Discussion!

DoublePortion · January 2013

I really don't know that I should be starting this discussion since I don't have a long history on the board, but I feel that it needs to be done. Do changes need to be made to the IFV "rules"? If so, what changes? Like I mentioned earlier, we all need to be on the same page. Otherwise some of us end up looking like the "bad guys" when we are just trying to be fair according to the last discussion on IFV parameters. If there needs to be changes made, I am open to them!

***Please keep it friendly. My intent is not to stir up drama.***

BzeetyD · January 2013

I am also open to changes and totally open to discussion, but whatever the rules are, they need to be applied across everyone and not on a case by case basis.

When this board was re-invigorated in Oct/Nov-ish all of this was discussed but nothing different was agreed on.

My understanding of the "rules" of intro-ing on this board are:

6 months history (posting) on the IF board.

----------

That's it.

The reasoning behind this was that this board and the IF board would have common friends and we'd recognize people and build support. Also so that Judy Soandso wouldn't come here regardless of her infertility history without ever being on The Bump before, or establishing support and knowing the system.

We can shorten it, we can lengthen it, we can not have it.

What do you think is right to protect the board and to be helpful to those needing support?

Mrs.McIrish · January 2013

The rule was always 6 months of posting on IF. But someone theoretically could post 10 times in that 6 month period and "qualify". That isn't right. When you come here from IF, "we" should know you and recognize you. You were giving support to others and not just taking for yourself. The other thing was "don't come mid cycle". We don't need to see your BFPS a week after you came here. Bottom line is no one should WANT to be here. It means you are a really really complicated case, you are near the end of your treatment as there is nothing that can be done for you. It's about more than your current cycle. It is having people who understand what is it like to be left behind. It was never just a six month rule-- a person could easily eat up six months with testing and funding issues,cysts etc. But that person gets amazing embryos that stick the first time. This board isn't meant for them.

Not sure I'm helping draft /change guidelines here.

BzeetyD · January 2013

Mrs.McIrish:
The rule was always 6 months of posting on IF. But someone theoretically could post 10 times in that 6 month period and "qualify". That isn't right. When you come here from IF, "we" should know you and recognize you. You were giving support to others and not just taking for yourself. The other thing was "don't come mid cycle". We don't need to see your BFPS a week after you came here. Bottom line is no one should WANT to be here. It means you are a really really complicated case, you are near the end of your treatment as there is nothing that can be done for you. It's about more than your current cycle. It is having people who understand what is it like to be left behind. It was never just a six month rule-- a person could easily eat up six months with testing and funding issues,cysts etc. But that person gets amazing embryos that stick the first time. This board isn't meant for them.

Not sure I'm helping draft /change guidelines here.

Totally agree on all your comments. That is my understanding as well, reasoning and everything.

Are these guidelines the way we want to continue to move forward?

PrettyAccountant · January 2013

Mrs.McIrish:
The rule was always 6 months of posting on IF. But someone theoretically could post 10 times in that 6 month period and "qualify". That isn't right. When you come here from IF, "we" should know you and recognize you. You were giving support to others and not just taking for yourself. The other thing was "don't come mid cycle". We don't need to see your BFPS a week after you came here. Bottom line is no one should WANT to be here. It means you are a really really complicated case, you are near the end of your treatment as there is nothing that can be done for you. It's about more than your current cycle. It is having people who understand what is it like to be left behind. It was never just a six month rule-- a person could easily eat up six months with testing and funding issues,cysts etc. But that person gets amazing embryos that stick the first time. This board isn't meant for them.

Not sure I'm helping draft /change guidelines here.

This - I was making this point on the other thread. We welcomed women here with relatively few posts but because they were around for 6 months it was Ok. It is really hard and I don't know if we will have or get all the answers. Clearly there are women who "belong" here based on their history but are not accepted. Also, just to play devils advocate - what boards count toward the requirement? What if in a given case we have someone who posts on the IF board, gets her BFP on her first cycle, moves on to PAIF, has a loss and then feels like she belongs here? She could have accumulated the 6 months and even accumulated an enormous amount of posts.

