Eggs and Baskets

Originally published April 6, 2012, on The Next Family.

One question that has come up, and that I thought would be fun to address around Easter, is egg donation.  I have been an egg donor, a gestational surrogate, and a traditional surrogate, in addition to having my own child.  I don’t have a unique view on any of these topics, but I do have both an opinion and experience with all of these topics.  There are thousands of women just like parts of me in the US alone.  I enjoy having had all of those opportunities, and consider all of them to be tools in shaping the person writing all this down.

Some people but a lot of stock in the genetics of their child, but that’s just not me.  I don’t feel connected by that sequence of Cytosine-Guanine-Adenine-Thymine, because frankly, seven billion humans have a similar amount of genetic variation as a single social group of gorillas.  Genetics are important for health histories, but genetics don’t make a family.  Humans- we’re an inbred lot compared to other organisms.  I’m also not a big fan of children, in case you haven’t guessed.  Right now you’re probably wondering why on Earth I would help other people have kids, right?  And I’m sure that a lot of fun tabloids and talk shows would say that it’s because of  money.

I’m here to tell you that it’s because I think people have the right to do what fits best for them, that everyone deserves the right to have the experience of parenting, and that families come in all makes, models, and sizes, and we don’t have the right to say one type of family is any better or worse than another.  Crazy, I know.  The thing is, when that little orangutan of mine came into my life, it did change things.  It wasn’t instantaneous, and it wasn’t perfect.  It took me a while to realize it, but they say it’s the slow gradual lifestyle changes that stick.  But even with 170+ pages of my dissertation waiting to be edited and defended, having that little orangutan was the best thing I’ve ever done, although it’s a tight race between him and my dissertation some days.

I understand that other people love children and feel called to be parents, and I respect that.  In theory, children are pretty freaking cool- someone to teach and mold, and carry on your memory and legacy. In reality, I find them too messy to justify more than one for myself and Dwight.  Similarly, I understand that other people want and value a genetic connection to their child, and that’s their feeling.  From an evolutionary perspective, it makes great sense, wanting to have your own children.  I never claimed to make the best choices.  I guess I’m more of a catbird than others are.  I’ll leave my eggs in other nests, and let those parents enjoy the offspring.  The major difference being that catbird offspring will typically dump any other eggs out of the nest; to my knowledge, none of my egg donation babies have committed fratricide.

So is this all completely altruistic?  Of course not. I get the thrill of helping somebody else have kids; I get to feel appreciated and special; I get to meet new people and see new places and have an amazing experience.  I’ve been fortunate to have some amazing stories and experiences in my life, and be a part of something special that others only dream of.  I’ve also been fortunate enough to have found a partner who is just as passionate about freedom and bodily autonomy as I am.  He trusts me to do what is right for me and doesn’t stop me from doing what thrills my heart.  We’re both completely honest with each other, and with our son, and we trust that that is how most of the world is, too.  Kenny knows more about reproduction and alternative ways of creating a family than many college students.  We all know that there are people genetically related to me and to Ken out there; it’s something to be cognizant of, but not to dwell upon, because it doesn’t affect our day to day life (although it has lead to some interesting discussions with strangers).

I guess if you take nothing else from this piece, remember that life is a continuum, not a one dimensional stereotype.  As many different types of families as there are, they all exist because of the same reason: love.  As many surrogates, gamete donors, and birth parents as there are, there are as many reasons to travel the route they have chosen.  It’s the variety that makes life interesting; this is the flavor I lend the world stew, and it’s only with the interaction of all the other parts that I taste the way I do- my particular mix of sweet, salty, bitter, sour, and rich.  And I wouldn’t have it any other way

...But We're Not in Denmark

Continuing the discussion from the last post...
The full project including restoration is projected to cost between $250,000 and $300,000.  At the end of this, the 800 square foot house will be the home to three professional offices upstairs (lawyer, architect, etc.), and a meeting room holding 25 people downstairs.  The rents from the offices and meeting room will go to pay the estimated $1,100 a month in costs, and the project is getting $40,000 in help with moving costs from Kent State University, $15,000 from the city, and unknown amounts of in-kind assistance from the city to help with the whole project. 

