Do you know what isn’t funny?  Taking a very serious topic and joking about it for several paragraphs at the expense of an emotional group BEFORE you say, “just kidding, this scientific breakthrough could potentially change the lives of many people!”  Thanks, Jezebel, for taking the subject of three-person IVF, a breakthrough that many potential parents who cannot have children without assistance — namely those who are carriers of certain mitochondrial illnesses — have been holding their breath over while debates rage on across the world, and putting forth every stereotype about people who need to resort to assisted conception; all in one article with an incendiary headline:

You Could One Day Have Your Very Own Designer Baby

We’re not talking Vera Wang babies.  Child boutiques where parents will order up their perfect offspring.  We’re talking about a very invasive, very expensive, potentially life-threatening procedure that the vast majority of the world would utilize only as a last resort.  If people truly knew what went into an IVF cycle, what it costs emotionally and physically (not to mention, financially), they would not live in fear that people would abuse this scientific breakthrough.  There is no real fear of designer babies; there is only hope offered up to people who — unlike the fear-mongering authors — are faced with the dilemma of potentially passing along a life-threatening illness if they want to build their family using their own genetic material.

[A side note: the first person who offers up adoption as a solution to family building while being a carrier of a genetic illness gets my foot up their ass.  Unless you truly understand the logistics of adoption; understand the financial and emotional costs to all members of the triad; AND have a clear understanding of the potential parent’s inner psyche, please don’t suggest adoption.  Everyone knows about adoption.  If they didn’t choose adoption, please know that there is probably a very good reason, even if you aren’t privy to it.  And that reason should be respected vs. cavalierly used as a tool of judgment.]

On the other end of the spectrum is The Beast’s coverage of three-person IVF, which cautions why we shouldn’t be freaking out about three-person IVF (thank you!):

Along with the Food and Drug Administration’s two-day meeting this week to discuss “three-person IVF” came the usual freak-outs about slippery slopes, designer babies, and other science-fiction fantasies (or nightmares) coming to life—magnified  by the strange thought of three people creating a healthy baby instead of the good ol’ two.

See, Jezebel, that is a way to report on a serious topic without offending your readership or doing damage to the public’s view of a topic they’re struggling to wrap their mind around.

Responsibility: let’s bring some back to the media.

So you may have noticed (though probably not if you’re a regular reader of this blog) that I turned on comment moderation.  It only affects the first comment you leave.  Once I’ve approved your first comment, you should be able to comment without moderation (save for a select few that Akismet always dumps in moderation for whatever reason).  But this will hopefully help with the enormous quantities of spam that get past Akismet without changing anything for you.  I will still need to deal with the spam, but I’ll get to it in my own, sweet time instead of feeling pressure to be cleaning it up the moment it hits my site.  I spend an extraordinary amount of time daily cleaning up spam.

Every real comment will still go up as long as it conforms to my commenting policy which is fairly loose: no hate speech, cruelty, or traffic grabbing.  I define traffic grabbing as someone who leaves a comment solely to drive traffic elsewhere.  Just want to make that clear: I never delete a comment that links to a personal blog — I want to be able to follow a comment back to someone else’s space and see what they’re writing about.  I am not talking about linking to your story.  But I do delete comments that write something like, “nice job!” and then link to a site where someone is selling something.  They clearly weren’t here to join a conversation.

I know that there is no one out there who likes spam, but I absolutely abhor spam.  I hate not having things neat and organized, and spam is like someone dropping crumbs in my inbox or on my blog.  It’s just another little mess I need to clean up.  Nothing huge, but annoying at the same time.

*******

Early bird pricing for BlogHer ends today.  If you were considering going, now is the time to buy your ticket because you can get $150 off.

*******

The Americans started back up again.  That show freaks me out so much.  And it’s on late.  So I watch it and freak myself out right before bed.  But it was so good to see everyone in that first episode.  I’ve missed them.

*******

And now the blogs…

But first, second helpings of the posts that appeared in the open comment thread last week.  In order to read the description before clicking over, please return to the open thread:

• “Why Miscarriage Matters When You’re Pro-life” (The Lewis Note)
• “Loss of Innocence with Hope” (Oh Baby, Baby)

Okay, now my choices this week.

No Kidding in NZ has a post about the flip side of gratitude and how she hears people processing appreciation for their life.  It’s an interesting take on trying to please others which comes to the conclusion that you can’t.  Especially not with a blog where your words are directed at a wide range of people vs. a single individual.  Go over and read the posts and comments.

