what a weird culture

The baby's crying so I'm awake. That would be my next door neighbor's beautiful newborn, so there's really nothing I can do about it besides ring the doorbell (probably waking the other kid and the dog) and offer to come in and rock the baby and be turned away as a total weirdo. But it is weird to lie awake in your bed, having just taken my prenatal vitamin and bcp (starting a new cycle in February, obsessive doc wants bcp) and listen to a newborn crying 4 feet away. Ah, NYC real estate.

This weekend we saw not one, but two shows were a girl's first sexual encounter results in pregnancy (Sp.rin.g Aw.aken.ing and Sp.ee.ch and De.bate - a fabulous little play about high school kids). It's such a weird cultural idea, that must stem from old wives' tales and constant warnings by other mothers that even your first sexual encounter can result in pregnancy. And I have to think it also has a bit to do with male authors. I mean really, first sex? Isn't that a male fantasy that everything was great? Moreover, it's highly unclear how 'comprehensive' these experiences were - in one play the girl mentions that things didn't go quite right. But it also makes me think of the weird disjunction for those of us in today's high-tech medical world who were absolutely sure that our first encounter posed no threats to our wombs. Clearly I was optimistic and hopeful that my first encounter might at least have the potential to result in a baby (although I was on bcp), but I already had heard enough warnings from RE not to count on it. One of my poor friends had a terrible surgery in her early 20's which almost certainly eliminated her ability to conceive naturally. I remember being with her on the day of her discharge from the hospital, when the poor doc doing rounds - not her primary surgeon - said something along the lines of, 'well, if you want kids do it in the next 5 years or so.' Great. Wonderful lifetime counselling there for a fragile 20-something girl who was at the time, and still is, completely single. Nothing like telling her to settle down immediately, or give up on motherhood entirely. Sadly, I haven't been able to talk to her about our current medical endeavors because she has taken a very fatalistic view that some women just aren't meant to be mothers. I personally can't see how you can believe that a physical problem is really indicative of whether you ought to parent, unless you believe in the type of incredible dictated universe where the poor are meant to suffer and only the evil die of painful diseases. Which brings us to Friday's oped in the N.YT by Jud.ith Wa.rne.r. If you didn't know by now, I read the times obsessively.

The article is a highly unsympathetic take on the justifiably shocking proposition of international surrogates. It's particularly troublesome because some of the parents hint that they chose international surrogates because of their ability to control and monitor them more than domestic ones. Just to make it clear, I think there are fraught moral questions of financial coercion, but in general I think these transactions should be legal and available. But it was not the article as much as the string of responses which basically stated 'You have no right to be a parent.' The number of responses which mentioned the idea that you don't have a 'right' to parent, made me reread the article to check that some quote had not inadvertently suggested the idea, which it hadn't. It's such an odd idea to focus on. Nobody I know, especially not a couple undergoing fertility treatment, has suggested having a baby is a right. And it doesn't even make sense because 'right' is so tied up in legal terms. What's clear is that these couples have the clear desire to be parents, and that desire is leading them through all sorts of hurdles and costs. The talk of 'rights' (with hints of elite privilege and money that would be better spent elsewhere) reeks of a lack of empathy that's so odious that they must be aware of it. I mean, infertile couples who chose medical treatment or adoption go through so much more hassle, expense, and surveillance than those who conceive quickly and naturally, that it seems like their immense desire would correspond to a pretty impressive level of dedication as parents. (And oh is that surveillance offensive. On Monday I have to go repeat my S.TD testing because the clinic requires it to be less than 12 months old before a new cycle. Not that I've done anything risky in the past 12 months, or even that my spouse has to be tested. Nope, this is just a bit more embarrassment for the women). I guess I just don't understand this idea that physical infertility must be just. Only a few comments even mentioned the trite idea that some of these women might suffer from fertility problems because they had put their careers first. Women's decisions about when to settle down and have children are so strongly influenced by societal pressures that it strikes me as a bit absurd to hold individual women accountable for their choices (especially when economic need rarely lets them decide in a vacuum). And as someone on the other side of the age spectrum, who has been asked repeatedly what our rush is and don't I worry about missing out on our carefree 20's, I hardly think a little carelessness with the foresight on family planning is a reason not to be a parent.

At least there was another article with a much nicer spin on infertility/parenting. In Sunday's paper there is an article about 3 girls adopted from China. The article itself, like most of their human interest stories, has little content, but the issue of tension between 3 adoptive families is an interesting take, and some of the quotes from the mothers are very on point. I particularly like this one: "We don’t want to be seen as clueless adoptive parents who are just thinking that our child’s life is a fairy tale, because obviously it’s not." If only it were as simple as parents who need babies and babies who need parents, as some of the comments on the War.n.er oped suggest, then obviously we'd all adopt. But it's just not that simple. And anyway, much as I would like to adopt someday, as a rather young unwed couple we don't qualify for the majority of domestic or international agencies. So back to the trenches in February. But first a whole month of depressing bcp.