so i'm currently researching the gay parenting journey. a comment i overheard the other day promted me to look into it. it was meant as a joke when one half of a lesbian couple said "you know its hard for gay folks to have a baby" but it got me to thinking.....
i can see that it would be a more difficult journey than it would for a hetero couple. so far i've found out that more than half of the homosexual population wants kids. and they have multiple routes to that goal. adoption, artificial insemination, surrogacy, etc.
but if they want a child who is biologically tied to at least one half of the couple, well how many of those procedures would be covered by insurance? how costly are they?
i learned that most children sucessful artificial insemination produces male offspring. some people really do have a preference for one sex or another so thats something to consider.
i'll be posting something on the topic soon, maybe this month if i get a chance to do enough research.
additionally the recent live streeamed birth
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.theunnecesarean.com%252Fblog%252F2009%252F11%252F6%252Flynsee-is-in-labor-broadcasting-birth-live-right-now.html&h=f67aa58d7a5a5128bff33de74c36c390&ref=mf has me thinking about the nature of birth advocacy. the discussion has fallen from one end of the spectrum with complete disrespect for hospital birth to a sort of resigned "well at least it wasn't a cesarean" to total acceptance of that mamas experience epidural, hospital and all.
so i'm re-evaluating my role as a self appointed "advocate for normal birth". i mean what does that mean? canada defined "normal birth" almost a year ago
http://www.sogc.org/guidelines/documents/gui221PS0812.pdf and i know other countries have done so as well. but what is "normal birth" in america and how best to advocate for it?
more to come on that topic as well as i mull it over.
Posts