For the finance committee meeting, public comments and questions were strictly limited to discussing *only* the loan itself, no other matters.  Nearly everyone spoke in opposition of this loan.  Questions concerned whether or not this project was benefiting unduly from ties to city council (the architect in charge and the director of TransPortage that backed this project is a former city council member, and a third council member has made unsolicited contacts to people opposed to putting the house on this green space to try and sway them); where the rest of the considerable funds needed for this project would come from; what was the collateral for the loan (there is none- it's unsecured); among other things.  When it was city council's turn to ask questions, similar questions also arose, but many other topics also came up, and they ranged far from the project at hand.  City council asked about the public support this new group had (their response: they're new, but they do have 130+ members on their Facebook group; those in opposition presented online and physical petitions with over 300 signatures, besides those who spoke).  One council member compared the project to a boat with a giant hole in the bottom, and granting this loan to throwing money into the boat, and one council person said that from a business stance, this loan was ridiculous.  Questions were raised about parking in the area, which is already difficult and sparse.  The night before, the city planning commission had denied the site plan for relocating this house to the green space, citing vociferous public concerns, and asking where was the historical concern for this house when it was being "bastardized" as a student rental.  The council raised the question of what Kent Wells Sherman House, Inc. contingency plan for this obstacle was, and heard the response of "We'll wait and see what happens."  With the denial of their site plan, they cannot move the house to the site until they've appealed this decision, and the university will not release their funds until the house is ready to be relocated.  The first date that they can appeal is August 20th, and that comes after the deadline for the house to be demolished on August 11th, so right now a contingency plan would be very helpful for them if the house is to be saved.
 Personally, I would much prefer to see the green space preserved, and think this whole process of trying to preserve the house has been shady.  I've dealt with crank-calls and crude emails on a daily basis since I became involved.  My husband is a historian, and we live in a nearly 100 year old house- I appreciate history and its preservation.  However, this high a dollar amount invested in a questionable project that would destroy green space and is publicly unpopular, and has as many flaws as I've stated here (and more), then it's not a good project for the community.  It is, on the other hand, a great project for those trying to preserve the house, as they personally aren't on the line for the loans should this project fail and the house be foreclosed.  The preservationists come out smelling great for trying to do a good thing, the house gets moved and saved, and professionals downtown get office space in a good neighborhood (so good that the architect on this project lives right around the corner).  The demographics are also interesting to see- very homogenous looking preservationists, and a very diverse group that uses the green space as it is.  
In the end, city council made their decision based on everything but the one thing that the public was allowed to comment upon, with one member even stating that they would "vote for preservation" and only one member voted with the public.  The council member who is an incorporator of Kent Wells Sherman House, Inc. made the motion to approve the loan, and the member who has cold-emailed citizens seconded the motion.  So I stay involved, hoping I can make a difference, and because staying involved is what I do, and what I enjoy.  If we don't speak up and voice our opinion, who could we possibly influence?  Even if our elected officials aren't swayed when we do speak up, at least we know where they stand.

Something Rotten...