Just some thoughts.

DoublePortion · January 2013

PrettyAccountant:
Mrs.McIrish:
The rule was always 6 months of posting on IF. But someone theoretically could post 10 times in that 6 month period and "qualify". That isn't right. When you come here from IF, "we" should know you and recognize you. You were giving support to others and not just taking for yourself. The other thing was "don't come mid cycle". We don't need to see your BFPS a week after you came here. Bottom line is no one should WANT to be here. It means you are a really really complicated case, you are near the end of your treatment as there is nothing that can be done for you. It's about more than your current cycle. It is having people who understand what is it like to be left behind. It was never just a six month rule-- a person could easily eat up six months with testing and funding issues,cysts etc. But that person gets amazing embryos that stick the first time. This board isn't meant for them.

Not sure I'm helping draft /change guidelines here.
This - I was making this point on the other thread. We welcomed women here with relatively few posts but because they were around for 6 months it was Ok. It is really hard and I don't know if we will have or get all the answers. Clearly there are women who "belong" here based on their history but are not accepted. Also, just to play devils advocate - what boards count toward the requirement? What if in a given case we have someone who posts on the IF board, gets her BFP on her first cycle, moves on to PAIF, has a loss and then feels like she belongs here? She could have accumulated the 6 months and even accumulated an enormous amount of posts.
Just some thoughts.

My understanding was that it is 6 months on the IF board, because that is where the relationships would be formed. When I joined TB I went straight to the IF board. I didn't go to TTGP or TTTC and have never really even lurked on those boards so I don't know the people there and wouldn't recognized them if they intro'd.

BzeetyD · January 2013

DoublePortion:
PrettyAccountant:
Mrs.McIrish:
The rule was always 6 months of posting on IF. But someone theoretically could post 10 times in that 6 month period and "qualify". That isn't right. When you come here from IF, "we" should know you and recognize you. You were giving support to others and not just taking for yourself. The other thing was "don't come mid cycle". We don't need to see your BFPS a week after you came here. Bottom line is no one should WANT to be here. It means you are a really really complicated case, you are near the end of your treatment as there is nothing that can be done for you. It's about more than your current cycle. It is having people who understand what is it like to be left behind. It was never just a six month rule-- a person could easily eat up six months with testing and funding issues,cysts etc. But that person gets amazing embryos that stick the first time. This board isn't meant for them.

Not sure I'm helping draft /change guidelines here.
This - I was making this point on the other thread. We welcomed women here with relatively few posts but because they were around for 6 months it was Ok. It is really hard and I don't know if we will have or get all the answers. Clearly there are women who "belong" here based on their history but are not accepted. Also, just to play devils advocate - what boards count toward the requirement? What if in a given case we have someone who posts on the IF board, gets her BFP on her first cycle, moves on to PAIF, has a loss and then feels like she belongs here? She could have accumulated the 6 months and even accumulated an enormous amount of posts.
Just some thoughts.
My understanding was that it is 6 months on the IF board, because that is where the relationships would be formed. When I joined TB I went straight to the IF board. I didn't go to TTGP or TTTC and have never really even lurked on those boards so I don't know the people there and wouldn't recognized them if they intro'd.

There is a sort of natural progression from TTC to TTTC (or TTCAL) and then to IF, and then here. Not always, certainly.

The IF board is the main feeder board for this one and yes, where relationships would be formed.

DoublePortion · January 2013

Mrs.McIrish:
The rule was always 6 months of posting on IF. But someone theoretically could post 10 times in that 6 month period and "qualify". That isn't right. When you come here from IF, "we" should know you and recognize you. You were giving support to others and not just taking for yourself.

Yes, 6 months with the caveat of being a recognized and supportive member of the IF board. And I think this is where it gets tricky.

liz4paws · January 2013

I don't know how much what I'm about to say is going to add to the discussion but I've been doing some thinking about it since the post from earlier.