A Woman My Age has a post about being a practicing Buddhist for 15 years.  She explains, “At the end of the marital struggles, elder care, depressions, job loss, and infertility, I KNEW I had the ability to survive any MOTHERFUCKING thing.  Including myself.”  It’s a wonderful post about the journey which keeps going and going and going.

A+ Effort has a post on the two year anniversary of becoming a mother.  It is so simple and so profound.  Congratulations!

Lastly, Serenity in Chaos has a post about the birth of her friend’s child.  She writes, “I was HAPPY for her, but also couldn’t help feeling a bit jealous. After all, this is the first biracial baby in my inner circle and it was DIFFICULT not to have any thought of “this could have been ours”. I couldn’t help staring at the cute baby photos on the first day. More than three times a day. On purpose.”  I loved this post for the deep honesty which covers the gamut from twinges to unbridled happiness.  It’s just a beautiful capturing of a moment in time.

The roundup to the Roundup: Trying to combat blog spam.  BlogHer early bird pricing ends today.  The Americans is back!  And lots of great posts to read.  So what did you find this week?  Please use a permalink to the blog post (written between February 21st and February 28th) and not the blog’s main url. Not understanding why I’m asking you what you found this week?  Read the original open thread post here.

Welcome back to IComLeavWe. It stands for International Comment Leaving Week, but if you say it aloud, doesn’t it sounds like “I come; [but] leave [as a] we”? And that’s sort of the point. Blogging is a conversation and comments should be honoured and encouraged. I like to say that comments are the new hug–a way of saying hello, giving comfort, leaving congratulations. Here is the vital information, pure and simple (a more detailed set of rules follows below the list):

• The list opens the 1st of every month. It remains open until the 21st. You can add yourself at any point. The list is open to everyone in the blogosphere–blog writers and/or blog readers.
• Add yourself to the list by filling out this form after adding the icon below: The March list is now closed.  The April list will open on 3/27.
  
• Click here to cut-and-paste this bit of code to add to your sidebar (if you have the old code from another month, remove it and replace it with this one). You need to add the icon or a link to the current list on your blog (see below) and will not be added until it’s up.
• Commenting kicks off every month on the 21st. Please mark it somewhere (calendar, post-it note taped to your computer…), though I will be sending out an email reminder on the 20th. Commenting week runs from the 21st to the 28th. Every day, leave 5 comments and return 1 comment for a total of 6 comments. You are highly encouraged to choose the blogs you comment on from the participants list below, but this is not required.
• I will send a second email on the 28th to remind you to remove the icon from your blog.
• Read below if you want to find out about Iron Commenters.
• The commenting ends on the 28th. We catch our breath and the whole thing starts again the next month on the 1st. Drop in and out according to what is happening in your life between the 21st and the 28th.

The March 2014 List

1. Stirrup Queens (twins, books, writing)
2. In Due Time (hope, faith, natural)
3. kate; unfiltered (motherhood unrequited, life)
4. Breathe Gently (new mum, IVF, PCOS)
5. The 2 Week Wait (infertility, ttc, humor)
6. The M House (adoption, family, parenting after loss)
7. Comatised (love, life, survival)
8. Desire to Mother (infertility, emotions, poems)
9. Moonfish and Buttermilk (parenting, surrogacy, marriage)
10. waiting for baby bird (infertility, PCOS, natural)
11. Feeding My Inner Child… Hopefully! (parenting; twins; health)
12. The Quest for a Tiny Human (infertility, iui, fur babies)
13. The Road From There To Here (faith, knitting, infertility)
14. Family Of Three (PCOS, parenting after infertility, TTC #2)
15. The Empty Cookie (disabled mother, child loss, living children)
16. My Lady of the Lantern (parenting after IF, baby loss, TTC ambiguity)
17. MissConception (infant loss, life, parenting)
18. Amateur Nester (infertility, faith, encouragement)
19. A Crack In Everything (loss, acceptance, TTC while single)
20. Life of an Army Wife (army wife, donor gametes, pregnancy)
21. A Little Bit More (life, PCOS, infertility)
22. Hope Love and Family (faith, infertility, ivf)
23. Creating a Family (infertility, adoption, parenting)
24. Stupid Broken Eggs (twins, IVF, faith)
25. Life’s Little Bump (infertility, miscarriage, grief)
26. A Virtual Hobby Store and Coffee Haus (news, food, life)
27. Beautiful and Impossible Things (endometriosis, dating, randomness)
28. The Idea Girl (family, gardening, food)
29. A Greater Yes (embryo adoption, parenting)
30. Gypsy Mama’s Family (pregnancy, positivity, life)
31. Baby Makin’ (pcos, pregnant with baby #1)
32. Meanttobemommy (infertillity, endometriosis, support)
33. Ready Now God (life, parenting, god)
34. The Lewis Note (recurrent pregnancy loss, secondary infertility, adoption)
35. The March list is now closed.  The April list will open on 3/27.