I grew up in a politically active house, and I still follow/enjoy politics.  Complaining about it, reading about it, debating it, and considering it- pretty much all enjoyable, in my world.  I may have grown up a poor kid in rural Ohio, but my dad knew the cops, city council, the mayor, and the county people.  Dad followed state and national politics as well, and was active politically when the occasion presented itself.  I was raised under the mantra "If you don't vote, you don't have any right to complain about the outcome."  Flag-waving and nationalism was less important, but patriotism that called our leaders to account and political activism were values instilled at a young age.  I bet you never would have guessed, right?
Well, this being Kent, Ohio, there's yet another dust-up between history and the environment.  Basically, in March, it was found out that one of the houses about to be torn down to make way for Kent State University's Esplanade (which is a giant sidewalk that will connect walkers and bike riders from the university with the downtown businesses) is historic.  It was built for the sister of the man that the town is named for, and dates back to the Ante-Bellum period.  It's been moved previously, and used for a student boarding house for 30 years, but it's supposedly in good shape for its age, and a group of preservationists want to sit the house right on one of the last remaining usable green spaces in downtown.  The space sits next to Standing Rock Cultural Arts, and has been used for children's theater, sculpture displays, poetry readings, community gatherings, potlucks, as well as housing a stage, swing, rain gardens, organic vegetable gardens, and native wildlife.  You can read some of the back story on the Kent Patch (the comments are especially interesting).  Kent's been through fights like this before, as have most towns, and we'll be through it again, and we always make it through OK. 
The thing you won't see on Patch, or any other news outlet that I've found so far, is the farce that last Wednesday's special finance committee meeting of city council was.  Last Wednesday, the special finance committee met to discuss the lending of $15,000 toward the preservation of the house.  This had been discussed and approved previously, but the loan had originally been approved to go to a different group, TransPortage, than the one that would now be receiving it, Kent Wells Sherman House, Incorporated.  TransPortage had been backing the project, but pulled out after objections from their membership convinced two of the three directors that this plan was not in their best interest, and would not forward their mission of sustainability.  Kent Wells Sherman House, Inc. began as Friends of the Wells Sherman House in March of this year, and incorporated in July of this year, with one of the city council members kindly volunteering to be one of the three people to sign off on and lend her address to the group's incorporation papers.  The original approval of the loan had happened prior to the Kent Wells Sherman House, Inc. incorporation and the council member's involvement, so after some vocal input from citizens, council decided to publicly discuss the matter before simply transferring the loan to the new group. 

Whoa.  It's been a year.  A year since Miss E was born.  Tomorrow, I head to See her and her daddy and papa, for her first birthday party.  With friends and family.  Holy schiznit, I'm nervous.  If you're reading this, you probably know that I don't like people and crowds.  I am 100% positive that I'll totally embarrass myself and everybody else there.  And, to top it off, my mom is heading up here to Ohio after her father-in-law's death, so I'll probably be seeing them soon, too.  And I still haven't defended my dissertation.  The whole damn thing is written, but getting my advisors to read it is like pulling teeth.  And not the loose baby teeth that we've been pulling out of my six year old's mouth.  Impacted wisdom teeth pulling hard.  Yeah, it's *that* not fun right now.  But, on the bright side, I'm getting a metric shit ton done lately.  And I think that's actually getting me caught up.  The weekend out of town will be a nice break, I just need to do some work on the road (not computer based, I refuse to take the computer).  Something fun- maybe beading.  Lots of writing- of all types- has been happening lately.  And I may have a job on the horizon.  A real, jobby-job, using my ejumukashun and such. 

That's it for now.  I'll check back in later with some new photos and new insane stories.  Ciao!

Knowing and Uncertain

NPR did a piece this week about uncertainty, and I loved it.  Why?  Why would a scientist want uncertainty; don't we do all that we can to limit confounding variables, measure, collect data, and reduce uncertainty?  Don't scientists want to know things and answer questions?  Here's the thing- those are all different issues.  Researchers most definitely design experiments, measure, collect data, and try to learn.  That doesn't necessarily answer questions, and it most certainly doesn't prove anything.  We collect data, and use that new data, previously collected and interpreted data that has been disseminated to the public sphere, add our own interpretation to the new data, and disseminate our data and interpretation.  We can provide support for a hypothesis or theory, or we can refute these things.  We almost never "prove" something.  That's not the way science works, and it's not the goal of science.

To have "proof," one would have to assume static conditions, that don't change, and omniscience.  However, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle asserts that whenever we reduce uncertainty somewhere, we increase uncertainty somewhere else.  Essentially, as we learn, we learn how much we don't know.  If we answer one question, we raise five more.  As much as I may disagree with him on policy, Rumsfeld got it right when he talked about "known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns."  He wasn't talking about research or science, but his description works here very well. Science is about rejecting hypotheses that the data do not support, not finding truth.  Science disproves, it doesn't prove.  It's the perfect career for a self-esteem challenged contrarian like yours truly, because I don't have to say "I am right," I can simply say "You are wrong, and here's the reason."

Something else that science does do is change.  As we learn new techniques, as we invent new technology, and as we answer some questions, we find new questions to ask, we can measure previously unmeasurable quantities, and we can perform experiments differently, not to mention re-interpret data with our new insights.  At the same time as we create new ways to conduct science, the world around us is changing as well, so that we can only apply new techniques, principles, or technology to the current world, not the past, revealing uncertainty that we might not have been aware of previously.  We can see this frequently in health science, where what was "good for you" last week may be declared "bad for you" in another month.  That doesn't necessarily mean the science was bad, just that the studies came to different conclusions, for any number of reasons. 

