# Medical Condition Where Pregnancy is Possible but Birth Is Not? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 27, 2019, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073 "2019-11-27T16:22:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2019, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073/21 "2019-11-28T13:50:29Z")
> [@Wrenching\_Spanners](#): > > Thank you. Just to provide a fuller answer to future readers of this thread, and me, could you please provide an example of a medical condition that would be extremely likely to cause an ectopic pregnancy? The link I gave to the Wikipedia article gives such conditions in other sections. Correction: I should have typed: “The pregnancy completes to full term but normal birth is not possible.” ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2019, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073/22 "2019-11-29T00:50:16Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > What the…huh !? Doesn’t a hysterectomy involve yanking out the entire thing, tubes and ovaries and all ? > > (Some wikipedia later) > > Apparently not. Well I learned a thing today. Cheers. I remember old articles in which women claimed that removing their ovaries had killed their sex drive and recommending that any woman having a hysterectomy should demand that they be left in. I don’t remember any study results being quoted. The wiki article states: > [@](#): > > After hysterectomy for benign indications the majority of women report improvement in sexual life and pelvic pain. A smaller share of women report worsening of sexual life and other problems. But it doesn’t specify if there’s a bigger likelihood with or without removal of the ovaries, and “worsening” doesn’t necessarily refer to a loss of libido. So I’m assuming it’s a concern whose time has passed, but maybe not. ---
**Author:** ![ivylass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/9de053/32.png) [@ivylass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivylass)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2019, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073/23 "2019-11-29T02:41:27Z")
> [@Kent\_Clark](#): > > Not an absolute, but the classic example is the [Rh factor](http://www.carterbloodcare.org/the-significance-of-being-rh-negative-or-rh-positive/). If the fetus inherits the Rh+ gene from the father and the mother is Rh- the mother will produce antibodies that can attack the fetus and end up with a miscarriage. This was a big concern up until the development of RhoGAM about 50 years ago. > > The really insidious thing about Rh pregnancies is that the problem didn’t start until after an Rh- woman had her first Rh+ child. The antibodies built up as a response to that, so an Rh- woman could carry one Rh+ child successfully, then subsequent pregnancies would fail. This happened to my younger sister. Funny thing is, she was born in 1970, about two or three years after the development of RhoGAM. I’m surprised my mother wasn’t given the shot. Maybe they didn’t know after my birth? All I know is my sister was born prematurely and had to have an immediate blood transfusion. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2019, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073/24 "2019-11-29T03:27:57Z")
Women with [bicornate uterus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicornuate_uterus)es can have problems carrying to term also. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2019, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073/25 "2019-11-29T12:20:43Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > . . . Note that an ectopic pregnancy in most areas, fallopian tubes, ovaries, abdomen is a really bad thing. A miscarriage sometimes results and if not life saving surgery to save the mother could be needed . . . Apparently this is not [a problem in Ohio](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/29/ohio-extreme-abortion-bill-reimplant-ectopic-pregnancy). ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2019, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073/26 "2019-11-29T13:59:56Z")
> [@Yllaria](#): > > I remember old articles in which women claimed that removing their ovaries had killed their sex drive and recommending that any woman having a hysterectomy should demand that they be left in. I don’t remember any study results being quoted. The wiki article states: > > But it doesn’t specify if there’s a bigger likelihood with or without removal of the ovaries, and “worsening” doesn’t necessarily refer to a loss of libido. So I’m assuming it’s a concern whose time has passed, but maybe not. The other issue is the concern that taking hormone pills to make up for the missing ovaries, or to mitigate the effects of menopause, was by some studies shown to increase the risk of cancer. Thus it was recommended to leave one or both ovaries in… unless the hormonal effects of the cycle were detrimental. Now I think they have better controlled doses of hormones, thus the risk of cancer is not so great? ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2019, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073/27 "2019-12-02T17:59:05Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > The other issue is the concern that taking hormone pills to make up for the missing ovaries, or to mitigate the effects of menopause, was by some studies shown to increase the risk of cancer. Thus it was recommended to leave one or both ovaries in… unless the hormonal effects of the cycle were detrimental. > > Now I think they have better controlled doses of hormones, thus the risk of cancer is not so great? Shrug. It’s been awhile since I had a personal stake in the discussion. I know that back in the day most doctors wanted to remove the ovaries because it was difficult to check them for abnormalities without a uterus. More offices have ultrasound now, though, so maybe not as much now. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/medical-condition-where-pregnancy-is-possible-but-birth-is-not/844073.md?page=1)