with gestational limits or broad bans, prompting some patients to seek care out-of-state, as in a documented case involving twins where local laws interpreted the procedure as an despite medical necessity. In the , selective reduction is lawful under the when justified on grounds such as substantial risk of serious handicap to the surviving or concerns, typically performed via selective termination for anomalies under "ground E." permits selective reduction of fetuses in multiple pregnancies where abortion is lawful, generally aligning with state-based of termination up to viability (around 20-24 weeks), though civil liability risks exist if not deemed medically indicated; no uniform federal prohibition applies. In , multifetal pregnancy reduction is legal and conducted in specialized fertility centers, often within the first , without specific statutory bans, though regulated under broader Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act provisions allowing termination for maternal or fetal health risks up to 24 weeks. explicitly authorizes multiembryonic pregnancy reduction, including selective termination, under its , with procedures integrated into clinical practice for higher-order multiples. Norway deems the procedure permissible under national law, typically via potassium chloride injection, distinguishing it from full-term abortion restrictions while aligning with therapeutic termination allowances. In Japan, while complete abortion of multiple fetuses before 22 weeks is legal, selective reduction preserving others may contravene regulations treating intact pregnancies differently from total terminations, leading to potential illegality despite clinical demand. A 2004 international survey of 52 countries found multifetal reduction prohibited outright in 29%, often in regions with conservative abortion statutes like parts of the and , while permitted in most Western and Asian nations with established IVF programs; Shiite Islamic jurisprudence specifically allows it for defective fetuses, contrasting with broader Sunni restrictions.

Bans on Non-Medical Selective Criteria

Several jurisdictions impose restrictions on selective reduction procedures, limiting them to medical criteria such as fetal anomalies, chorionicity risks, or threats, while explicitly prohibiting or discouraging non-medical criteria like fetal , , or non-health-related traits. These regulations seek to mitigate societal harms, including gender imbalances observed in regions with prevalent sex-selective practices, where male-to-female birth ratios have skewed as high as 120:100 in parts of and prior to enforcement efforts. In the United States, no comprehensive federal ban exists on non-medical criteria for selective reduction, but state-level laws prohibiting - or race-selective abortions—enacted in at least 13 states including (2011), (2011), and (2014)—apply to such procedures in multifetal pregnancies, treating reduction as a form of targeted termination. These statutes impose criminal penalties on providers, with exceptions only for life-threatening conditions, though enforcement relies on proving intent, which critics argue burdens women without reducing underlying preferences. Internationally, India's Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of ) Act of 1994 bans all forms of prenatal sex determination and selection, extending to selective reductions in multiples, with penalties including imprisonment up to three years and fines; this has reduced reported sex-selective terminations but faced challenges in underground circumvention. In the , the permits selective termination only under specific grounds like substantial risk of serious fetal handicap (Ground E), excluding non-medical preferences such as sex, as affirmed in guidance from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Italy's Law 40/2004 prohibits eugenic or non-therapeutic and fetal selection, effectively barring non-medical criteria in reductions. In , selective reduction is lawful under state abortion frameworks (e.g., Victoria's Abortion Law Reform Act 2008), but federal and state prohibitions on non-medical —such as under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984—preclude its use as a criterion, with procedures confined to health-based justifications to avoid legal liability. Similar restrictions appear in other nations; for instance, Spain's 1985 abortion law (updated 2010) allows reductions for medical risks but not elective traits, aligning with European trends against non-therapeutic selection. Professional bodies like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists advise physicians to consult local laws, noting that non-medical selections raise ethical concerns beyond legality.

References

  1. [1]
    Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction - ACOG
    In selective reduction, fetuses are chosen based on health status. As with all pregnancies, when a woman with a multifetal pregnancy has ultrasonography or ...
  2. [2]
    Multifetal pregnancy reduction and selective termination - UpToDate
    Jan 23, 2025 · Multifetal pregnancy reduction and selective termination. Multifetal gestations are at higher risk for a variety of maternal, fetal, and ...
