Sunday February 12, 2012
Valentine's Day is this Tuesday in America, and love is in the air - at least, it's all over the media and marketing messages. I know the holiday is mainly about selling cute boxes of chocolate, and don't get me wrong - there is nothing wrong with a little chocolate! But I think it's also a good time to look at our love life and our connection with our partner.
Infertility is notorious for messing with our sense of self and our love lives. I have heard again and again people express concern that their partner might leave them for someone "more fertile." And sadly, these words rarely get heard by their partner. Strangers on fertility forums are more likely to hear about this fear than the one who could answer the fear best.
If you have worried about this - and if you have, you are NOT alone - why not take this upcoming love holiday and commit to talking about it? Tell your partner that you worry they might leave you because of the infertility. Tell them that you are afraid they see you as less womanly or less manly, tell them you worry that your infertility makes you somehow less sexy.
I would bet, for a great majority of you, the love of your life will not take that moment to pack his or her bags and leave. I have a feeling they will instead take you into their arms, calm those fears, and let you know that they love you and find you as irresistible as before. They may even surprise you and tell you that they have the same exact fear.
And even if you don't get that reaction, it's still better for the words to be spoken than rumbling around in your head and heart. Spoken pain can heal. Pain you keep bottled up just makes you sick inside.
Have you experienced these worries? Have you shared them with your partner, or kept silent? Share your thoughts and experiences below. Let other readers know that they are not alone. Whether you've decided to be open with your love, or not, we want to hear from you. (Feel free to use a pseudonym.)
More on infertility and your relationship:
Photo (c) Noel Hendrickson / Getty Images
Wednesday February 8, 2012
At Salon.com, in their New Mom Confessions, a mother of twins wonders at why she's embarrassed to admit her twins came as the result of fertility treatment. She talks about how part of her shame is rooted in the very personal nature of infertility, but she brings up another touchy question: if you couldn't conceive, why didn't you adopt?
Some of us have heard it said, while others have read it online in the nasty comment hell that follows articles on infertility. "How can you pursue fertility treatments when there are children without homes?" or "The world is already overpopulated, why are you making it even more crowded?"
Note that the people who say these things usually a) have never adopted or even fostered a child, and b) have their own kids. Most of the time.
First of all, the waiting list to adopt a child is typically long. This is partially because there are more parents requesting adoptions than children waiting to be adopted.
There are, of course, special situations where a child is having trouble getting adopted, possibly due to special needs or age. But this isn't always the best choice for a couple, and it's important that a family be ready to deal with a special situation. Not everyone can handle it.
Second of all, the desire to have your own child is not the same as the desire to raise someone else's.
I'm not saying that adoptive parents don't feel over time that their adopted child is just like their own. But I am saying that those desires - to adopt and to conceive - are two different desires. They just aren't the same.
When a fertility challenged couple does decide to adopt, it's not "giving up" or "doing the right thing" or "choosing the higher moral choice." They are choosing to do what they've decided fits their family best.
And adopting doesn't take away the pain of not being able to conceive their own child. They will still mourn that loss.
Some families are built by both natural conception (or fertility aided conception) and adoption. It's not like adoption is limited to those who can't conceive, or those whose fertility treatments fail.
Last but not least, there's also the fact that not all couples qualify for adoption. Sometimes, treatments are the only choice.
What are your thoughts? Do you feel guilty for pursuing treatment instead of pursuing adoption? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
Photo (c) Blood Productions / Getty Images
Sunday February 5, 2012
While browsing the news sites, I spotted an article entitled, "Why I Orgasmed in an MRI Scanner." Who can resist reading an article with a title like that? I mean, totally from a research perspective, of course.
The article isn't so much about why the author orgasmed in the MRI, but more about people's reactions to research studies on sex and sexuality. The author, Kayt Sukel, writes that people seem to think funding research on sex isn't worthwhile, not when things like cancer are around to study.
Sukel believes sexuality is worth studying, and I have to say I agree. Sex is a vital part of our lives. In fact, we don't have "life" without it. Even with IVF, which some may say takes the sex out of conception, it's still based on sexuality. The desire to conceive children is at least partially based in sexual desire. Animals instinctively seek out sex in order to mate and make more animal babies. So do humans, in our own complicated way.
Sexuality also plays a role in fertility, and it's a role that's not quite clear yet. We will never find out what role it plays without research.
What do you think? Is sexuality worth researching? Share your thoughts in the comments! I'd love to hear from you.
More on sexuality and fertility:
Photo (c) Jan Tyler / Getty Images
Wednesday February 1, 2012
Waiting to have your first child until after age 35 is becoming more and more common. Unfortunately, since biological clocks don't wait, this can mean trouble with conception. The media is full of stories of women who "just didn't realize" that their ovaries are getting older even if they feel young and healthy.
In these same articles on waiting to conceive, there is usually at least one "expert" blaming the feminist movement for the wait. Because women are so focused on their careers, goes the commonly held belief, they put off having a child until it's too late.
Turns out that's not quite true. In fact, career is an uncommon reason to put off family building.
An interesting study in Canada surveyed women with planned pregnancies to ask them what factors played a role in deciding when to have a child and why they waited (or not.) The most common reason given for waiting to have a family was "being secure in a relationship." Other common reasons given were "feeling in control of one's life" and "feeling prepared to parent."
But what about careerism? Less than 30% of women said their career goals played a "very important" role in deciding when to have their first child.
There was a right-on opinion piece at Slate.com, where writer Jessica Grose questions where The New York Times (and other media sources) find women who cite "ignorance" of their biological clock as the reason for waiting to start a family.
I think she simplifies this a bit (as many people really aren't aware that IVF can't "save" you from infertility after 40), but she also brings up a good point - that most women who wait aren't playing games with their biological clocks, or just "didn't realize" that getting older makes it harder to have babies.
Most women are very aware of time ticking away. They just haven't found the right person, or don't feel financially secure, or don't feel ready.
What's your experience? What factors played a role in when you decided to have kids? Feel free to share in the comments!
More on the biological clock:
Image (c) Nanette Hooslag / Getty Images