I think it's important that we do filter women who should/shouldn't be on this board. However because of the complexity of how each of us gets to their own "left behind" point in her IF struggle, there just isn't a one-size-fits-all rule. No matter how we slice it, putting ANY rule out there is going to alienate women who probably do deserve to be here. That just makes my heart hurt big time. I think it's almost worse to leave a woman out who needs us than to allow someone to post here who might be a little premature. That's just my two cents and I'm sure many of you might feel differently. And that's ok, we are just having a discussion here.

I think the 6 months is a good guideline, but someone could have a relatively short bout with IF testing and treatments, posted a few times in a 6 month span, and be eligible to be here. Whereas someone else might have been put through the IF ringer quickly, found out they likely will never conceive using their OE, hit a brick wall, yet posted dilligently on IF for a 5 month span and be denied here. I think thats the 6 month rule just isn't working very well for this reason.

Each and every case is different, but the one common factor is that the poster would otherwise feel left out and out of place on the IF board after their failures. I think if the poster says that is how they feel, we should take that at face value and accept her.

PrettyAccountant · January 2013

liz4paws:
I don't know how much what I'm about to say is going to add to the discussion but I've been doing some thinking about it since the post from earlier.

I think it's important that we do filter women who should/shouldn't be on this board. However because of the complexity of how each of us gets to their own "left behind" point in her IF struggle, there just isn't a one-size-fits-all rule. No matter how we slice it, putting ANY rule out there is going to alienate women who probably do deserve to be here. That just makes my heart hurt big time. I think it's almost worse to leave a woman out who needs us than to allow someone to post here who might be a little premature. That's just my two cents and I'm sure many of you might feel differently. And that's ok, we are just having a discussion here.

I think the 6 months is a good guideline, but someone could have a relatively short bout with IF testing and treatments, posted a few times in a 6 month span, and be eligible to be here. Whereas someone else might have been put through the IF ringer quickly, found out they likely will never conceive using their OE, hit a brick wall, yet posted diligently on IF for a 5 month span and be denied here. I think thats the 6 month rule just isn't working very well for this reason.

Each and every case is different, but the one common factor is that the poster would otherwise feel left out and out of place on the IF board after their failures. I think if the poster says that is how they feel, we should take that at face value and accept her.

Liz - you said it perfectly. Please don't anyone here take this the wrong way - I am not trying to diminish your hurt but I have thought this many times - I have seen some women post and think to myself "really? two failed IUI's and your talking about being a vet?". Compare that to Chucktgirl's post on IF she titled Lost. Her RE told her - there is no more treatments. My heart was breaking for her.

PrettyAccountant · January 2013

DoublePortion:
Mrs.McIrish:
The rule was always 6 months of posting on IF. But someone theoretically could post 10 times in that 6 month period and "qualify". That isn't right. When you come here from IF, "we" should know you and recognize you. You were giving support to others and not just taking for yourself.
Yes, 6 months with the caveat of being a recognized and supportive member of the IF board. And I think this is where it gets tricky.

This!

DoublePortion · January 2013

liz4paws:

I think it's important that we do filter women who should/shouldn't be on this board. However because of the complexity of how each of us gets to their own "left behind" point in her IF struggle, there just isn't a one-size-fits-all rule. No matter how we slice it, putting ANY rule out there is going to alienate women who probably do deserve to be here.

I agree, someone is going to get hurt no matter what rules there are. Say 2 people want to join on the same day and they've both been on the IF board for 4 months...I don't want to be the one to tell one of them that they just haven't struggled enough and then tell the other one they can go ahead and skip the 6 month rule because their pain warrants it. Perhaps this is why the original Vets came up with the 6 month rule...to have some kind of criteria that doesn't turn IFV into an elitist group. (I hope that makes sense! I feel like my brain is in a fog.)

liz4paws · January 2013

DoublePortion:
liz4paws:

I think it's important that we do filter women who should/shouldn't be on this board. However because of the complexity of how each of us gets to their own "left behind" point in her IF struggle, there just isn't a one-size-fits-all rule. No matter how we slice it, putting ANY rule out there is going to alienate women who probably do deserve to be here.

