"Friends" and the Media

The Media shows families in many ways subtle and obvious. I am sure most of you remember the show Friends. This show originally fallowed the lives of 6 people, 3 guys and 3 girls all in there mid to late 20's. As the show went on these people changed and grew and so did there relationships. In this show many people Married, Cohabited or had children together. I am sure if you think of friends this is not the first thing you think of. However, when I think back to the show I can think of an example of most of the things we covered from babies to relationships. I will now list some of the characters and the events in there life that correlate with the class discussions. 

I will start with Ross-the Nerdy Paleontologist.

*He marries his first wife and has a son with her and then he later found out that she is a lesbian. This means he is married, gets divorced and has a child with his ex wife. 

* His next relationship is with an International women named Julie. This covers relationships with people from other places. 

* His third wife is his child hood love. His friend Rachel. They get married when they are drunk and late divorce and have a child. Rachel and Ross take care of there child and live there separate lives.

* To sum up Ross has been with 3 different wives all in different situations. 

Phoebe is this creative free spirited kind hearted women. 

* She marries a friend from Canada who she believed is Gay, he later divorces her because he realizes he is straight. This sub plot is a bit more far fetched but this does show that people marry for different reasons. And some times people end up leaving there partners of the opposite sex for one of the same sex. 

*Later Phoebe becomes the surrogate mother for her brother. Through in vitro fertilization i believe and ends up giving birth to triplets. 

Monica and Chandler are friends who end up falling in love and getting married. They are in capable of having children so they adopt one.

Joey the last friend is bachelor and loves every moment of it.

It is funny how family and relationships can sneak into a show. This show was a popular show in america and it ran for many years. I believe that show found a way to show the diferant sides of america and the different families. It made it light and made all kinds of love and relationships and love excepted. They would have the characters vocalize the issues and express different opinions. Every character had a happy ending so in a sense they gave hope to the rest of the world. 

I hope that this opens your eyes and makes you take a closer look at the shows you watch and how they show family. 

Thanks for your time, Justine Gilbane

Media influences on family

Keeping Up with the Joneses

Families around the world are becoming more and more similar now a days through influence of the media illustrating an impression towards children and family norms. Throughout the history of human civilization, there has been a prevailing motif of neighborly competition. At its root, it is a drive for social acceptance. This is best shown by the advent of television commercials and the respective toy phenomena that now rock elementary schools all over the world. Before television and other forms of mass communication, neighborly competition was left to just that—neighbors. This predictably led to diversification among children’s toys across the world. This can be shown at almost any antique auction, where old handcrafted toys from exotic countries are kept in pristine airless boxes that exude their extravagant price. But here in the beginning of the twenty-first century, that diversification is quickly disappearing. Especially now that the internet is merging with television through complex video gaming systems like the Xbox 360 and Play station 3, kids are playing the same games all across the world with each other. And thus, the difference between a family in Japan, a family in Bosnia and a family in America is evaporating.

Culture generates through interaction, and before mass media the only interaction possible was physical. From small and subtle things like borrowing spices to gathering together to sing Christmas carols, a sense of neighborhood grew up slowly and in tightly-knit circles. These days the physical boundary is no longer an obstacle, starting with the telegraph and moving all the way to talking via satellite telephones, electronic mail and blogs. Unfortunately, however, this technology is still only available to countries with sufficient infrastructure. Many countries lack clean drinking water, hospitals and highways. In these impoverished nations, establishing a steady and accessible internet connection is not a practical project. This is especially an issue considering the rate at which technology advances; the best computers twenty years ago are now hardly useable. This leaves those countries completely in the dust, literally generations behind countries using the digital superhighway. This creates a drastic difference in appearance between societies with this technology, and those without. And so while connected countries become much more tightly bound, other nations and other people are falling farther and farther behind both economically and socially.

