Won't you end up having a whole litter of babies all at once?

No. You're thinking of the good old days.

Back in the good old days they hadn't quite worked this whole IVF thing out yet. Success rates were poor, and doctors transferred lots of embryos at once to try and compensate. Every once in a while all the little buggers would stick and it would end up in the papers.

Now they know what they're doing, the most they transfer at once is two. The most they transfer for me, most cycles, is one. This means I have no more chance of having twins than the next woman on the street. Higher order multiples? I think I'd get my own case study.

As an aside, when you hear of couples with sextuplets and so forth in the papers, this is almost always the result of lower-tech fertility treatments. The lower the tech, the less control you have over the outcome. Programs in other countries also have higher rates of multiples, because of the way IVF is funded in those countries (or rather, not funded). I'd like to pause and congratulate the Australian government for allowing Australian families to pursue IVF safely by funding infertility like the legitimate medical condition it is, although I realise their decision is not only informed by a desire to protect the health of the mother and child, but also by some careful accounting. (It's cheaper to fund IVF than to force parents to take risks which lead to expensive complications.)