s/o Stop responding to threads asking for "success stories" with stories of m/c, failure, etc!

[Anonymous]

I suppose I see the point...it just seems like the point could have been made without smacking down someone who really did answer the OP's question (even though, to your way of thinking she apparently should have just written one sentence.) It just seems needlessly mean to someone who can only be "faulted" for giving the full picture of her experience. And I can't help but note that your comment dragged that thread away from what the OP said she wanted -- success stories.

If this hijacking is truly such a big problem on this board -- I've been here a while and I haven't seen it to the degree you have -- then surely there must have been a better example.

[Anonymous]

I'm with OP. She's not trying to be the board police, she's asking people to think about where and why they post their experiences. We all have the ability to post anywhere but it is aggressive, to use a PP's term, to post your negative experience on a thread specifically asking for good news. You can post elsewhere. Don't decide for the OP if other threads that she HAS to hear about bad outcomes. If an OP wants one positive thread, let her ask us for it and get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tangent, I'm sorry -- what does "s/o" mean? I've seen it several times but it's hard to figure it out because there's not enough context.

s/o = spinoff

This whole time I was wondering why people would write "search of" and got confused. thanks for clarifying!!

[Anonymous]

While I can somewhat understand the OP's position about not wanting to hear about failed cycles when posters are asking for success stories, I'm less sure I agree with regard to miscarriages. Most miscarriages are the result of some sort of genetic anomaly that doesn't really have anything to do with the ART. So the ART could be successful (IUI or IVF) in the sense that it results in a pregnancy, but the pregnancy might ultimately not continue. In my own view, the latter (miscarriage later in pregnancy) has nothing (or at least nothing that's been demonstrated) to do with whether the specific treatment worked, and so for myself I'd want to know if something like a 6-day transfer resulted in a pregnancy even if the pregnancy ultimately did not lead to a live birth.

In fact, I feel like this board has been particularly helpful for me, as a relative ART newbie, to understand that there's a different between the success rate of a procedure and the success rate of a pregnancy. Now, of course, one can argue that pregnancies resulting from ART have a higher rate of miscarriage than they would if the couple had gotten pregnant without ART, but I'm not aware that there is good data on that.

Anyway, I don't want to pretend to speak for any other posters on these forums, but as someone who has posted similar questions I do appreciate hearing from people who've had treatments that resulted in pregnancies even if they eventually miscarried.