Counting down the days to Christmas with a daily morning post containing a photograph of the White House Christmas decorations.  Have no clue why someone Jewish is doing this or how I got all these pictures — read the first post.

Bo going over to check out the Gold Star tree before his walk.

What an incredibly shitty week.  I don’t know, is there really any other way to describe this week?  A week where you not only lose 20 children and 7 adults in an act of violence, but you then need to wade through the endless, pointless commentary by anyone and everyone in the media; the idiotic Facebook status updates throwing blame to every corner of the earth; the infuriating statements of how a seemingly constant stream of violence could be avoided if we just put a random person’s half-baked plan into effect; as well as explaining the fact that horrific acts of violence exist in the world to up-until-now innocent children?

That was my week online.  Even the good stuff, the helpful stuff such as the beautiful pictures of the children lost, was TOO MUCH.  We used to be able to process quietly or emerge ourselves into the information based on our personal needs, and now it feels like the volume dial is stuck on 10.  The only way to take a break is to unplug entirely — from the Internet, from radio, from the television.  Which isn’t necessarily a terrible thing.

And then there is the opposite.  I lost a childhood friend this week.  It is difficult to reconcile the boy I know in my heart with the man he became later in life.  All I wanted was to spend a few minutes with other people who remembered him as I do; walking through the dirt at camp in white athletic socks when it became popular one summer to walk barefoot, slow dancing at Bar Mitzvahs, playing “I Never” at sixteen and falling asleep like puppies on Pam’s floor, being the Great One to his Pain (especially when he ad libbed my lines when I walked offstage in fear, helpfully saying, “I’m sure if my sister were here she would say ‘My Brother’s a Pain…”), being the only boy in our dance class as he strutted amongst us to Billy Joel’s “Pressure.”  I have only happy memories of him, and I feel so incredibly lucky that I do.

And I found that on Facebook, which made my head finally feel quiet when it was screaming so loudly at me while I was unplugged.

Counting down the days to Christmas with a daily morning post containing a photograph of the White House Christmas decorations.  Have no clue why someone Jewish is doing this or how I got all these pictures — read the first post.

Ornaments on the office White House Christmas tree in the Blue Room.

Stories about infertility are feeling a little bit like popcorn this month.  There was a story here and there, and then in one week, my Google Reader was filled with stories about birth rates and donor gametes and clinic advertising.

“Are Infertility Doctors Turning into Predatory Bankers?”

Well that is certainly a neck-swiveling question, Forbes (I’ll admit that I don’t actually read Forbes.  This article was linked to from someplace much more insipid.)  I’m going to assume that the answer — you believe — is “yes” because if the answer was a resounding “no,” it wouldn’t make for a news article.  It’s an article about fertility doctors providing fertility loans, and I wrote my feelings on this practice this past summer.  I actually thought it was going to be something on the topic that has been floating around all week on the study about slippery advertising on the part of fertility clinics.  I am going to guess that the media believes that fertility clinics are taking advantage of their patients based on the way both these stories are being reported.  I don’t know what I believe beyond the fact that articles like these drive home the fact that reproductive medicine is a business as much as it is a medical solution.  How do you feel about the loans and the advertising?

“Fertility Decline Surprises Women Over 40, Study Finds”

I thought this headline from the Huffington Post was rather rich.  Why do you think people might be surprised?  Could it be because the mainstream media often speaks about IVF as if it is (1) the only option to treat infertility and (2) a slam-dunk solution?  Because we speak about 48-year-old actresses having twins without ever mentioning either treatments or donor gametes?  Do you blame women for believing that we’ve somehow evolved to stay fertile longer in the same way that we’ve extended our life span?

Why should we, the reader, be surprised or find it newsworthy that people believe what they read and absorb the messages provided by the media?

“America, You Are Getting Really Shitty At Having Babies”

This Jezebel article is only remarkable because infertility does not appear anywhere in the post.  The author is musing on why US women are having fewer children and fewer abortions; meaning, they’re not getting pregnant.  Birth control is floated as a reason, and I’m sure it is.  But if infertility rates are growing, doesn’t that have the possibility to affect the overall birth rate?  Unless fertile women begin having more children than normal, the overall birth rate numbers are going to shrink.

“Couple Seeking Egg Donor Offers Their Kid’s Nanny $30K … & She Quits”

This is a very interesting story.  Let’s take out the nanny’s actions because I find them deplorable.  Someone asks you something in confidence, and you go air their private life to the mainstream media.  In my world, that’s a dick move.  No one violated her rights or did anything illegal.  Her employer asked a question, she gave an answer, and then months later, she went to the New York Post to talk about her employer and her fertility issues.  There was nothing in the article about her employer treating her unfairly afterward or making her life miserable because she wouldn’t be a gamete donor.  In fact, it states:

The employee still left on good terms a few months later. To the best of her knowledge, the mother has not had more children. Elizabeth lists her as a professional reference and, until now, has only mentioned the proposition to close family.

Until now are the key words.

But the employer… did she do anything wrong?  On one hand, she is in a position of power and her question could be seen as coercion.  Is the employee really free to say no to such a personal request if she depends on that employment?  And at the same time, I wonder how our thoughts on that first question come into play when we consider all known-donor situations.  I would personally ask someone to be a gamete donor, and while I don’t have gametes others would want, I would have never been offended if someone had asked me to be their donor.  Are we responsible for someone else’s comfort when reaching out for help?  Is it wrong to make a non-pressured, non-coerced request of another person?  Would you be okay with another person asking for a major donation — gametes, organ, or bone marrow — from you?

Personally, it’s okay to ask me anything.  I may not always say “yes,” but I wouldn’t be offended.

I think I was just really bothered by what was implied in this situation.  Perhaps it hit too close to home since I would consider a known donor, yet how does one ask if they worry about destroying a relationship in the process of asking?

Counting down the days to Christmas with a daily morning post containing a photograph of the White House Christmas decorations.  Have no clue why someone Jewish is doing this or how I got all these pictures — read the first post.

The Washington Monument in the distance with a White House Christmas tree in the foreground.

(Does it get any more “Christmastime in Washington” than that?)