Breastfeeding is for every baby. It is not for every mother...

I've been reading Salon since 1997 and there have always been these "Life" sort of articles. One great thing about Salon is that one day a political article is the headliner, and the next day a treatise about a TV show is up front. The editors mix it up.

The nastiness of these letters is insane. The letters section has become the whiniest writing online. If you don't like the topic of an article, don't read it! No newspaper, magazine or web site NEEDS to be compulsively read "cover to cover" to be enjoyed. Pick what interests you, and read that. Not interested in a particular writer or topic? DON'T READ IT. Simple.

Here's another idea. Instead of spending so much time writing letters decrying the topics or quality of articles on Salon, how about spending your time writing something you'd like to see here, and submitting it? And then you can sit back and wait for the barrage of whacko hatred from the letters to the editor.

...

How could they tell?

Has anyone considered the fact that maybe the LW's brother is counting on someone in his family to spill his little secret? This spares him from the responsibility of his own confessional moment.

Of course, the nastiest and most passive aggressive scenario is that he's secretly hoping that when his lack of honesty comes to light, it will get him off the hook entirely with the pregnant bride to be and baby. As in, his fiancee is so hurt and angry, she dumps him.

I really liked the idea of the LW giving the brother a short time limit, and then forcing him into accountability. Maybe this scenario will push the brother to get real about the responsibility he has towards his fiancee and baby. (Regardless of whether they stay together or not!)

The dramatic moment at the wedding is WAY too hurtful to all involved.

In just about any pregnacy or parenting magazine, we read articles about pregnant or post-partum women, depression & SSRIs. Just about all of them say that, especially for new mothers, it is better for the mother & the infant when a woman treats her depression, than to not take the meds & be depressed. OB's & Family Practitioners hand this stuff out to pregnant women & new moms, believing the risk is outweighed by the benefit of treating the depression. I think the Broadsheet article is trying to say that once again, women are on the recieving end of conflicting messages &misinformation. So often medical research is based on a male model. Is that the case in this situation? I don't know. I do know that it's scary & beyond unsettling. While thalidomide might not be the best comparison, the long term (& even some short term) effects will not be known for a while. Depression has it's negative effects onfetuses & infants. What are depressed women supposed to do?

Having been through 3 rounds of ART, it is curious to me that no one questioned the following by the author:

You can't help but look around at your clinic, and knowing your statistics, start doing the math. If it's the woman to my right and the woman to the left who are going to get pregnant, then maybe it's not going to be me. As much as you smile at everyone and think good thoughts, you're aware of that.

This never even occurred to me.

I'm kind of glad it didn't, it would have made a difficult time even more difficult. Fertility treatment is hard enough, I had to believe I had a good chance it would work or I couldn't have gone through with all of it.