As humans and our societies evolved, being in good standing with your neighbors was a matter of life and death. As many Calvin and Hobbes cartoons gleefully pointed out, we humans would not last long in the jungle. Our survival depends on using our largest evolutionary advantages, namely our tool-making hands and complex language systems. Being a social outcast during cave-dwelling eras would quickly mean extinction, and so humans have been conditioned both genetically and psychologically to avoid being a social outcast. As global cultures converge and are subsequently capitalized, the scope of a neighborhood goes beyond physical bounds. The children of the past few decades born in these societies are especially affected by this. This is because of commercials. As any parent of the television age knows, children’s commercials are incredibly effective. And now children from all over the world are being shown advertisements for the same products. These products are also so complex and versatile that their appeal does not fade over time. So the children growing up with these digital neighborhoods will grow into a full-fledged online community, as we are already seeing today.

Is this new trend of assimilation a step up from the differentiated cultures that dominated at one time? How far will the wealthier countries lead over the less developed? Will the idea of a universal ideal family emerge out of this digital neighborhood?

By Jamie Goulart

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPh_CHP77ko

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAfANb2Cs9Q

The Ever-Changing Family portrayed in the Media

The meaning of family is constantly changing in society. Today society’s families are made up of straight, gay, and lesbian couples. Some include children while others do not. Some couples are married while others cohabitate but still refer to themselves as family. Some families are blood relatives while others are a kinship formed family.
The media has noticed the changing and diversity of America’s family and that there is becoming less of an idea typical family, which includes a husband, wife and two children. Now families come in many different forms.

A TV show that is an example of how the media is adapting its shows to the ever-changing family structure in the US is clear in the show Gilmore Girls. In this show, a single mother has one daughter of her own. They live together in their own house. There is no father or paternal figure in the family. The grandparents or the mother’s parents are a part of their lives although they live a different conservative lifestyle. The mother’s name is Lorelai Gilmore. The daughter’s name is Rory Gilmore. Rory proves that success is possible for a child growing up in a single-family home as she is admitted into an Ivy League college securing her future. The mother and daughter share a close relationship through the difficulties of life. They show how family is love and is support for each other in whatever form family comes in. They do not have a father in their life but they have plenty of love that they share with each other. This show is a common scenario in the US today. There are many single mothers with a child.

“According to Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support: 2005, released by the U.S. Census Bureau in August, 2007, there are approximately 13.6 million single parents in the United States today, and those parents are responsible for raising 21.2 million children (approximately 26% of children under 21 in the U.S. today).” Source is http://singleparents.about.com/od/legalissues/p/portrait.htm.

Is the new view the media is taking and publicly sharing on TV changing the way families function in society today and could this portrayal encourage dysfunctional families or does it simply celebrate the diversity of types of families in society today? Or are there any other thoughts and comments you have on this subject?

-Taylor Faulkner's Portion of Group Blog.

Ethical Concerns About ARTs: Final Post

Thank you to all those who participated in our blog discussion. As a group, you’ve contributed some valuable insights and raised interesting points. We seem to be somewhat divided on the ethical issues regarding in-vitro fertilization, which is representative of the opinions of society as a whole. Should there be laws governing the age of women receiving IVF, sex selection, and preimplantation genetic diagnosis? Should health insurance companies be required to cover IVF to supplement the costs and reduce the risk of multiple births? These issues will continue to be debated. Further, if we are now able to choose the sex of our children and, for the most part, select out of having a child with any kind of genetic disorder, should we be able to select physical traits and the IQ of our children when science allows us to do so? How far is too far?

- Brianne Caira, Christina Comeau, Julie Conton, and Amy Diamond

Repost of Initial Post: Ethical Concerns About Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs)

It has been brought to our attention that our original post seems to have disappeared. We're not exactly sure where it went, so we're posting it again just to make sure that everyone can access it. Please see below for our original post. Thanks!


Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Background:

The science and study of ART began in the 1970’s with in-vitro fertilization (IVF) for women who couldn’t conceive. The first successful live birth through IVF was in 1978, and since then, the science has grown and evolved at an extraordinary level. There are many new ways that families can conceive a baby including artificial insemination, IVF, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, gamete intrafallopian transfer, zygote intrafallopian transfer, surrogacy, egg donation, and semen donation. Many different people use ART including single parents, infertile parents, and gays and lesbians. Many of these families simply cannot conceive, however others use it because they would like to screen for diseases and disabilities or choose the baby’s gender. This is possible through pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), and is often standard in many clinics.

