Posted on 06/28/2013 4:48:18 PM PDT by Morgana
Yup, it’s them again. America’s most charming couple is back in the news.
You remember, don’t you? We were introduced back in May when Albert Garland (a pseudonym), published a piece on Babble with the charming sub-headline: “My wife’s expecting twins — and I’m not happy about it.”
Things only went downhill from there.
Well, apparently the reaction to Albert’s piece was less than positive (who knew?), and now his wife has stepped forward to tell her side of the story in a follow-up piece on Babble.
“Mrs. Albert Garland” patiently explains, in their defense, that she and her husband only ordered one child (they got pregnant through IVF), and it’s really, really unfair that they got two. And just to be perfectly clear, they’re really (really) not happy about it!
“The twins are coming fast, and I don’t feel a sense of joy. Instead, I feel responsible. We only wanted one,” she writes. (Did I mention how charming this couple is?)
She goes on to wonder how much “strain” having two more children will place on her marriage and her older son, and explains that “like any family” they have dreams of “going to Disney, college, etc.” and are worried that now they will need a bigger car and a bigger house.
“Now, seven months into my pregnancy — and in therapy — I still feel remorse and am terrified of our future,” she writes. “When I chose to plant both embryos, I made a decision that forever impacted our lives, and not necessarily for the better.” (There’s that charm again.)
To be fair, Mrs. Garland does paint a picture of a very difficult pregnancy. Carrying twins is a very challenging thing for any mother, and it would take a very remarkable woman not to sometimes get down and a little discouraged during the process. Add onto that the fact that the couple’s first son had colic, and you can begin to understand why the couple may feel daunted at the prospect of twins.
But what this doesn't excuse is the choice to pen, and then publish in the public forum, a pair of such ridiculous articles. In the trials of their pregnancy, Mr. and Mrs. Garland may be excused for seeking pity and support - but it should be the pity and the support of each other, and of their close family and friends. What they hope to accomplish by airing their purile grievances for the world is unclear, except to re-affirm all of the most pernicious fallacies about parenthood that are currently so popular.
Indeed, what is so fascinating about this story is that it illustrates, in a nutshell, how just about everything that the modern world teaches us about parenthood, pregnancy and childbirth - all that stuff about “control” and “choice” and “responsible parenthood” and “self-realization” – is absolute rubbish, and, rather than making us free and happy (as promised), leads only to misery and a truly breathtaking narcissism.
The Garlands have clearly bought hook-line-and-sinker into these lies. They believed (because that’s what they were told) that they could have had absolute control over their reproduction. They thought they could put in an order for a baby, and have it delivered neatly wrapped with a bow on top. They thought they could have exactly what they envisioned as the "perfect" family.
But that's not how it works. When you get married, when you have sex, when you open yourself up to the possibility of children, you are opening up a Pandora's box. You are opening yourself up to life. And life is not within our control. It is way bigger and more mysterious than we are. Get all the scientists and screening technologies involved that you want. It doesn't matter. The only proper approach to parenthood is to simply open your heart and accept whatever comes as a gratuitious gift from God.
To become a parent is inherently to stretch ourselves. And if we sit back and allow ourselves to be stretched, we will find that our hearts are bigger than we ever knew. But if we hold on to our hearts, and say that they will stretch this much and no more, we only cause ourselves pain. And we will sink into self-pity.
The main difference between the Garlands and millions of other couples around the globe in similar circumstances, is that when the Garlands found out that they were getting something that they didn’t order, they found that they couldn’t stomach the notion of aborting their unwanted child. This is to their credit.
Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!
But this is exactly where all this talk of “control” has brought us – to more than 50 million aborted babies in the United States alone. To some 50 million heartbroken, spiritually scarred, empty-armed mothers and fathers, who believed that they could have their cake and eat it too, and who chose murder when that didn’t turn out to be true.
Love does not seek to control. Love opens its arms and embraces. Love finds a way. By treating our children as a commodity to be bought and sold, when, where, and however we wish, we have closed our hearts to the spontaneity of love.
If the Garlands would simply let go of that illusion of control, which has been hammered into them by the contraceptive, pro-abortion, “planned parenthood,” self-oriented culture, they would find the freedom to embrace their circumstances, to come out of themselves, and to find hope even in their most difficult moments.
They would see that going to Disneyland is not an important part of being a family; that you don’t need a large house to love three children; that while pregnancy is difficult, it is a difficulty with immense rewards; and that all of the hardships of parenthood oriented towards one of the greatest things any human being can ever do – bring new life into the world.
This doesn't mean that pregnancy won't be hard. That having twins won't be hard. But what it does mean is that even within the hardships, they will find their happiness and their joy.
The most hopeful part of the Mrs. Garland's article is the last line: "For anyone who is worried about me and my husband, our son brings us a ton of joy. We are always amazed by how much we love him, and I’m sure this indescribable love will extend to his brothers. But for now, I’m having trouble seeing the light at the end of the tunnel."
In the midst of challenges and uncertainty and suffering it can be hard to see the light at the end of the tunnel. But fortunately for the Garlands, because they a sufficient moral sense to rejected the possibliity of abortion, they will be given the opportunity to see that light - to welcome their two children, and to learn how to love them as the treasures that they undoubtedly are.
And hopefully whenever (if ever) they unintentionally become pregant again, they will have learned their lesson, and won't write any more such ridiculous articles for ridiculous publications.
Perhaps God had a reason for not blessing them with a child naturally.
Apparently they didn't.
“in their defense, that she and her husband only ordered one child “
Had it been me I wouldda said “COOL! I got two for the price of one!”
They chose to implant two embryos, wanting one to die. That’s sick.
This society is so sick. :(
Yes, it is.
In a Clintonesque way, they did
Eeew, that’s a good point.
The best thing for those babies would be if they were given up for adoption.
they bought into the stats that probably only one would implant. it’s why they always put more than in, because chances are both won’t.
In other words, they wanted one to die.
This article made me want to barf.
The whining and sniveling is tough to take.
.
this is why the homo lifestyle needs to be destroyed. it rubs off on heteros.
these are two heteros who are living the homo lifestyle, unhappy they are really going to lose the freedom to do whatever, whenever, wherever, and their finances will take a big hit because of the burden of children.
I cried when I found out I was having twns. Of course, ours were identicall. I warn people that are using meds or IVF to be prepared for multiples.
I love my daughters with all my heart, but I wish I had them 1 at a time.
After 10 weeks of complete bedrest, they were born early, got sick with RSV at 6 weeks and almost died. One of them has a brain injury.
I thought the other ne was okay until last year. She was diagnosed with a movement disorder like Parkinson’s, called dystonia. It can be in 1 body part or it can spread. It now looks like it is spreading from her arms to her legs. She is only 16. She’s already lost the ability to play the flute (which she loved) and to write, and now we’re looking at her maybe losng the ability to walk.
I thought having a kid with a rain injury was hard, but the dystonia thing is really difficult. She’s in pain and tired constantly.
Having twins just raises the pissibilities of troubles by so much.
I would much rather have healthy singletons.
However, I would really love for my baby girls to be healthy and not have their ailments.
i think more like “expected” one not to survive.
a natural reaction would be happiness both survived and beat the implantation stats.
One would think.
“these are two heteros who are living the homo lifestyle, unhappy they are really going to lose the freedom to do whatever, whenever, wherever, and their finances will take a big hit because of the burden of children.”
If that is the way they really feel they are better off not having children.
Sight unseen, no take backsies.
I'll take the older child as well if he cramps your lifestyle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.