Q: What if I miss a day?

A: Catch up the next day by doubling your comments–12 comments instead of 6.

Q: What if I have two blogs? Can I sign up twice, listing both blogs?

A: Yes, but you also need to double your comments. If you have two blogs listed, you should be leaving 12 comments per day.

Q: What is an Iron Commenter?

A: Not for the faint-of-heart. People who wish to be an Iron Commenter and be entered on the Iron Commenter honour roll need to leave a comment on every blog on the participants list (exceptions are blogs that require you to have a special log-in, such as some LiveJournal accounts or other similar situations). You can spread out this commenting any way you wish over the whole week, but the final comment needs to be left by midnight on the 28th (EST). Reaching Iron Commenter status is done on an honour system. Please email me if you earn Iron Commenter status so I can add you to the wall of honour.

Q: Why do I have to add that bit of code to my sidebar?

A: The code is the latest icon (the icon changes colour every month so you know that you’re on the right list). This month, the icon is green, the next month it will be red, etc. The reason is two-fold: (1) it enables more people to find out about IComLeavWe and (2) it gives you easy access to the current list once the commenting week actually begins and better ensures that you’ll use it. Too many times, people sign up and forget to actually do IComLeavWe and this icon gives you a daily reminder (with the dates on it) every time you open your own blog. The icon is linked back to the current list. On the 28th, remove the icon from your blog. A new one will be created for the next month.

Q: It’s the 23rd and I just saw this for the first time on my friend’s blog! I want to join the list–why can’t I?

A: Because IComLeavWe happens every month, once the list is closed, it’s closed. If you’re finding out about this on the 23rd, you can’t join the current month. But leave yourself a note to check back in a week on the 1st and you can sign up for the next month.

Q: You said the list closes on the 21st. Well, it’s still the 21st where I am. Why aren’t you moving my information onto the list?

A: All dates and times are U.S. Eastern Standard Time (UTC/GMT -5 hours). The list closes around 11 p.m. EST on the 21st.

Q: What if no one comments on my blog and I have no comments to return?

A: Well, that really doesn’t happen for the most part, but in that case, simply choose another blog and add an additional comment. The goal is to hit 6 comments daily as a minimum. Going over that is fantastic and encouraged.

Q: Mel, my question wasn’t covered at all. What do I do?

A: Email me; I’m quite friendly. It helps to place “IComLeavWe” in the subject line. You could also check this post which contains the history of IComLeavWe and see if you can glean anything there.

Looking for the comment section? It has been closed on this post. Use the form in the directions to add yourself to the list.

I’m certain that you’ve seen it popping up in the news as well; a new-ish app called Glow that helps you pinpoint your fertile days.  It operates in the same manner as the long-standing FertilityFriend: you input data, the program starts to see the pattern, and it helps you to read your fertility signs.  What is newsworthy is that they’ve added a new feature which they’re calling a type of fertility insurance.  Smithsonian reports on how it works:

Couples or women trying to get pregnant pay $50 to the company each month. Then, if they have not become pregnant at the end of 10 months, they receive at least $500 towards infertility treatment services. The money from all the couples who were contributing to the pool is split among those who did not become pregnant, so the more people participate, the more money the couples who don’t conceive will receive.

Unless I’m doing my math incorrectly, you give Glow $500 over 10 months.  If you don’t get pregnant, they give you your $500 back (or, perhaps more if enough people join along AND get pregnant!) so you can pay for one vial of injectable medication.  If you do get pregnant, you’re out $500.  Wait, can we back up again to that if you don’t get pregnant thing?  Do they know anything about fertility clinics?  Do they know how little you can do with $500?  Even in a mandated state with decent insurance, we were still paying several thousand out of pocket.  Our testing was covered down to the obscure thrombophilia panel they tacked onto the normal thrombophilia panel, and we still paid thousands upon thousands of dollars.  If you don’t have coverage, that $500 isn’t going to get you in the stirrups.

