I definitely do judge the fact that they've bought baby shit instead of using that money towards IVF.
I do not judge them for being upset that IVF costs a lot of money. I understand why it does but it is a darn shame that IVF is out of reach for many families willing to go that route for a child or children. We make decent money but it would take a long time for us to come up with $15,000 for IVF.
But don't worry, I do judge them for other reasons so I'm not here to be a Debbie Downer lol.
You mean, bought baby shit while they were in the middle of IUI treatments?
Have you dealt with IF? It's a nightmare. I bought baby shit during my numerous failed cycles. I wanted to be optimistic it would work, because the alternative was soul crushing.
Really, the overwhelming opinion here is that IF isn't sympathetic. Didn't you dream about what your children with your DH would look like? You just didn't have an article written about you so that everyone could judge you on the internet.
I have not dealt with IF. I don't doubt it's a nightmare. And I sense that most people here are sympathetic to IF based on the posts, just not sympathetic to these particular folks for other reasons.
No, I never dreamed about what my children with DH would look like.
At 33, yeah I think you should be looking at "how can we make this happen" instead of "lets just wait til the economy gives us the work/money we need" BUT maybe they are the the article is just making them look like they are sitting around?
ETA: I went to grade school and middle school with her. She was a year ahead of me, but we have a lot of mutual friends. I don't really "know" her now.
lol!!
i was going to tag you. i thought with the area and the DH's profession you might know of them or know people that did
I swear, everyone in St. Louis knows everyone!
FTR, I agree having a registry and baby proofing before conception is loony. And while I get that working in construction is so random, and you should be prepared for slow times, 95% of the people aren't.
I think the fact that people struggling to conceive and IVF treatments being so expensive and usually 100% out of pocket IS something that should be talked about.
I just think it was a poor choice to highlight this particular couple who actually DO have the means to afford IVF if they just make a few basic life style changes. I have a really hard time feeling bad for these people with their baby-proofed house and baby registry knowing that the only thing REALLY standing in their way is "if it's not 100% our perfect vision of life in the suburbs, we're not doing it" attitude.
Show me the infertile childless couple that wants a baby more than anything and truly can't afford to do it at all (not just "can't afford the perfect vision"), and I'll show you that I can actually be sympathetic about this sort of thing.
I think I am becoming a softy. I'm definitely more sympathetic than usual with this couple. But I am a little confused as to why they couldn't down grade a car. That seems a minor sacrifice.
I definitely do judge the fact that they've bought baby shit instead of using that money towards IVF.
I do not judge them for being upset that IVF costs a lot of money. I understand why it does but it is a darn shame that IVF is out of reach for many families willing to go that route for a child or children. We make decent money but it would take a long time for us to come up with $15,000 for IVF.
But don't worry, I do judge them for other reasons so I'm not here to be a Debbie Downer lol.
You mean, bought baby shit while they were in the middle of IUI treatments?
Have you dealt with IF? It's a nightmare. I bought baby shit during my numerous failed cycles. I wanted to be optimistic it would work, because the alternative was soul crushing.
Really, the overwhelming opinion here is that IF isn't sympathetic. Didn't you dream about what your children with your DH would look like? You just didn't have an article written about you so that everyone could judge you on the internet.
It's funny how people are different about that. I am pregnant but have had some complications. I dare not buy anything in case I never have a baby:(. The most I care to do is clean out the potential nursery closet.
I think the fact that people struggling to conceive and IVF treatments being so expensive and usually 100% out of pocket IS something that should be talked about.
I just think it was a poor choice to highlight this particular couple who actually DO have the means to afford IVF if they just make a few basic life style changes. I have a really hard time feeling bad for these people with their baby-proofed house and baby registry knowing that the only thing REALLY standing in their way is "if it's not 100% our perfect vision of life in the suburbs, we're not doing it" attitude.
Show me the infertile childless couple that wants a baby more than anything and truly can't afford to do it at all (not just "can't afford the perfect vision"), and I'll show you that I can actually be sympathetic about this sort of thing.
Honestly, I don't even need for them to be completely downtrodden and unloved.
My real problem is that this couple seems to have an attitude of entitlement. Not that they are entitled to have a baby. Everyone should be able to have a baby. There's just this overall attitude that they are entitled to have their lives go and be exactly as they wanted them to, they did everything "right" and now they don't understand why life hasn't rewarded them with the perfect vision of what they've conjured up for a home.