Because ART is relatively new and a controversial subject, there is very little federal regulation on it. Some states regulate it, but regulations vary. Since there is little regulation, there is also little research on statistical information about it. It is estimated however that about 12% of women of childbearing age in the U.S. have used ART (Assisted), and there are over 400 fertility clinics in the U.S. (Pertman). Costs for ART are high, ranging from $10,000 to $14,000 per cycle plus even more for birth complications. It is common for most women to have to go through more than one cycle because of complications, which adds on to the costly bill. Also, “in 2000, 35% of all live births resulting from ART were multiple births” (Assisted). ART is covered by some insurance policies, however, only the most expensive health insurance plans which excludes individuals from lower classes. There are also no legal regulations of these insurance policies to prevent discrimination, however, it seems that if you have the money, you can find a way to get it done. Since there are limited regulations, it was difficult to find age limits for ART. However, on most of the clinical websites, the age limit for women to use their own eggs is 45, we could not however find any listed age limits for women using donated eggs.


A Trend in Older Women Having Babies, Using ART:

As we have learned in our Sociology class, there is a trend of women marrying at later ages and as a result, having children at later ages. This is because there are more opportunities for women now. They are going to college, and graduate school, and starting their careers instead of getting married right out of high school. The only problem with this, is that women are not biologically designed to have children at these later ages. After age 30, the probability of having a baby decreases 3.5 percent per year. The probability of miscarriage increases significantly along with the chance of having a baby with chromosomal disorders (Aging). Even with the help of IVF, chances of an older woman giving birth are quite low. There is only a 10 percent pregnancy rate for women over the age of 40 with IVF, using their own eggs. This is why many clinics set an age limit of 45 years for women using their own eggs with IVF. However, if these same women use donor eggs, their chances increase to 65 percent. The need for a use of donor eggs has lead to another trend in women freezing their own eggs while they are young and healthy, so that they will be able to use them when they are ready to have a baby. One also needs to take into consideration the dangers and health complications that come with older women giving birth. For example, they are more prone to heart disease. Egg freezing is still in the experimental stage, so it is suggested to only women who have no other options, however, many women who are worried about their biological clock are looking more and more into the procedure. It brings up the concern over whether or not older women have the stamina to raise children, and what it is doing to our families.


IVF and the Risk of Multiple Births:

In the past two decades, the number of twin births in the United States has increased 50 percent and the number of higher order multiple births (triplets, quadruplets, etc.) has increased by 100 percent, while single births have only increased by 6 percent. This dramatic rise in the rate of multiple births is primarily due to the increasing use of assistive reproductive technologies such as in-vitro fertilization. IVF has an average success rate of less than 30 percent, decreasing further as maternal age increases. In order to increase the chances of a successful pregnancy, usually more than 1 embryo is transferred to the uterus, increasing the risk of a multiple birth. IVF increases the likelihood of a multiple birth by 20 percent, and studies have shown that 45 percent of all IVF births are multiple. Multiple births increase the risk of complications such as premature delivery, low birth weight, fetal and infant death, pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, and caesarean section. Often times when there are three or more fetuses, one or more of them are eliminated through a process called reduction to augment the chance of healthy development of the others.

In June 2006, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine recommended that doctors only transfer one embryo for women under age 35. However, countless women undergoing IVF treatment still insist on the transfer of multiple embryos. In many cases, the cost of IVF is not covered by medical insurance, and after enduring painful procedures and spending $10,000 plus, most women would rather risk a multiple birth than risk a failed attempt at pregnancy. Experts believe that the biggest obstacle in reducing the number of multiple births is the lack of insurance coverage. In Europe, most IVF is covered by national health insurance, resulting in more instances of single-embryo transfer and higher success rates.


Ethical Issues Surrounding Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD):

In assisted reproductive technology doctors perform a preimplantation genetic diagnosis with the fertile egg. There are two things that doctors test to discover different diseases, chromosomal analysis to assess the number or structure of chromosomes present in the cells; and DNA analysis to detect specific gene mutations. With this testing parents are able to pick the eggs that have no diseases, or eliminate the eggs all together if all have mutations.