I agree, someone is going to get hurt no matter what rules there are. Say 2 people want to join on the same day and they've both been on the IF board for 4 months...I don't want to be the one to tell one of them that they just haven't struggled enough and then tell the other one they can go ahead and skip the 6 month rule because their pain warrants it. Perhaps this is why the original Vets came up with the 6 month rule...to have some kind of criteria that doesn't turn IFV into an elitist group. (I hope that makes sense! I feel like my brain is in a fog.)

I know, it's such a difficult thing to navigate. But I fear that the current rule is doing more harm than good. Even if it alienates one woman who needs to be here, it's not working.

My vote would be to make the only rule be that if you have had failures that make you feel out of place on the IF boards, this is place for you.

Even women who have only been through IUIs and for whatever reason can never afford IVF, or perhaps even their religion keeps them from doing IVF, I don't feel right judging their need to be here or not based on a defined number. They are at their own brick wall.

Inside, they must feel just as left out on the other boards as someone who had the means to do many many IVFs and failed.

I think the "feeling left out" aspect is the one and only constant we have to go off of and if a woman says this is how she feels, we should accept her.

Feel free to disagree with me, I know I am in the minority and I haven't been here nearly as long as everyone else but this the only thing I can wrap my head around that seems fair and consistent that wouldn't leave a woman out who needed us.

BzeetyD · January 2013

liz4paws:
DoublePortion:
liz4paws:

I think it's important that we do filter women who should/shouldn't be on this board. However because of the complexity of how each of us gets to their own "left behind" point in her IF struggle, there just isn't a one-size-fits-all rule. No matter how we slice it, putting ANY rule out there is going to alienate women who probably do deserve to be here.

I agree, someone is going to get hurt no matter what rules there are. Say 2 people want to join on the same day and they've both been on the IF board for 4 months...I don't want to be the one to tell one of them that they just haven't struggled enough and then tell the other one they can go ahead and skip the 6 month rule because their pain warrants it. Perhaps this is why the original Vets came up with the 6 month rule...to have some kind of criteria that doesn't turn IFV into an elitist group. (I hope that makes sense! I feel like my brain is in a fog.)

I know, it's such a difficult thing to navigate. But I fear that the current rule is doing more harm than good. Even if it alienates one woman who needs to be here, it's not working.

My vote would be to make the only rule be that if you have had failures that make you feel out of place on the IF boards, this is place for you.

Even women who have only been through IUIs and for whatever reason can never afford IVF, or perhaps even their religion keeps them from doing IVF, I don't feel right judging their need to be here or not based on a defined number. They are at their own brick wall.

Inside, they must feel just as left out on the other boards as someone who had the means to do many many IVFs and failed.

I think the "feeling left out" aspect is the one and only constant we have to go off of and if a woman says this is how we feel, we should accept her.

Feel free to disagree with me, I know I am in the minority and I haven't been here nearly as long as everyone else but this the only thing I can wrap my head around that seems fair and consistent that wouldn't leave a woman out who needed us.

Borrowing from Double P's post and yours here -

The idea isn't to be elitist, it's to be protective of the women who are already here. The gate isn't closed. No one can judge another person's pain but I also don't want the board to become IF2.

I'm very hesitant to make it open to those who feel they should be here without any other guidelines. I don't know how we close the gate, or mind the gate in that case. Other boards seem much clearer. You don't get to feel that you are PGAL, or feel that you are almost anything listed over there. It's mostly cut and dry. I supposed you can fake things, or be overly dramatic, but you know what I mean.

liz4paws · January 2013

BzeetyD:

Borrowing from Double P's post and yours here -

The idea isn't to be elitist, it's to be protective of the women who are already here. The gate isn't closed. No one can judge another person's pain but I also don't want the board to become IF2.

I'm very hesitant to make it open to those who feel they should be here without any other guidelines. I don't know how we close the gate, or mind the gate in that case. Other boards seem much clearer. You don't get to feel that you are PGAL, or feel that you are almost anything listed over there. It's mostly cut and dry. I supposed you can fake things, or be overly dramatic, but you know what I mean.

