Three things

1. Via Half Changed World, Raising Kaine, and Tessy, I am relieved to pass on the news that Virginia's HB 187 was swiftly killed in committee.  The bill, earning a place of honor among Delegate Bob's "most addle-brained, inhumane, and outright bigoted bills," was intended to deny ART to unmarried women.  Defeated.  Good.  Done.  Now, how about his proposed prohibition of anonymous gamete donation?
2. A recent study has found that women with endometriosis benefit from a course of GnRH agonist treatment — Lupron and the like — before undergoing IVF.  The study's authors found a four-fold increase in the pregnancy rate in women who'd undergone three to six months of GnRH therapy before cycling.  The live birth rate is also increased.  Strange; I would have predicted that after six months on Lupron, the study subjects would be so desperately psychotic that their embryos would be too terrified to implant, and would instead regretfully off themselves in the peaceful privacy of their sterile dish.
3. "You don't ever mention adoption," said one reader several days back, and, really, don't you think it's better that way?

   In a recent post I seem to have stepped on a lot of toes, and in the comments, so did many of my friends inside the computer.  I do apologize for my own gaffes, especially for referring to an expectant mother who's considering placement as a birth mother; outside of that infelicitous shorthand, I hope the substance of my post demonstrated that I meant no disrespect.

   I also fear that my point was misconstrued.  I can only say this baldly: I am not concerned about love.  I don't worry at all about whether Paul and I would love an adopted child as much as we love Charlie — spending time in the NICU with Charlie, it hit both of us very forcefully that we responded primarily to being needed rather than to being related.  In my post I meant to convey my fear that no one but us — and, to be fair, adoptive parents who already know, themselves — could believe that. We know we would, but would anyone else?  And that concern remains.  How could it not, when I fail to make myself understood here among people who know our situation well?

   Every infertile woman I know who's pursuing treatment is sick to death, and maybe a bit afraid, of being asked, "Have you considered adoption?"  This always strikes me as a disingenuous question.  I'm spending $15,000 and sticking needles in my belly.  Of course we've considered adoption.  The question that's really being asked is this: Why not adoption (with ...you selfish freak being the optional grace note)?  The answers, as I've seen in the comments, are so personal, so individual, and so complicated that I think anyone who asks the question casually over chips and salsa at a Super Bowl party should be kicked in the figurative nuts.

   It's a hard thing to discuss.  I don't know whether I'll talk about this again because there doesn't seem to be any way to do it without hurt feelings.  I think Tina might be on to something when she tells people simply, "We think about it."

   Oh, we do. 

Posted by Julie at 11:05:50 AM in I've learned a lot...but I'm not sure it's worth it., Mama drama

Comments

Three things

1. Via Half Changed World, Raising Kaine, and Tessy, I am relieved to pass on the news that Virginia's HB 187 was swiftly killed in committee.  The bill, earning a place of honor among Delegate Bob's "most addle-brained, inhumane, and outright bigoted bills," was intended to deny ART to unmarried women.  Defeated.  Good.  Done.  Now, how about his proposed prohibition of anonymous gamete donation?
2. A recent study has found that women with endometriosis benefit from a course of GnRH agonist treatment — Lupron and the like — before undergoing IVF.  The study's authors found a four-fold increase in the pregnancy rate in women who'd undergone three to six months of GnRH therapy before cycling.  The live birth rate is also increased.  Strange; I would have predicted that after six months on Lupron, the study subjects would be so desperately psychotic that their embryos would be too terrified to implant, and would instead regretfully off themselves in the peaceful privacy of their sterile dish.
3. "You don't ever mention adoption," said one reader several days back, and, really, don't you think it's better that way?

   In a recent post I seem to have stepped on a lot of toes, and in the comments, so did many of my friends inside the computer.  I do apologize for my own gaffes, especially for referring to an expectant mother who's considering placement as a birth mother; outside of that infelicitous shorthand, I hope the substance of my post demonstrated that I meant no disrespect.

   I also fear that my point was misconstrued.  I can only say this baldly: I am not concerned about love.  I don't worry at all about whether Paul and I would love an adopted child as much as we love Charlie — spending time in the NICU with Charlie, it hit both of us very forcefully that we responded primarily to being needed rather than to being related.  In my post I meant to convey my fear that no one but us — and, to be fair, adoptive parents who already know, themselves — could believe that. We know we would, but would anyone else?  And that concern remains.  How could it not, when I fail to make myself understood here among people who know our situation well?

   Every infertile woman I know who's pursuing treatment is sick to death, and maybe a bit afraid, of being asked, "Have you considered adoption?"  This always strikes me as a disingenuous question.  I'm spending $15,000 and sticking needles in my belly.  Of course we've considered adoption.  The question that's really being asked is this: Why not adoption (with ...you selfish freak being the optional grace note)?  The answers, as I've seen in the comments, are so personal, so individual, and so complicated that I think anyone who asks the question casually over chips and salsa at a Super Bowl party should be kicked in the figurative nuts.

   It's a hard thing to discuss.  I don't know whether I'll talk about this again because there doesn't seem to be any way to do it without hurt feelings.  I think Tina might be on to something when she tells people simply, "We think about it."

   Oh, we do.