There are many different questions that arise from preimplantation genetic diagnosis. One of the main ethical issues involves whether and under what circumstances the use of PGD is acceptable. In PGD the creation and mostly destruction of human embryos becomes a huge issue for some people. When searching for disease like Huntington Disease that does not affect the person until later in life, should the embryo be destroyed when they have decades to live unaffected by this disease. Also should embryos be destroyed if they have a certain genetic mutation that could cause a certain disease but may also be nothing? In the future parents may have the ability to decide what their child will look like, musical talents and creativity just to name a few. This would cost a great deal of money and would eventually lead to upper class having a greater advantage because it costs so much money. These ethical issues are just a few that come from preimplantation genetic diagnosis.


Assisted Reproductive Technologies and Sex Selection:

Throughout history many adults have preferred a specific sex for their child, for a variety of reasons, and have tried a number of non-medical means in order to conceive a child of their desired gender. For many people, this desire still exists, but now the practice is scientifically feasible. Originally, sex selection was intended for and limited to future parents who wanted to choose the sex of their child for medical purposes. For example, certain genetic diseases are sex-linked, so families with a known history of a particular sex-linked disease can choose the gender not related to that disease in order to prevent that specific disease from being passed on to their child. Another reason that parents may wish to choose a specific gender for their child is for the purposes of “family balancing,” which is a term for adults who select a particular sex because they already have at least one child and want to control the number of male and female children that they have. However, in the United States, unlike in some other countries, there are no laws that dictate the conditions in which one can choose the sex of their child. Therefore, anyone in this country, who has the appropriate resources, can choose the sex of their child for any reason.

There are three ways to select the sex of one’s future child: preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), various sperm-sorting techniques, and genetic engineering. PGD, an in vitro fertilization technique, is the most effective (and the most expensive) method of selecting the sex of one’s child, as it has a 100 percent success rate. PGD is now being used by some doctors to screen out chromosomally abnormal embryos in an attempt to make IVF pregnancies as successful as possible. In addition to detecting chromosomal abnormalities and serious genetic diseases, PGD can determine the sex of an embryo. Consequently, once the unhealthy embryos are eliminated from the picture, future parents are typically allowed to choose the sex(es) of the embryo(s) that they want to transfer. Therefore, some people consider it to be morally acceptable for infertile couples who are undergoing IVF to select the sex of their child, but, they cringe at the idea of couples undergoing PGD for the sole purpose of selecting the sex of their child.

Sperm-sorting technologies, such as flow cytometry and MicroSort, work by separating X-bearing sperm from Y-bearing sperm. This can be done in a number of ways including separation by weight (X-bearing sperm are slightly heavier than Y-bearing sperm) and through the use of DNA-specific dye. Sperm-sorting technologies are less expensive than PGD, but they are also less effective; it typically takes more than one attempt for a pregnancy to occur and it is less likely that parents will end up with a baby of their desired sex.

Genetic engineering is different from both of the previously mentioned sex selection methods because it is not currently being used for sex selection. However, scientists believe that in the near future it will be possible to use this method to directly manipulate the sex of an embryo.

There are many ethical issues surrounding the use of ARTs for sex selection. Several of these ethical issues involve social justice. For example, gender biases may be reinforced because offering parents the means to choose one sex over the other suggests that one is superior. This sense that one sex is better than the other may create an even greater social divide between the sexes and may even lead to sexism. Another problem is the destruction of human embryos. To people who believe that embryos are people, destroying an embryo is essentially the same as killing a person. People opposing sex selection are troubled that embryos created for PGD, that are not of the desired sex, may be discarded for the sole reason of being male or female. Furthermore, access to sex selection through ARTs is unequal. Every type of sex selection method is expensive and time consuming, and they are typically not fully covered by insurance plans. Therefore, it is mostly wealthy, upper-class parents who are able to choose the sex of their children.