  3. [3]
    uncovering the risks and benefits of early fetal reduction in ...
    This procedure is associated with a significant prolongation of pregnancy, decreased risk of preterm delivery before 32 weeks of gestation, higher birthweights, ...
  4. [4]
    Risks and pregnancy outcome after fetal reduction in dichorionic ...
    This study aimed to describe and compare the risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes, including the risk of pregnancy loss, in a national cohort of all dichorionic ...Missing: benefits | Show results with:benefits
  5. [5]
    Successful Fetal Reduction in Early Second Trimester
    Feb 23, 2024 · Selective multifetal pregnancy reduction in the second trimester offers advantages such as objectively addressing abnormalities in the fetus or ...
  6. [6]
    Fetal reduction, moral permissibility and the all or nothing problem
    There is an ongoing debate about whether multifetal pregnancy reduction from twins to singletons (2-to-1 MFPR) is morally permissible.Missing: controversies | Show results with:controversies
  7. [7]
    Application of legal principles and medical ethics: multifetal ... - NIH
    Although fetal reduction techniques have emerged to be effective in improving pregnancy outcomes, this has been an area of great controversy where ethical and ...
  8. [8]
    Ethical Issues Surrounding Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction and ...
    Ethical reflection concerning multifetal pregnancy reduction and selective termination has evolved over the past decade from one of automatic equation with ...
  9. [9]
    Trends of Selective Fetal Reduction and Selective Termination in ...
    Dec 13, 2021 · Selective abortion was shown to be increasingly common in England and Wales over a 9-year period, occurring most frequently as twin to singleton reductions in ...
  10. [10]
    Multifetal pregnancy reduction and selective termination - Beriwal
    Jul 12, 2020 · Although there is a high risk of preterm birth within 3 weeks of this procedure, such timing carries no risk of miscarriage and major disability ...Abstract · Procedures for fetuses with... · Outcomes · Ethical and psychological...<|separator|>
  11. [11]
    Selective reduction in multiple gestation - PubMed
    Fetal indications for which selective termination has been reported are Down syndrome, microcephaly, hemophilia A, spina bifida, thalassemia major and Tay- ...
  12. [12]
    Trans-abdominal fetal reduction in higher order multiple pregnancies
    Jun 4, 2024 · A total of 123 fetuses were reduced. Out of total 108 multifetal pregnancies, 96 (88.8%) were due to in-vitro fertilization (IVF). Eighty-five ...
  13. [13]
    Perinatal outcome and timing of selective fetal reduction in ... - NIH
    Jan 16, 2024 · Keywords: timing of selective reduction, gestational age at surgery ... selective reduction before 16 weeks to obtain a better outcome.
  14. [14]
    Triple trouble: uncovering the risks and benefits of early fetal ...
    May 30, 2023 · Severe preterm deliveries were significantly higher in nonreduced triplet pregnancies (27.9%) than triplet pregnancies reduced to twin ...
  15. [15]
    Fetal reduction of triplet pregnancies to twins versus singletons
    Mar 26, 2022 · Conclusion: Triplets RTT had lower fetal survival rate of all remaining fetuses, lower GA at birth, higher risk of PTB and lower birth weight ...
  16. [16]
    Perinatal outcomes in multifetal pregnancy following fetal reduction
    Perinatal death occurred in 5.6% of pregnancies reduced to twins, as compared with 10.0% of unreduced triplet pregnancies and 2.4% of unreduced twin pregnancies ...Missing: success metrics
  17. [17]
    Comparison of maternal and perinatal outcomes of multifetal ... - LWW
    Sep 19, 2025 · The loss rate in 1000 consecutive MFPR cases was found to be 4.7%, and it has been shown that the highest preterm birth rates occur when ...Missing: metrics | Show results with:metrics
  18. [18]
    Selective Fetal Reduction in Multiple Pregnancies | Article | GLOWM
    Selective reduction in twins is often offered when there is an abnormality in one twin, or in complications such as TTTS or twin reversed arterial perfusion ...
