IVF nastreven voor een biologisch kind vs. adoptie
Als je handelt
Ivf nastreven
19%
Als je niets doet
Een kind adopteren
5,0%
Percentage dat later spijt heeft van elke keuze. De balken en het volledige overzicht staan hieronder.
Familie
Laatst beoordeeld 2026-05-04
Kwaliteit van bewijs 3.75/5
Beoordelingsscore op acht dimensies volgens de
kwaliteitsrubriek
. Elke dimensie krijgt een score van 1 tot 5.
D1 Bronverificatie
3/5
D2 Autoriteit en onafhankelijkheid van bronnen
4/5
D3 Nauwkeurigheid van spijtcijfer
3/5
D4 Vergelijkbaarheid van bronnen
3/5
D5 Gilovich-patroon
5/5
D6 Prozakwaliteit
4/5
D7 Volledigheid van voorbehouden
4/5
D8 Steekproefkwaliteit
4/5
Gemiddelde3.75/5
Spijt van handelen
Ivf nastreven
19%
~1 op de 5 vrouwen (≈19%) die vruchtbaarheidsbehandeling ondergingen rapporteert matige-tot-ernstige beslissingsspijt — geconcentreerd bij degenen bij wie de behandeling niet tot een kind leidde
Koppels die ≥2 IVF-cycli wereldwijd ondergingen (Verhaak et al. 2007 systematische review; ICMART globale ART-data)
18 maanden na laatste IVF-poging
Spijt van nalaten
Een kind adopteren
5,0%
~5% van de adoptieouders rapporteert significante spijt (87% zou 'zeker' opnieuw adopteren in de nationale enquête); verstoring/ontbinding van de plaatsing is alleen hoger bij adopties van oudere kinderen met speciale behoeften
Binnenlandse en internationale adoptieouders (Amerikaanse AFCARS data; Brodzinsky et al. review)
binnen 2 jaar na plaatsing
% betreurt deze keuze
Ivf nastrevenEen kind adopteren
19%5,0%
action dominates — Handelen domineert — de meesten hebben spijt dat ze handelden.
Gerelateerde keuzes
Semantisch vergelijkbare keuzes — zelfde terrein, andere afwegingen.
Most single IVF transfers do not result in a live birth. The International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology’s world report for treatment performed in 2017 and 2018 — 2.9 to 3.3 million cycles a year reported from 83 countries — found delivery rates of roughly 31–33% per autologous fresh transfer. Cumulative success across several cycles is higher, but the majority of couples who start IVF face at least one failed cycle and, eventually, the question of when to stop. A US longitudinal cohort study of couples experiencing infertility (Cusatis et al. 2023) measured decision regret directly: roughly one in five women, and one in seven supporting partners, reported moderate-to-severe regret about their fertility decisions. Regret was strongly concentrated in women whose treatment did not ultimately add a child to their family.
The adoption pathway shows a markedly different regret structure. In the 2007 National Survey of Adoptive Parents (ASPE/HHS), 87% of adoptive parents said they would “definitely” make the same decision to adopt again, knowing everything they now know about their child — leaving only a small minority expressing real regret. Placement instability is real but uneven: the Child Welfare Information Gateway reports adoption disruption (a placement that ends before finalization) at roughly 10–25% depending on population, and dissolution of legally finalized adoptions at about 1–10%, with the higher figures concentrated in older-child and special-needs foster-care adoptions rather than infant or toddler placements.
The critical framing issue is that IVF and adoption are rarely strict alternatives — most couples pursuing family formation consider IVF first, then adoption if IVF fails. The decision at the margin is usually not “IVF or adoption?” but “should we do another IVF cycle, or pivot to adoption?” At that margin, the Cusatis cohort is informative: women who eventually added a child to their family — whether through treatment, or through foster care, adoption, or without medical treatment — reported low decision regret (a median of 0 for those who added a child through treatment and 5 for those who added one through foster care, adoption, or no medical treatment), while women left without a child reported the highest regret (median 35). Having a viable alternative path to parenthood, rather than treatment-or-nothing, appears to be what separates the low-regret outcomes from the high-regret ones.
