Skip to content
Likelier

Action vs. inaction regret

Pursue IVF to have a biological child vs. adopting

If you act

Pursue IVF

19%

If you don't

Adopt a child

5.0%

Percentage who later regret each choice. Bars and full ledger render below.


Family

Last reviewed 2026-05-04

Evidence quality 3.75/5

Eight-dimension review score against the quality rubric . Each dimension scored 1–5.

D1 Source verification
3/5
D2 Source authority & independence
4/5
D3 Regret-rate accuracy
3/5
D4 Source comparability
3/5
D5 Gilovich pattern
5/5
D6 Prose quality
4/5
D7 Caveat completeness
4/5
D8 Sample quality
4/5
Average 3.75/5
A flat vector illustration of a laboratory embryo dish alongside a simple outline of two adult hands holding a small hand

Action regret

Pursue IVF

19%

~1 in 5 women (≈19%) who pursued infertility treatment report moderate-to-severe decision regret — concentrated in those whose treatment did not result in a child

US couples experiencing infertility (Cusatis et al. 2023 longitudinal cohort, n=72 women / 48 partners; ICMART global ART success-rate context)

measured up to 6 years after treatment decisions

Inaction regret

Adopt a child

5.0%

~5% of adoptive parents report significant regret (87% would 'definitely' adopt again in the national survey); placement disruption/dissolution is higher only for older-child, special-needs adoptions

US adoptive parents, nationally representative (2007 National Survey of Adoptive Parents, ASPE/HHS); placement-stability data from Child Welfare Information Gateway

retrospective decision satisfaction; disruption measured before/after finalization

% who regret this choice

action dominates — Action dominates — most regret acting.

Related decisions

Semantically similar decisions — same territory, different trade-offs.

Health

Fertility treatment vs. childlessness

% who regret this choice

Inaction dominates

Inaction regret 1.7× higher

family

Adoption placement vs raising

% who regret this choice

Action dominates

Action regret 4.8× higher

family

Surrogacy vs. childfree

% who regret this choice

Inaction dominates

Inaction regret 2.1× higher

family

Tell vs. conceal adoption

% who regret this choice

Inaction dominates

Inaction regret 4.0× higher

family

Egg/sperm freeze vs. wait

% who regret this choice

Inaction dominates

Inaction regret 3.2× higher

family

Having children

% who regret this choice

Balanced

Roughly balanced

family

One more child vs stopping

% who regret this choice

Inaction dominates

Inaction regret 2.6× higher

family

Early vs delayed parenthood

% who regret this choice

Inaction dominates

Inaction regret 1.7× higher

Risks behind this decision

The probabilities that sit underneath this choice.

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.

Sources: action

Claim ledger

Every number below is what each source reported, with the verbatim quote we relied on and how we arrived at our figure. Click any link to verify directly.

1/2 sources independently verified verbatim against the cited source

  1. [1] Reproductive Health (BMC) — Decision regret among couples experiencing infertility: a mixed methods longitudinal cohort study Verified
    Decision regret among couples experiencing infertility: a mixed methods longitudinal cohort study

    See all 2 Likelier entries citing this source →

    Statistic
    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
    Excerpt
    “"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)." ”
    Source data from
    2023-11-02
    Accessed
    2026-06-30
    Verification
    Excerpt independently re-fetched and confirmed word-for-word against the cited source during our grounding audit.
    Calculation
    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. [2] Human Reproduction / ICMART — International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology world report: assisted reproductive technology 2017 and 2018
    International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology world report: assisted reproductive technology 2017 and 2018
    Statistic
    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
    Excerpt
    “"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. ”
    Source data from
    2025-06-01
    Accessed
    2026-06-30
    Calculation
    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.

Sources: inaction

Claim ledger

Every number below is what each source reported, with the verbatim quote we relied on and how we arrived at our figure. Click any link to verify directly.

1/2 sources independently verified verbatim against the cited source

  1. [1] Child Welfare Information Gateway, US Children's Bureau — Discontinuity and Disruption in Adoptions and Guardianships
    Discontinuity and Disruption in Adoptions and Guardianships
    Statistic
    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
    Excerpt
    “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. ”
    Source data from
    2021-01-01
    Accessed
    2026-06-30
    Calculation
    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. [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 Verified
    Adoption USA: A Chartbook Based on the 2007 National Survey of Adoptive Parents
    Statistic
    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
    Excerpt
    “"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." ”
    Source data from
    2009-07-01
    Accessed
    2026-06-30
    Verification
    Excerpt independently re-fetched and confirmed word-for-word against the cited source during our grounding audit.
    Calculation
    "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.

Caveats

IVF and adoption are not cleanly comparable options: IVF seeks a biologically related child while adoption provides a child who already exists. The choice between them is often experienced as sequential (try IVF first, then consider adoption) rather than simultaneous. The Gilovich action/inaction frame here is: IVF = active medical intervention with uncertain outcome vs. adoption = acceptance of an existing child without medical risk. Action-side regret is concentrated in failed IVF cases; couples who succeed at IVF have very low regret. The inaction-side (adoption) regret is concentrated in specific subgroups: older-age foster-care adoption with complex trauma histories has a higher disruption rate than infant adoption. The populations are also self-selected: couples who choose adoption typically have already accepted non-biological parenthood as acceptable; those who choose IVF have stronger preferences for biological connection. The regret rates should be interpreted as: given you're in the position of deciding between the two paths, what does the evidence suggest about where regret falls? International adoption is declining rapidly due to Hague Convention restrictions; the most relevant adoption pathway for most high-income-country applicants is domestic foster care or domestic infant adoption.

Raw data: /api/decisions.json

Recently viewed on this device