After years of struggling with infertility and several autoimmune disease diagnoses, Clara was advised to begin IVF treatment. But Clara was concerned about the stress IVF would put on her body, so she and her husband chose a different path.
At the age of 38, following three cycles of restorative reproductive medicine (RRM), Clara gave birth to a healthy baby.
Clara’s experience with RRM illustrates the effectiveness of its root-cause approach to infertility and women’s health. When RRM is utilized before assisted reproductive technology like IVF, families are spared the ethical concerns, emotional distress, and financial strain that IVF can cause.
Restorative Reproductive Medicine should be offered as the first line of defense for couples experiencing infertility, not the last resort.
In America, infertility is treated solely as a disease when it is often a symptom resulting from underlying conditions. Women who cannot get pregnant are told they are simply suffering from infertility, with few medical treatments being given to address the issue. In reality, these women are often experiencing underlying health conditions that can be treated to allow them to conceive naturally.
RRM seeks to address these underlying problems for parents by restoring their health and addressing their infertility at the same time. IVF, on the other hand, seeks to circumvent a woman’s body and the struggles leading to infertility.
In short, IVF sidesteps the body’s natural reproductive process, while RRM works with the body to restore its natural fertility.
Despite their unique DNA and inherent dignity, millions of embryos remain frozen on ice today in the United States, and thousands are destroyed every year due to intentional and unethical IVF practices. RRM treatments avoid these issues by helping couples conceive naturally.
NaPro (Natural Procreative) Technology was developed in the 1970s by Dr. Thomas Hilgers. NaPro works with the Creighton Model FertilityCare™ System to restore a woman’s natural menstrual cycle. The treatment also focuses on personalized plans to address health issues at the root of infertility, such as endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). Today, NaPro Technology remains an ethical alternative to in vitro fertilization (IVF).
NaPro is not the only form of RRM, but it is one of the most widely known and effective. A 2012 study showed that couples with an average age of 35 who were treated with NaPro had a 38% chance of having a live birth. This number is comparable The women undergoing NaPro treatment for 24 months had an even more impressive rate of live birth—66%. Not only is NaPro a more ethical alternative to IVF, but it can also be more effective.
RRM may also be beneficial for parents who have gone through failed IVF cycles. A study including couples choosing to undergo RRM after IVF had an overall live birth rate of 32.1%. The financial and emotional strain that these couples likely experienced during IVF treatment may have been avoidable if they had been directed towards RRM at the beginning of their journey.
Opposition to RRM from the medical establishment can often push couples toward IVF. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine argues that RRM is lacking key fertility tools, including IVF. ns, and it’s leading to an ethical crisis with thousands of human embryos being destroyed every year.
For women like Clara, IVF is a Band-Aid on the issue of infertility. Some couples experiencing infertility are more likely to have success with types of RRM than they are with IVF, and RRM has the added benefit of not just delivering a baby but also restoring the reproductive health of the parents.
To restore reproductive health in America and provide families with ethical, life-affirming alternatives to IVF, restorative reproductive medicine should be both supported and prioritized.