  19. [19]
    Triplet pregnancies - The Fetal Medicine Foundation
    Survival: overall 75%, at least one baby 95%. Birth at <32 weeks: 55%. MC triplets: endoscopic laser surgery can be technically difficult because of the ...
  20. [20]
    Fetal Reduction Could Improve but Not Completely Reverse the ...
    Jun 23, 2022 · No significant differences were found in the rates of pregnancy loss at <24 weeks (5.4% vs 5.3%) and live birth (94.1% vs 94.7%) between the ...Abstract · Introduction · Materials and Methods · Discussion
  21. [21]
    Obstetric and neonatal outcome of multifetal pregnancy reduction
    This retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the obstetric and neonatal outcomes of MFPR procedure in patients with HOMP compared to those managed ...Missing: metrics | Show results with:metrics
  22. [22]
    Perinatal outcomes in multifetal pregnancy following fetal reduction
    May 8, 2017 · Previous studies have reported a higher risk of miscarriage among triplet pregnancies reduced to singleton pregnancies than among triplet ...
  23. [23]
    Obstetric outcome and psychological follow-up of pregnancies after ...
    The main risk in embryo reduction is miscarriage. In the present series, no complete miscarriage occurred. Overall, a pregnancy loss of 11.7% was reported in a ...<|separator|>
  24. [24]
    Adverse outcome following selective termination of presenting twin ...
    Feb 1, 2023 · Premature contractions, ruptured membranes, sudden emergency delivery, technical difficulty in performing ST, increased maternal anxiety and the ...ABSTRACT · INTRODUCTION · RESULTS · DISCUSSION
  25. [25]
    Pregnancy outcome after multifetal pregnancy reduction
    Among 21 twin pregnancies that had selective termination at or after 15 weeks, the risk of preterm delivery < 33 weeks was three times higher than in the group ...
  26. [26]
    Correlation analysis of adverse outcomes for the selective reduction ...
    May 18, 2022 · A case series of TRAP patients undergoing RFA at a single centre reported an overall survival rate of 92% [18]. Several studies reported that ...
  27. [27]
    Radiofrequency ablation for selective fetal reduction in complicated ...
    Mar 6, 2021 · The pregnancy success rate following RFA selective reduction was highest among sFGR and TRAP groups and lowest in the anomaly group.
  28. [28]
    Treatment of twin reversed arterial perfusion sequence with ...
    Conclusion. Expectant management is effective for treatment of TRAP sequence in stage Ia. In stage IIa, RFA improves the prognosis of pump twins.
  29. [29]
    Birth outcomes of twins after multifetal pregnancy reduction ...
    Pregnancy reduction from triplets to twins was associated with higher birthweight (+365.44 g; 95% confidence interval, 222.75–508.14 g; P<.0001) and higher ...
  30. [30]
    Improvement in outcomes of multifetal pregnancy reduction with ...
    Results: With increasing experience there has been a considerable improvement in outcomes, with decreases in rates of both pregnancy loss and prematurity.
  31. [31]
    Pregnancy Outcomes of Different Methods for Multifetal ... - NIH
    The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of various methods of multifetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) and to determine which method produces ...Missing: success metrics peer
  32. [32]
    [PDF] Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction: Evolution of the Ethical Arguments
    On one side, twin reduction for social reasons is defensible as a reproductive right. Respect for parental decisions is the governing norm in these cases. ...
  33. [33]
    Life Issues Forum: Selective Reduction: A Morality Tale | USCCB
    Aug 19, 2011 · A recent cover story in The New York Times Magazine explores the "ethical dilemma" parents and doctors face when fertility treatments produce two or three ...
  34. [34]
    Abortion and multifetal pregnancy reduction: An ethical comparison
    Jun 15, 2021 · We have dubbed the most important arguments against MFPR that we have identified the harm argument, the slippery-slope argument, the ...Missing: philosophical | Show results with:philosophical
  35. [35]
    Selective Fetal Reduction for an Anomaly in a Twin Gestation
    May 1, 2025 · Therefore, selective reduction of the abnormal twin may improve the ... , et al. Pregnancy outcome following fetal reduction from dichorionic ...
