... with articles based on the fact that "young women today" are having meaningless sex all over the place. While the sexual norms of each generation do vary, I believe this is an extreme overstatement. Journalist are continually using this "fact" to theorize and make further assumptions. How about if we ignore articles that are based on the rampant sex of Generation whatever-it-is as overreaching attempts at getting published?

She claims that gaining 10-20 pounds after the age of 18 is "materially compromising" to your health.

Spoken like a true 21 year old.

Why does Salon dredge up these marginal news items and act as if normal people are actually saying these things?

I have to second or third the recommendation for What the Dead Know. It's very good. I don't usually read a lot of mysteries because I find them formulaic with bad endings. This is a great family drama/mystery with a very satisfying ending.

I haven't read the new Val McDermid but A Place of Execution was very good too. Probably the two best mysteries I've read!

I'll add more great summer reads:

Then We Came to the End

The Post-Birthday World by Lionel Shriver

Special Topics in Calamity Physics

Captcrisis, if you're going to the wrong beaches, I'm bringing the wrong books. I consider vacation the time to sink into a long involved book that I don't always have time for during my regular busy life. I'm the one on the beach with the 900 page A Suitable Boy or some such thing unlike what the media presents as summer reading.

Captcrisis, perhaps "beach reading" is a misnomer, it's really more "vacation reading". I work in a bookstore and I can tell you most assuredly that people buy more books when they are on vacation or are going on vacation. And it's not just upscale customers. Many people save their reading for their vacation because that's when they have time to read. Some don't read all year long until their summer vacation. This has nothing to do with socio-economic status (although maybe what they choose to read does), it's across the board.

I just got an email here at work about a book (I'm in the book business) called "Beach Reads" and the cover shows a woman reading a book - next to a pool! Maybe that's where all the beach reading is happening!

Muze, I'm willing to say it, this is an example of extreme irresponsibility all around. On the part of the parents and on the part of the doctors involved. That parents are willing to do this does not shock me, stupidity and emotions being involved, but I'm appalled that a medical professional would be involved in this. What happened to "first do no harm"? A mother with acute heart failure and 6 preemies in ICU? I call that doing harm. Forseeable and avoidable harm. If a patient is going to refuse selective abortion, a doctor should not be implanting 4,5, 6 or more embyros in them.

Fertility use to be defined as not being able to conceive naturally after 1 year. Now it's diagnosed after 6 months. Do you think that reproduction has changed or perhaps the rise of the fertility industry had something to do with it?

I am pretty shocked at people in this thread who claim to be prochoice who want to limit other women's choices by enacting some sort of regulation or law. That would make them anti-choice, wouldn't it?

By that reasoning parents and their doctors could do anything they wanted during a pregnancy whether it caused birth defects, death, whatever, in the name of choice. I doubt a lot of pro-choice people advocating that kind of choice. Doctors have a responsibility to act in the best medical interest of the mother and fetus. (When you start with one presumably healthy woman and end up with 6 dead babies and a mother with acute heart failure, it does not speak of responsible medicine.) If a mother came in and said her choice was to drink lighter fluid to see what it would do to the baby, would you really call that pro-choice?

I'm also not pro-choice when it comes to whether you beat your child, feed your child or get appropriate medical care for your child. Can't really see how you think this as hypocritical.

You're right - you did not use the word hypocrisy, my apologies. And I agree with you on the point that we/our government should not randomly apply parenting laws to prospective parents. I do, however, think there should be higher standards of behaviors for fertility doctors who knowingly implant 6 fetuses in a woman. I don't know much about medical law, but I'm know there are some laws about doctors performing medical procedures that are dangerous. And this is a dangerous medical procedure. While a patient may be uninformed, or stupid or just too emotional to make an informed choice, doctors do and should have some objectivity to know whether a procedure is safe or not. I wonder if anyone told that woman "your babies will most likely die and you might too".

As to harm to children, I will tell you frankly that I think probably 50% of the people who have children have not thought through the overwhelming responsibilities of parenting

Agreed. But I do think purposely breeding children with multiple disabilities is different than not being a a very good parent. I know many people with disabilities lead wonderful lives, but knowingly causing children to have life-threatening health problems is another thing.