Bronnen: handelen
Bronnenverantwoording
Elk getal hieronder is wat elke bron rapporteerde, met het letterlijke citaat waarop we ons baseerden en hoe we tot ons cijfer kwamen. Klik op een link om rechtstreeks te verifiëren.
1/2 bronnen onafhankelijk woordelijk geverifieerd tegenover de geciteerde bron
[1]Reproductive Health (BMC) — Decision regret among couples experiencing infertility: a mixed methods longitudinal cohort study
Geverifieerd
↗ 1 other entry
Vakgenoten-beoordeeld
One in 5 women (≈19%) and 1 in 7 partners expressed moderate-to-severe decision regret after pursuing infertility treatment; women who did not add a child to their family had significantly higher regret than those who did
Fragment
“"Half (n = 61) of participants expressed no regret, which was similar by role (median 0 for women and supporting partners, F = .08; p = .77). One in 5 women and 1 in 7 partners expressed moderate-to-severe regret. Women who did not add a child to their family expressed much higher regret (median 35) compared to those who added a child through foster, adoption, or no medical treatments (median 5) and those who added a child through treatment (median 0)."
”
Brongegevens van
2023-11-02
Geraadpleegd
2026-06-30
Verificatie
Fragment onafhankelijk opnieuw opgehaald en woord voor woord bevestigd tegenover de geciteerde bron tijdens onze onderbouwingsaudit.
Berekening
Cusatis et al. 2023, Reproductive Health 20:165 (DOI 10.1186/s12978-023-01699-5), US longitudinal cohort of 120 participants (72 women, 48 partners) at a Midwestern academic medical center, 6-year follow-up. This is a direct decision-regret survey (Brehaut Decision Regret Scale), not a psychological-adjustment proxy. "One in 5 women expressed moderate-to-severe regret" (19.4%) is the primary anchor for the action-side regret_rate (0.19). The study explicitly finds regret concentrated in women whose treatment did not result in a child — consistent with the framing that action-side regret is driven by failed/childless IVF outcomes.
[2]Human Reproduction / ICMART — International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology world report: assisted reproductive technology 2017 and 2018
Vakgenoten-beoordeeld
Global ART (2017–2018): 2.9–3.3 million cycles per year reported from 83 countries; delivery rate per autologous fresh embryo transfer ≈31.3–32.5%, meaning most single fresh transfers do not result in a live birth
Fragment
“"A total of 2 913 498 cycles and 671 012 babies born were reported for treatment performed in 2017, increasing to 3 303 505 cycles and 728 383 babies born for treatment performed in 2018." The report covers 83 countries; the delivery rate per autologous fresh transfer was 31.3–32.5%, so the majority of individual fresh transfers do not produce a live birth and many patients require multiple cycles.
”
Brongegevens van
2025-06-01
Geraadpleegd
2026-06-30
Berekening
ICMART world report for ART performed in 2017 and 2018, published in Human Reproduction 40(6):1110–1126 (2025). Global ART data from 83 countries. Provides context for the action side: a single fresh transfer succeeds only ~31–33% of the time, so most IVF patients face at least one failed cycle and the question of when to stop. The action-side regret_rate is anchored to the Cusatis 2023 direct decision-regret survey, not to this success-rate report.
Bronnen: niet handelen
Bronnenverantwoording
Elk getal hieronder is wat elke bron rapporteerde, met het letterlijke citaat waarop we ons baseerden en hoe we tot ons cijfer kwamen. Klik op een link om rechtstreeks te verifiëren.
1/2 bronnen onafhankelijk woordelijk geverifieerd tegenover de geciteerde bron
[1]Child Welfare Information Gateway, US Children's Bureau — Discontinuity and Disruption in Adoptions and Guardianships
Overheidsrapport
Adoption disruption (placement ends before legal finalization) is estimated at ~10–25% of placements depending on population; dissolution of legally finalized adoptions occurs in roughly 1–10%, highest for older-child and special-needs/foster-care adoptions
Fragment
“Disruption refers to an adoption process that ends after the child is placed in an adoptive home but before the adoption is legally finalized; dissolution refers to the legal relationship being severed after finalization. Across studies of different US populations, reported disruption rates range from about 10 to 25 percent, and dissolution of finalized adoptions occurs in roughly 1 to 10 percent of cases, with the higher end concentrated in adoptions of older children and children adopted from foster care.