  36. [36]
    The Outcome of Twin Pregnancies Discordant for Trisomy 21
    Nov 14, 2013 · The management of twin pregnancies discordant for fetal abnormality is dependent on the lethality of the anomalies. If the condition is ...<|separator|>
  37. [37]
    Efficacy of second-trimester selective termination for fetal ...
    OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to develop the most comprehensive database possible to counsel patients about selective termination for fetal abnormalities, because no ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  38. [38]
    Selective Abortion as Moral Failure? Revaluation of the Feminist ...
    Mar 8, 2016 · The core of Asch's argument, that the use of genetic selective abortion is based on misinformation about living with disabilities and that it ...
  39. [39]
    Trends in female-selective abortion among Asian diasporas ... - eLife
    Sep 27, 2022 · While selective abortion of female fetuses is documented within China and India, it is also significant among Asian diaspora in Canada, US, ...
  40. [40]
    Sex Selection Abortion: A Worldwide and U.S. Problem
    Sex selection abortions are playing a role in skewing the male-female sex ratio at birth (SRB) in dozens of countries around the world. The problem is worst in ...<|separator|>
  41. [41]
    Selective reduction of pregnancy: a legal analysis.
    It concludes that since the legal status of the procedure in English law is unclear, it may be a criminal offence to perform selective reduction even where ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  42. [42]
    Confronting the Taboo of Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction: A ...
    Dec 10, 2024 · Objective To explore the personal experiences of women faced with the decision to continue a triplet pregnancy or undergo multifetal ...
  43. [43]
    do we forget the emotional impact on fathers? A qualitative study ...
    Jan 10, 2024 · Multifetal pregnancy reduction is a medical procedure with the purpose to reduce the number of fetuses to improve chances of a healthy outcome ...Missing: peer- | Show results with:peer-<|separator|>
  44. [44]
    First-trimester multifetal pregnancy reduction: Acute and persistent ...
    RESULTS: More than 65% of the sample recalled acute feelings of emotional pain, stress, and fear during the reduction procedure. Mourning for the lost fetuses ...
  45. [45]
    Psychological Reactions After Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction: A 2 ...
    One year after birth one-third of the women in the reduction group reported persistent depressive symptoms related to the reduction, mainly sadness and guilt.
  46. [46]
    The psychological effects of multifetal pregnancy reduction - PubMed
    Conclusions: Multifetal pregnancy reduction is experienced as stressful and distressing. However, when pregnancy outcome is successful, the medical intervention ...
  47. [47]
    Psychological reactions after multifetal pregnancy reduction
    effects of multifetal pregnancy reduction on the mothers'​​ very painful emotionally and provoke acute grief reactions.
  48. [48]
    First-trimester multifetal pregnancy reduction: Acute and persistent ...
    Multifetal reductions, although highly stressful psychologically, are well tolerated. Sadness and guilt may persist, especially for an identifiable subgroup.
  49. [49]
    Bereavement Associated with Multifetal Reduction
    Practitioners should not assume that success- fully bearing children cures the grief associated with infertility or reduction.Missing: term | Show results with:term
  50. [50]
    Follow-up of pregnancies, infants, and families after multifetal ...
    Two couples only occasionally experienced some grief and mourning reactions for the reduced fetuses.
  51. [51]
    Fetal Reduction: 25 Years' Experience - Karger Publishers
    Feb 13, 2014 · Fetal reduction (FR) began in the 1980s to salvage the pregnancies of couples needing fertility therapy who were finally successful but with ...
  52. [52]
    Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction - ScienceDirect.com
    The first case report of fetal reduction in a higher-order multiple pregnancy was published by Kanhai, van Russel, and Meerman in 1986. This controversial ...Missing: 1980s | Show results with:1980s
  53. [53]
    Selective Reduction of Multifetal Pregnancies in the First Trimester
    Apr 21, 1988 · The number of pregnancies complicated by multiple gestation has been increasing as a result of the relatively widespread use of ovulatory drugs and in vitro ...