I don't think this is truly a classic NYT-esque unsympathetic case study. They don't make $125k a year. They MAY make as much as this on good years if they are both working full time. BUT they say the Hs job is unpredictable. And they are about to lose their health insurance because his hours have been so low. And he says he may have to just find a new career altogether.
Fertility or infertility I would be concerned about bringing a baby in to this situation.
Ultimately though I think it's not the money. I'm not sure one of them actually wants a kid. I think it's the H. And I think the money/economy/career stuff is cover. The article is really about how much she wants kids. His voice is missing on that front.
I feel for them and applaud their decision to wait until they're financially ready.
I agree that they should be applauded that they're waiting until they're financially ready. I think the article missed a lot of info that may have shown why they aren't. It kinda touched on the wrong things, IMO.
Also / 15k to have no guarantee of a baby is heartbreaking. Is that a common figure for IVF? I think in Ontario they're going to start covering ONE cycle per woman. I wish I could donate mine to someone.
I think I am becoming a softy. I'm definitely more sympathetic than usual with this couple. But I am a little confused as to why they couldn't down grade a car. That seems a minor sacrifice.
Maybe their cars are paid for? Maybe they are upside down on loans on them and they wouldn't be worth a trade? Maybe they're really really stupid with their finances or can't qualify for a loan due to huge fluctuations in their income?
For a group that trots out the No Skittles for Poor People! stuff all the time and gets so irate when people judge the grocery carts of poor folks, this post reeks of some really awful judgment. Sell the cars! Downsize the house and move someplace that covers IVF!! They're about the least sympathetic infertile couple ever but these suggestions are ludicrous.
I don't think this is truly a classic NYT-esque unsympathetic case study. They don't make $125k a year. They MAY make as much as this on good years if they are both working full time. BUT they say the Hs job is unpredictable. And they are about to lose their health insurance because his hours have been so low. And he says he may have to just find a new career altogether.
Fertility or infertility I would be concerned about bringing a baby in to this situation.
Ultimately though I think it's not the money. I'm not sure one of them actually wants a kid. I think it's the H. And I think the money/economy/career stuff is cover. The article is really about how much she wants kids. His voice is missing on that front.
My guess is that they made 125k in 2007, he was working tons of OT at the height of the housing bubble and they were enjoying a level of income that was new to them (he mentions growing up on assistance). They splashed out on a wedding in Vegas, a new house and a couple of nice cars--locking in all of those costs. Then in 2008/2009 he probably was lucky to work 2 days a week and it was all they could do to meet their obligations.
But unless all of those loans are underwater I don't see why they can't move to a smaller place get at least one normal car and bank the savings for IVF and the inummerable costs of child rearing. Life in a suburban SFH is not the unalienable birthright of a child--even a perfect blue eyed one.
These are good points and it's kind of what I'm assuming as well. I think they got the wind knocked out of them by the economy and that they really don't know to go forward. I think they presumed the high they married on was what they were due for doing things "the right way."
I feel for them and applaud their decision to wait until they're financially ready.
I agree that they should be applauded that they're waiting until they're financially ready. I think the article missed a lot of info that may have shown why they aren't. It kinda touched on the wrong things, IMO.
Also / 15k to have no guarantee of a baby is heartbreaking. Is that a common figure for IVF? I think in Ontario they're going to start covering ONE cycle per woman. I wish I could donate mine to someone.
You mean, bought baby shit while they were in the middle of IUI treatments?
Have you dealt with IF? It's a nightmare. I bought baby shit during my numerous failed cycles. I wanted to be optimistic it would work, because the alternative was soul crushing.
Really, the overwhelming opinion here is that IF isn't sympathetic. Didn't you dream about what your children with your DH would look like? You just didn't have an article written about you so that everyone could judge you on the internet.
It's funny how people are different about that. I am pregnant but have had some complications. I dare not buy anything in case I never have a baby:(. The most I care to do is clean out the potential nursery closet.
I was paranoid to buy maternity clothes when I was pregnant with DD. Or once we told someone about the pregnancy I was afraid something bad would happen. I had no reason to believe things would go wrong, I have no history of loss.
As for this couple, it does seem like they could make some changes and be able to afford IVF, however I realize we do not have the entire picture.