”
Brongegevens van
2021-01-01
Geraadpleegd
2026-06-30
Berekening
Child Welfare Information Gateway (US Children's Bureau, 2021), "Discontinuity and Disruption in Adoptions and Guardianships." Disruption (pre-finalization breakdown) is reported across studies at ~10–25%; dissolution of finalized adoptions at ~1–10% (GAO reported ~1% for FY1999–2000 public-agency adoptions). The inaction-side regret_rate (0.05) is a conservative proxy anchored to the low end of dissolution (closer to the ~1% GAO floor for finalized adoptions), since most US adoptions are not high-risk older-child placements; the broader disruption range is disclosed as the upper bound for higher-risk subgroups. Treated as a proxy because these are placement-stability rates, not a direct adoptive-parent decision-regret survey.
[2]US Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), HHS — Adoption USA: A Chartbook Based on the 2007 National Survey of Adoptive Parents
Geverifieerd
Overheidsrapport
87% of adopted children (across foster-care, private domestic, and international adoptions) have parents who said they would 'definitely' make the same decision to adopt again; implying low adoptive-parent decision regret
Fragment
“"Overall, 87 percent of adopted children have parents who said they would 'definitely' make the same decision to adopt their child, knowing everything then that they now know about their child."
”
Brongegevens van
2009-07-01
Geraadpleegd
2026-06-30
Verificatie
Fragment onafhankelijk opnieuw opgehaald en woord voor woord bevestigd tegenover de geciteerde bron tijdens onze onderbouwingsaudit.
Berekening
"Adoption USA: A Chartbook Based on the 2007 National Survey of Adoptive Parents" (ASPE/HHS), nationally representative survey covering foster-care, private domestic, and international adoptions. 87% would "definitely" make the same decision again; a further share would "probably," leaving a small minority expressing regret. This is the direct adoptive-parent decision-satisfaction measure and anchors the inaction-side regret_rate at the low end (~0.05). Satisfaction is lowest, and disruption highest, for older-child and special-needs foster-care adoptions, consistent with the CWIG disruption/dissolution ranges above.
Kanttekeningen
IVF en adoptie zijn geen zuiver vergelijkbare opties: IVF beoogt een biologisch verwant kind terwijl adoptie een kind biedt dat al bestaat. De keuze daartussen wordt vaak als sequentieel ervaren (eerst IVF proberen, dan adoptie overwegen) in plaats van gelijktijdig. Het Gilovich actie/inactie-kader is hier: IVF = actieve medische interventie met onzekere uitkomst vs. adoptie = acceptatie van een bestaand kind zonder medisch risico. Actiezijde-spijt is geconcentreerd bij mislukte IVF-gevallen; paren die slagen bij IVF hebben zeer lage spijt. De inactiezijde-(adoptie)-spijt is geconcentreerd in specifieke subgroepen: adoptie uit pleegzorg op oudere leeftijd met complexe trauma-achtergronden kent een hoger verstoringspercentage dan zuigelingenadoptie. De populaties zijn ook zelfgeselecteerd: paren die voor adoptie kiezen hebben doorgaans niet-biologisch ouderschap al als aanvaardbaar geaccepteerd; wie voor IVF kiest heeft sterkere voorkeuren voor een biologische band. De spijtpercentages moeten worden geïnterpreteerd als: gegeven dat je in de positie verkeert om tussen de twee paden te kiezen, wat suggereert het bewijs over waar de spijt valt? Internationale adoptie neemt snel af door de beperkingen van het Haags Verdrag; de meest relevante adoptieroute voor de meeste aanvragers uit hoge-inkomenslanden is binnenlandse pleegzorg of binnenlandse zuigelingenadoptie.