I completely see what you're saying. But for the example of most other boards like PGAL, its binary - you've either had a loss or you havent. It doesnt have to be subjective because the situation itself isn't subjective. It's black and white. But in our case, the situation itself is very gray which I think makes it nearly impossible put a one-size-fits-all rule.

And I weight the two scenarios: A woman posting here who has a "questionable" struggle but who SWEARS with a straight face that she is at her own personal brick wall versus a woman being turned away and not being allowed to post here for another X months yet she just learned may never be a mother. I would much rather err on the side not having a rule that kept that second woman from joining in.

I'll go with the majority vote here but just continuing to add to the discussion. This is a very good discussion!

ETA: Fixed some grammar issues.

kflynn81 · January 2013

IFV newbie 2 cents??

I've felt left behind, left out, what have you for the past few years. Even though we've only been on medicated cycles a year, that is the only way I'm getting pregnant and I know that and its hurt my soul every time someone oops! gets pregnant and is so happy and carefree about it.

I've been on TB for over a year (wish I found it sooner!) and although emotionally at times I felt that I belonged with you ladies long ago, I "put in my time" on the boards. It was my understanding that you were to be an "active" poster for 6+ months....and so I waited, and guess what? Here I am....tadah!!!

I can see the point on both sides where someone feels they are a "vet" and yes they probably are. But as for the dynamic of this board I agree that the actively posting person would be more of a fit here as they've already made connections with some or most of the current posters.

IFV newbie out!

BzeetyD · January 2013

Can we make an anonymous survey monkey poll or something? With a link that you need to PM to get?

I think we need to get a good sense of what the whole community thinks. Maybe leave it up for a few days, so everyone could weigh in? Then if change is needed, we can figure that out.

Really appreciate all the comments here too. Thanks for starting this up DoubleP.

DoublePortion · January 2013

BzeetyD:
Can we make an anonymous survey monkey poll or something? With a link that you need to PM to get?
I think we need to get a good sense of what the whole community thinks. Maybe leave it up for a few days, so everyone could weigh in? Then if change is needed, we can figure that out.
Really appreciate all the comments here too. Thanks for starting this up DoubleP.

An anonymous poll is a good idea! I appreciate everyone's comments as well and that we were able to keep this civil. I think we all have the same goal in mind (to accept new members in the least hurtful way for all who wish to be part of the board) and just have different ways of getting there, but we'll work it out. Big Smile

brooklynesque · January 2013

DoublePortion:
I really don't know that I should be starting this discussion since I don't have a long history on the board, but I feel that it needs to be done. Do changes need to be made to the IFV "rules"? If so, what changes? Like I mentioned earlier, we all need to be on the same page. Otherwise some of us end up looking like the "bad guys" when we are just trying to be fair according to the last discussion on IFV parameters. If there needs to be changes made, I am open to them!

***Please keep it friendly. My intent is not to stir up drama.***

Hi ... lurker here with 2 cents to contribute. I'm a pretty low-hope case but have been holding off intro-ing here because, although I've been posting on IF for nearly a year, I took a several-month break after my first disastrous IVF cycle and haven't been actively posting again for 6 months. I wish I could be on this board; I definitely don't feel at home on IF, given I'm on my 3rd IVF and chances are pretty slim that I'll be able to conceive with my OE.

I'm happy to abide by the 6-month rule if that's what continues but wanted to throw in another suggestion: I feel that by the time a woman has failed 2 IVFs, if she's posted on IF throughout both (even if she's only been on the board for, say, 4 months), it might make sense to allow her here. Once you fail twice, it becomes clear you're probably a hard case. And it's kind of a vicious circle -- when you're an experienced hard case you're probably going to post less rather than more on the IF board, because you're not going to be chatting about every monitoring appointment or asking as many questions. Two IVF failures could be another bright-line rule that would keep the "tourists" away but would assure that people who really had graduated from IF (and not in the good way) got the support they needed.

Of course this suggestion is very self-serving, LOL.

Going back into lurking now . . .