I agree that they should be applauded that they're waiting until they're financially ready. I think the article missed a lot of info that may have shown why they aren't. It kinda touched on the wrong things, IMO.
Also / 15k to have no guarantee of a baby is heartbreaking. Is that a common figure for IVF? I think in Ontario they're going to start covering ONE cycle per woman. I wish I could donate mine to someone.
I'd say $15k is on the low end.
I meant to ask that. This was my assumption as well, that IVF costs are much higher usually. I think in this case, their location is probably a good one because it is LCOL.
I think I am becoming a softy. I'm definitely more sympathetic than usual with this couple. But I am a little confused as to why they couldn't down grade a car. That seems a minor sacrifice.
Maybe their cars are paid for? Maybe they are upside down on loans on them and they wouldn't be worth a trade? Maybe they're really really stupid with their finances or can't qualify for a loan due to huge fluctuations in their income?
For a group that trots out the No Skittles for Poor People! stuff all the time and gets so irate when people judge the grocery carts of poor folks, this post reeks of some really awful judgment. Sell the cars! Downsize the house and move someplace that covers IVF!! They're about the least sympathetic infertile couple ever but these suggestions are ludicrous.
no they aren't ludicrous, they're common sense. If you want a baby more than anything else and money is what is standing in your way, then it's not unreasonable to make some sacrifices. Get a second job, downsize your life, etc. Maybe they don't have EVERY option available to them but there are more things they can be doing instead of just blaming it on the economy.
And re the blue eyed stuff. Don't read too much into that. Everyone has visions of what their future children will look like. If she and her husband are both blue eyed it's not silly of her to see her future children as blue eyed too. (Doesn't mean she will get them!)
i feel bad for people that cant have kids and wants them really bad. adoption is also really expensive too but i think with tax credits people can find ways to make it an option for them. i love that we have science enough to make IUI/IVF an option for some people. these people could find a way to have that. someone on medicaid couldn't. would there be an article written about that?
since i am a bleeding heart, i would like to see all IF treatments covered under an eventual UHC system. but then again, i dont think everyone needs to have a kid in the first place.
so my thoughts are scattered. lol
So we can further derail this, would you consider adoption as an IF treatment that should be covered under UHC? Not foster to adopt because that is typically free to cheap through the state programs.
And re the blue eyed stuff. Don't read too much into that. Everyone has visions of what their future children will look like. If she and her husband are both blue eyed it's not silly of her to see her future children as blue eyed too. (Doesn't mean she will get them!)
And here come the tangents...
I thought if both parents have blue eyes, that guarantees that their child(ren) will have blue eyes too?
Adoption tax credits rarely cover the costs, and in many times, rarely half the costs.
I did buy a few things the first 2 times I got pregnant. I still have 1 or 2 items from each time. When we were placed with LT, i was in denial it actually happened. So, my point? I can see why it is something she wants to do. So, I don't judge. I think if you haven't experience IF personally, you have no idea what is normal/not normal. You can sympathize, but that is all.
In terms of the voice of the DH? Eh, this is the NYT. They don't present perfect aspects in such stories.
And re the blue eyed stuff. Don't read too much into that. Everyone has visions of what their future children will look like. If she and her husband are both blue eyed it's not silly of her to see her future children as blue eyed too. (Doesn't mean she will get them!)
And here come the tangents...
I thought if both parents have blue eyes, that guarantees that their child(ren) will have blue eyes too?
nope. I saw a good diagram about this the other day, let me find. ETA -
Also, $15K does not guarantee them a baby. It is just a shot at a baby. I can't fathom spending that much money and having NOTHING to show for it.
Personally, I think it takes a lot of courage to put their story out there and it kind of sucks that people are so judgmental of them.
This!
I was lucky enough to have insurance coverage for IVF. Once we got to the donor egg stage, insurance covered very little. Cost would have been about $15,000 out of pocket with a 50/50 shot. We had the money, but I did not want to put that kind of money down on the fucking roulette wheel. Even if they have the money or could save it, I get not wanting to risk that kind of money.
For the record, I found a guarantee program which was twice the cost, but we got our money back if it didn't work. (It didn't). So, maybe they could find a guarantee program.
And for the couple of posters who said they could adopt, that costs as much or more than an IVF cycle.
I am going to back out of this thread now as it is just going to make me angry.
