CAROLYN HAX

Adapted from a recent online discussion:

Carolyn:

A friend recently told me she was undergoing in-vitro fertilization and asked for my help. I said no as nicely as I could. She pushed, and finally I said what I really felt: IVF is selfish and she should try adopting.

Thirty-some years ago, my parents were told they couldn't have kids naturally. They adopted my older brother and were thrilled to finally have a child. Oddly enough, a few years later I came along, the "old-fashioned way." Adoption made my family, and the death of my brother led me to decide that even if I can have my own kids, I too will adopt a child who needs a family.

So for me, refusing adoption is rather personal. She said she wanted to have her OWN child, blah blah blah. And besides, weren't my parents glad to have finally had their own baby? Incensed, I then told her she'd never make a good parent if she can only love her own demon spawn, and needless to say we aren't friends anymore.

Please remind those who choose IVF that while they are having a rough time, their choices are their own, and others do not have to agree with them.

Anywhere, Md.

I'm sorry about your brother; the math says his death was terribly premature.

I'm also sorry you took your friend's decision personally. While I can sympathize completely with the emotional roots of that offense, the logical implications say those emotions needed a hard factual challenge before you unleashed them raw on your friend.

The world was different 30-some years ago. You don't know (nor do they, necessarily) that your parents wouldn't have tried IVF had it been as common and available as it is today. It wasn't an option for them: Louise Brown, the first such baby, was born in 1978.

Meanwhile, single parenthood has been dramatically destigmatized in recent decades. Factor in abortion and women's far greater economic power, and developed countries just aren't producing as many babies who need homes. That's why so many adoptions are international now, involving underdeveloped countries.

And, for babies, the demand is fierce, given the additional trend of delayed childbirth and thus infertility. The cost of adoption can be huge, the waiting lists long, and the hoops to jump through plentiful, if not prohibitive.

So you used seriously out-of-date standards by which to trash your friend's character.

Maybe this particular friend had it coming for other reasons -- for example, if she really thinks adopted kids get an asterisk.

But that raises another point: Just as some people don't want kids where some can't imagine life without them, some women care more about feeling a kick, or men about seeing their wife's eyes in their baby.

If people are honest with themselves about their attachment to these things and decide adoption might not be for them, should they be judged as demon carriers for that? Does that include couples who bear children without intervention, or does it fall only on the infertile? Is that fair? Should all be shamed? Into what, adopting?

Again, I realize you're grieving. But please don't let that get past your lips and into someone else's business until you consider that choosing against adoption doesn't always mean choosing against your brother.