  54. [54]
    The Two-Minus-One Pregnancy - The New York Times
    Aug 10, 2011 · In the mid-1980s, they devised an escape hatch to deal with these megapregnancies, terminating all but two or three fetuses to lower the risks ...
  55. [55]
    Fetal Reduction: 25 Years' Experience - Karger Publishers
    Feb 13, 2014 · Fetal reduction (FR) began in the 1980s to salvage the pregnancies of couples needing fertility therapy who were finally successful but with too many fetuses.Missing: advancements | Show results with:advancements
  56. [56]
    Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction | GLOWM
    ### Summary of Advancements and Statistical Data on Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction (MFPR)
  57. [57]
    Multifetal pregnancy reduction: modification of the technique and ...
    The rate of miscarriage in this study using the modi- fied technique was 8.8%. This is less than the 12.6% loss rate reported by Sebire et al. (4) in their ...
  58. [58]
    Texas abortion laws mean she had to leave state for selective ... - NPR
    Feb 28, 2023 · Doctors can selectively terminate one fetus, while another or multiple other fetuses continue to develop. Multiple pregnancies are inherently ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  59. [59]
    Implications of Abortion Laws for Fertility Services - Goodwin
    Jan 20, 2023 · Laws on abortion vary from state to state, and may affect fertility services, selective-reduction procedures, and genetic testing.Missing: non- | Show results with:non-
  60. [60]
    [PDF] Selective reduction of fetuses in multiple pregnancies and the law in ...
    This article considers whether it is lawful in Australia to terminate one or more fetuses in a multiple pregnancy selectively and, if so, under what circum-.
  61. [61]
    Understanding Multi-fetal Pregnancy Reduction - IFM Kolkata
    Mar 8, 2024 · The legality of fetal reduction varies from country to country. In India, fetal reduction is legal and performed in specialized medical ...
  62. [62]
    Multiembryonic pregnancy reduction: The Hungarian experience
    According to the prevailing Public Health Law, multiembryonic pregnancy reduction is legally permitted in Hungary, as is selective termination in multifetal ...
  63. [63]
    [PDF] Abortion and multifetal pregnancy reduction: An ethical comparison
    The practice and the legal aspects of MFPR in the Nordic countries differ somewhat. Norway is the only Nordic country in which the government has concluded ...<|separator|>
  64. [64]
    [PDF] The regulatory environment of multifetal pregnancy reduction
    Hence, abortion of all the foetuses in multiple pregnancy by 22 weeks is legal but foetal reduction may be illegal, as the "abortion" procedure in MFPR is ...
  65. [65]
    Chapter 10: Fetal reduction - Fertility and Sterility
    Indeed, it is prohibited in only 29% of the 52 respondent countries (Table 10). As might be anticipated, the procedure is not approved nor practiced among ...
  66. [66]
    Permissibility of Multifetal Pregnancy Reduction from The Shiite ...
    According to Shiite sources, fetal reduction is permitted. Defective fetuses are the criteria for selective reduction.Missing: non- | Show results with:non-
  67. [67]
    Sex-selective abortions: no simple solution - PMC - NIH
    Several countries that have prohibited sex-selective abortions have found that the law is difficult to enforce and that people determined to have boys find ways ...
  68. [68]
    Banning Abortions in Cases of Race or Sex Selection or Fetal ...
    Jan 22, 2020 · Race-selective abortion bans are based on the idea that women of color are coerced into abortions or are complicit in a “genocide” against their ...<|separator|>
  69. [69]
    Sex-Selective Abortion Laws In The United States - Chicago Unbound
    Sex-selective abortion laws in the US prohibit abortions based on fetus sex, with penalties. Eight states have such laws, and 21 states and the federal ...
  70. [70]
    [PDF] Italian Journal of - Gynæcology & Obstetrics
    Jun 7, 2023 · Differences between selective ter- mination of pregnancy and fetal reduction in multiple pregnancy: a narrative review. Re- prod Biomed Online.