And that money is designated solely for fertility treatments.  So if you decide to pursue adoption or not pursue treatments at all, you’re out of luck:

After 11 months, Glow First will pay an accredited infertility clinic (check list) of your choice when you submit proof of your medical costs.

In other words, you need to submit more personal information about yourself to this app-maker in order to be reimbursed.  And after they’ve collected heaps of information from your medical records… they’ll give you enough to pay for an ultrasound or two.  Because even if thousands of people become pregnant, leaving their contributions behind, we’re still talking about a relatively small pool of money to be split amongst the people who have jumped through the hoops and remembered to log their cycle 10 months in a row.

It’s a nice idea and I’m sure the app is great.  I personally am partial to FertilityFriend just because I started there about 12 years ago, but there’s room for others to get in on the telling-you-when-you’re-ovulating game.  I’m just not sure how I feel about Glow First.  It seems like people would be better off paying themselves $50 per month so they’d definitely have $500 in hand at the end of 10 months.  Then they wouldn’t need to pass along their medical information to a third party.  And while they may not hit the jackpot, they can rest assured that they also didn’t gamble with their fertility.  They didn’t wait 10 months just to capitalize on a program, they didn’t have to jump through hoops to get it.  That money is simply back in their pocket, where it belongs.  Because if there is a problem, they’re really going to need it.

What do you think of Glow?  Has anyone tried it yet?

Back in January, I first read about a group of celebrities who were imploring fans to stop reading magazines that use paparazzi-taken photos of their kids.  The boycott points out our role in the harassment of people related to the celebrity; Kristen Bell states that if we stop buying these magazines, the demand for these photos will go away.  Of course, the magazines won’t know if we’re not reading them for the baby photos, the insipidness of the articles, or the perfume samples they slip inside the pages.  But still, as someone who is incredibly squeamish about overstepping lines, I’m in favour of Kristen Bell’s requests.

Good binky for disguising young children

Image: US CPSC via Flickr

I like to think of my life like one of those divided plates where I’ve put myself in the largest protein portion, offering myself up for consumption.  But the kids and Josh are like the separated out peas and carrots and corn.  They’re right beside me, but they’re clearly not mixed in with me.  It’s my decision if I want to give up some of my privacy.  But it’s not my decision to make as to whether the twins give up their privacy.  And it certainly isn’t my decision to give up someone else’s child’s privacy, hence why I am so wholly against people putting up pictures online without permission; and that includes class pictures, group shots of the sports team, or party photos.

Unless you’re cool having your privacy invaded, don’t invade someone else’s.

But I digress.

People magazine put up a statement yesterday about their use of celebrity children’s images in the magazine.  They are moving toward only using posed photos from events or ones taken with permission.  A step in the right direction though I’d caution all those celebrities releasing photos of their kids that their kids may not be thrilled to have that picture of them playing in the park in a national magazine.

But what gave me pause was a snarky little sentence in the middle of People’s statement:

And there’s always the tough balancing act we face when dealing with stars who exploit their children one day, and complain about loss of privacy the next.

Exploit their children?  While there are celebrities and non-celebrities alike who make parenting decisions that I would never make, I can’t say that I can point to one celebrity who exploits their child.  Can you?  There are celebrities who sell baby photos of their children and donate the money to charity — such as Angelina Jolie.  The reason usually given is that by providing the images, they hope to stave off paparazzi who are trying to steal an image by bothering them in public.  Bring children to events?  Sure — but is that exploitation?  To me, exploitation is using a child for gain.  And I’m not sure what is gained that wouldn’t be gained otherwise by attending an event without your child.  Is the child being used to get the parent work?  Money?  Do I think some people see their children as accessories that they put on when they’re in the mood?  Sure, I’m sure there are people out there like that.  But that isn’t exploitation.  That’s just crappy parenting.

Accusing someone of exploitation is a character assessment.  And while I think there are child celebrities who are being exploited by their non-famous parent — pushed into privacy-stealing positions without being properly prepared for the pressure — and child celebrities who are being exploited by their celebrity parent a la the children of reality television shows that feature children on-air, I can’t think of a celebrity parent who is exploiting their non-celebrity child.  It’s a fairly charged word.  I’d be really curious if People magazine is privy to behaviour that shows clear exploitation from celebrities who are complaining about their child’s lack of privacy.  I would be very curious to learn who they believe exploits (meaning; derive benefit from) their child AND complains about a lack of privacy.

What do you guys think of the boycott of paparazzi photos of celebrity kids?  And can you name a celebrity that exploits their non-famous kid?