This lack of certainty and certainty of change is hard for many humans, because a lot of us desperately want some kind of certainty and stability.  We want something to hang on to, like a board on the waves as the world tosses us about.  The thought is appealing, I know, but that's not what science provides.  Many turn to religion to serve this purpose, and that's a valid choice (provided they don't try to make policy based on it or force it on others).  Maybe that's why Americans tend to distrust science?  I don't know.  For some people, that uncertainty is filled by our faith in other humans and the natural world.  Others embrace uncertainty, or do something completely different.  Our personal experiences, nature, and nurture shape which path we take.  The one thing that is certain, aside from a lack of funds, there will always be career opportunities in science, thanks in part to this uncertainty.   Obviously, right now, lack of funding is a very real problem, but that's another issue.

All of this is to say that if someone tells you that something has been scientifically proven, ask questions of them.  Be skeptical.  Consider what role the person fills, what they stand to gain, and where their personal bias may lie.  At the same time, if you hear a scientist use "may", "could", "potentially", "might", and other "hedging" words, don't discount them.  They're not trying to sound equivocal; they're being a good scientist.  We just deal in data, and leave the "truth" to other people. 

And don't think that all this means we won't defend the data and interpretations passionately, but we'll do it based on logic and the data, although we are human and have human failings just like everyone else.  For the times our failings pop up, please consider forgiving us, just like you would anyone else, and we'll all try to learn from our mistakes.

New Venues

So, I've been trying to do better about writing, at least on things other than my dissertation.  I'll be updating here more regularly, and you can also catch some of my ravings- er- musings at the Kent Patch and The Next Family.  I'll be adding other content as it gets figured out.  :)

Holy crap, it's almost April?!

Spring Cleaning

 

If you hadn't heard the frogs calling yet, or looked at a calendar, let me be the one to break the news to you (just a little late, but oh well)- It's SPRING!
I love this time of the year.  Trees are growing buds, flowers are blooming, frogs are calling, and the weather is warming, especially this year.  I'm an ecologist by training, and spring is just brilliant in my opinion, for all the wonder in the natural world that's going on.  The whole wide world, simply bursting with life.  It's wonderful, and I mean exactly that, full of wonder.
It's also full of work.  The winter chill drives people indoors.  We track in mud, snow, and other stuff of the great outdoors.  Doors and windows are shut, furnaces and fireplaces and woodstoves burn fuel and create dust and soot.  The air gets stale, and people get sick, passing around germs and snot and sneezes.  And then there's the holiday trees, and tinsel, and wrapping, adding to the grime.  And all that grime needs cleaning, once you can throw open the shades, let the breeze in, and fill the house with fresh air smells.  And there's the garden that needs tending, and the yard that needs care, and there's the over-indulged, under-utilized body that needs tuned up again and gotten back into shape.  Spring is hard work, mixed with beautiful beginnings.
That beauty is what makes the ugliness of some recent stories all the harder with which to deal.  The Trayvon Martin case, the Hunger Games tweets, cheating schools, and the Afghan shootings.  Among other things.  These are serious marks on our country.  Two of these have to do with some of our country's historic problems with racial equality.  We aren't the only country to deal with these issues, but that doesn't make it right.  Trying to be positive, talking about these inequalities and bringing them out into the open might actually, finally make some progress.  Like opening the shades and throwing up the window lets in the sunlight and sweeps out the stale air.  Maybe we can finally be frank, discuss difficulties like adults, and try to enter the twenty-first century like civil human beings.
Once again, the US seems to be at a crossroads.  We can take one road that forges the path ahead and let's us see new ground, or we can go around the block again, hoping to see a detail that we missed before.  Can we grow further than our past history?  Let all the little blossoms bloom to their full potential?  I promise you, the more colorful the garden, the better the display.  So hopefully, in this time of growth and beauty and cleaning, we can clean out our national dialogue and start a whole beautiful garden on its way to fruition.