[ETA: My suggestion is not to discontinue the 6-month rule, but to add the 2-cycle failure rule as a special exception.]

Mrs.McIrish · January 2013

Brooklyn-you just took a break after IVF 1. You don't have to start your 6 months over. If you were gone for 2 yrs that might be different if no one knew who you were. I think you are fine to post here. Just my 2 cents!

Also, the girls that left WANT the newer ladies to continue/restart this board. It was so important to them to have a safe haven and you all should get that too. You just need to be careful of the revolving door and that is why parameters are important. Otherwise you will just feel like it is IF2 and you're still left behind.

BzeetyD · January 2013

You bring up many good points.

I'd be open to that suggestion of 2 IVF failures so long as failure included successes that ended in losses or 6 months history on the IF board.

We'll draft a poll and include some of the options that have been mentioned.

Keep em coming!

Mrs.McIrish · January 2013

Some DOR ladies are not eligible for IVF and get converted to IUI time and time again. The 2 IVF rule would disqualify them..

BzeetyD · January 2013

Could it be either 6 mo on the IF board or 2 failed IVFs? That's what I meant. Not everyone has the option to do IVF anyways and a converted to IUI would be considered a failed IVF, too, right?

Julie21613 · January 2013

PrettyAccountant:
DoublePortion:
Mrs.McIrish:
The rule was always 6 months of posting on IF. But someone theoretically could post 10 times in that 6 month period and "qualify". That isn't right. When you come here from IF, "we" should know you and recognize you. You were giving support to others and not just taking for yourself.
Yes, 6 months with the caveat of being a recognized and supportive member of the IF board. And I think this is where it gets tricky.
This!

This....

I didn't WANT to come over to this board. I was really hoping I wouldn't have to. But this is where it feels like "home" for me. In the 6 months I was actively posting on the IF board, I cannot even begin to tell you how many women came and left to join the PAIF board. I was happy for them. But felt they were gone before we really got to know them. And I agree with you Rachel... I read 2 failed iui's? Seriously? I'm not down playing their infertility. I've been there.. many years ago. I still post over on IF to lend support. But this is where I feel I belong.

rockpaperlove · January 2013

Mrs.McIrish:

Brooklyn-you just took a break after IVF 1. You don't have to start your 6 months over. If you were gone for 2 yrs that might be different if no one knew who you were. I think you are fine to post here. Just my 2 cents!
Also, the girls that left WANT the newer ladies to continue/restart this board. It was so important to them to have a safe haven and you all should get that too. You just need to be careful of the revolving door and that is why parameters are important. Otherwise you will just feel like it is IF2 and you're still left behind.

I agree. The parameters are important here. It will get complicated otherwise. I sort of feel like the saying "don't try to fix what's not broken" applies here. This board has been a great safe haven and bending old rules or making new rules might not be a good idea.

hootie123 · January 2013

Late to the party but I was at my support group tonight.

I really think this board would benefit it if had less specific rules. Just keep it along the lines as people who are in an advanced infertility journey. If someone thinks they fit in here then they start posting - no judging or asking if they belong or not! Everyones Infertility journey is too complicated and difficult to make set boundaries and one-size fits all. Even if someone is brand new to the bump but has a complicated history - I have no problem with them posting here. The bonds are formed from now on - not what happened in the past.

jekomo · January 2013

I lurk on this board from time to time because I don't feel as if I belong on the other boards anymore, but I know I don't "qualify" to post here necessarily. I have two failed IVFs (one chemical, one cancelled before ER) and dx of DOR. We're basically done except for a miracle as we are out of money. I am in a lot of pain emotionally and feel so alone. I could really use some people to talk to because I don't even know how to start to heal.

I would love to be accepted here as allowed to post or even in some sort of facebook group or whatever. I am really having a hard time right now. I don't like the infertility or tttc board anymore because I don't really have any "questions" about treatment or anything; just trying to pick up the pieces at this point and move on.

Discussion!

Re: Discussion!

NTNP 2009-2012 TTC since 2012:

Choose Another Board

Search Boards