I don't think this is truly a classic NYT-esque unsympathetic case study. They don't make $125k a year. They MAY make as much as this on good years if they are both working full time. BUT they say the Hs job is unpredictable. And they are about to lose their health insurance because his hours have been so low. And he says he may have to just find a new career altogether.
Fertility or infertility I would be concerned about bringing a baby in to this situation.
Ultimately though I think it's not the money. I'm not sure one of them actually wants a kid. I think it's the H. And I think the money/economy/career stuff is cover. The article is really about how much she wants kids. His voice is missing on that front.
I think this is where they are losing some sympathy. Anyone is entitled to want to share a certain lifestyle with their kid. But if you can't attain your ideal situation, you're going to have to make some tough choices. And that can happen to anyone regardless of IF problems.
DH just lost his job, and given the volatile industry we're in, we are definitely starting to wonder if we should change our lifestyle to give our current kid better opportunities, much less have another. I'm not sure I want another kid badly enough to sacrifice some of our luxuries. But it's a choice. They seem a bit "woe is me" although they seem to have some options. Of course we don't know 100% of the situation, but that does not look like dire straits and lack of options.
I do agree that the husband doesn't seem as invested in the idea of a child as the wife, so perhaps that's the sticking point.
We are acting as if they want to make sure they can give their kid a Oeuf crib and a Bugaboo stroller and if they can't have that then they don't want a baby. But what they actually talked about was being worried about everyday mundane economic stuff, like having a job, having stable income, having health insurance. I think if one spouse is on the verge of loosing a job or insurance we have entered an entirely different realm of economic insecurity than just wanting to recreate a Kardashian baby in suburbia
And re the blue eyed stuff. Don't read too much into that. Everyone has visions of what their future children will look like. If she and her husband are both blue eyed it's not silly of her to see her future children as blue eyed too. (Doesn't mean she will get them!)
And here come the tangents...
I thought if both parents have blue eyes, that guarantees that their child(ren) will have blue eyes too?
So we can further derail this, would you consider adoption as an IF treatment that should be covered under UHC? Not foster to adopt because that is typically free to cheap through the state programs.
no b.c adoption is not always for IF treatment, whereas IUI/IVF are. i think adoption should be as free of a financial burden as can be with substitutes and whatnot but i wouldnt classify it as a treatment for anything and have it fall under healthcare. i would place it more under community outreach or betterment, not health insurance.
but i have some qualms with adoption overall. not to derail this further.
I don't want to derail, but adoption is not for betterment. I think that is why there are issues with adoption (schemes, law issues, etc).
So we can further derail this, would you consider adoption as an IF treatment that should be covered under UHC? Not foster to adopt because that is typically free to cheap through the state programs.
Adoption isn't a treatment. I can think of no other way to say this without sounding like a hard ass but that's what it boils down to. Adoption is not a medical treatment and therefore, I wouldn't support it being covered under UHC. It is a lifestyle choice which is why I don't have a problem with tax credits for adoption. I would even support an expansion of those credits that is more in line with the actual costs for adoption. But not incorporated into health care.
I was lucky enough to have insurance coverage for IVF. Once we got to the donor egg stage, insurance covered very little. Cost would have been about $15,000 out of pocket with a 50/50 shot. We had the money, but I did not want to put that kind of money down on the fucking roulette wheel. Even if they have the money or could save it, I get not wanting to risk that kind of money.
For the record, I found a guarantee program which was twice the cost, but we got our money back if it didn't work. (It didn't). So, maybe they could find a guarantee program.
And for the couple of posters who said they could adopt, that costs as much or more than an IVF cycle.
I am going to back out of this thread now as it is just going to make me angry.
i wasn't saying "just adopt" in the face of IF issues.
i was just saying that as far as i know, there are tax credits that help with the costs of adoption and nothing yet for IUI/IVF, so adoption does have a least one advantage money-wise for it.
Here's the thing in the construction business. Full time to a "normal" worker is 2080 hours a year.
In construction, you work a LOT less, even in good years. For example, to get health insurance for my Union (different from the guy in the article, but a building trade in the same city) you only have to work 1300 hours a year. DH has been in the trade for 7 years and struggles to get there each year.
So, yeah, if he's making $40/hr and works what most consider full time that's over $80k a year, but really, he'll make more like $50k a year. Still a decent living for the area though, don't get me wrong.