Another key ethical issue is that sex selection may create a sex ratio imbalance which could lead to further ethical and societal problems. In addition, choosing the sex of one’s child may negatively influence the child, such as in the case that the child does not meet his or her parents’ possibly gender-stereotyped expectations. Lastly, the practice of sex selection through ARTs brings to the forefront the slippery slope argument. If we’re choosing the sex of our children now, what genetic traits will be choosing in the future? How far is too far when it comes to choosing the genes of another human being?


Questions: (Please include the question number in your response.)

1. How do you feel about women having babies abnormally later in life? How do you think it will affect the family in either positive or negative aspects? Do you think that egg freezing should be an option for all women, or just those that have no other options, for example, recovering cancer patients?

2. Should medical insurance companies be required to cover IVF in order to reduce the risk of multiple births? In your opinion, what would be the ethical implications of such a policy? Is there an alternate solution to reducing the number of multiple births in IVF treatment?

3. How do you feel about PGD? Do you agree with preimplantation genetic diagnosis? How do you think this process is going to affect the future of our society?

4. Do you think that sex selection through the use of ARTs should be legal? Why or why not? If you think it should be illegal, are there any extenuating circumstances in which it should be legal? Also, if sex selection continues to be legal in the U.S., how do you think it will affect the family and society?


- Brianne Caira, Christina Comeau, Julie Conton, and Amy Diamond


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
References:

Assisted Reproductive Technologies in the U.S. Retrieved on February 26,2009 from, http://www.religiousinstitute.org/documents/ARTsintheU.S.andEconomicJustice.pdf

Aging and Reproduction (March 2008). Retrieved on February 26, 2009, from http://www.ivf1.com/aging-reproduction/

Black, C. (August 2007). Women freeze eggs to have babies later. Retrieved on February 26, 2009 from http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/328287_frozenegg20.html

Hollingsworth, L.E. (2005). Ethical considerations in prenatal sex selection. Health and Social Work, 30 (2), 126-134. Retrieved February 26, 2009, from MEDLINE.

Kalb, C. (2004, January 26). Brave new babies. Newsweek, 45-53.

Koster, O., & Wheldon, J. IVF rush by over-40s. Retrieved on February 26, 2009 from, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-336030/IVF-rush-40s.html

Liao, S.M. (2005). The ethics of using genetic engineering for sex selection. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31 (2), 116-118. Retrieved February 26, 2009, from MEDLINE.

Sample, I. (November, 2006). Test helps older women decide about IVF treatment. Retrieved on February 26, 2009 from, http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/nov/17/lifeandhealth.familyandrelationships

Ethical Concerns About Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs)

I think that older women should have the option to use unnatural ways such as assisted reproductive technology to get pregnant. I think it is a great new option that women who are older such as in their early 40's can use to become a parent. For example my aunt is in her early forties and married late. She is a wonderful person and will make the most caring mother. She desperately wanted to be a mother but could not get pregnant naturally. Now she is due in April with a child and is so thrilled. I think that parents who choose this option will often make great parents because they want to have their children so badly that they will spend a lot of energy on raising their children and their children will be important to them. I also think this is a great option for younger mothers who cannot get pregnant naturally. The mothers who go through this tedious process obviously want to have a child badly. They are bound to care very much for their child. I think that one of the most important qualities a parent should have is wanting to be a caring parent for their child. Therefore I think that this new technology will create families that are very connected and dedicated to each other and this is only a good thing. I do have an issue when it comes to mothers at the age of 6o or so giving birth. I do not think that this is fair to the child to have a child at this old of an age in life. I think that mothers should be able to use this technology until the age of late 40's or at an age where they can prove they are healthy and have the energy to care adequately for their child. Overall I am excited about the new opportunities the technology is creating for new caring happy families such as my new cousin on the way!

Taylor Faulkner

The Saga of Lilly Ledbetter: Final Post

 Sen. Barbara Miluski of Maryland (who sponsored the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act), Michelle Obama, and Lilly Ledbetter after the signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

We have read this week's comments, and they are all fantastic. Everyone has such great insights, and this is the kind of discussion we had in mind when choosing this topic and writing this blog. 

For the most part, everyone agreed that this was a step in the right direction towards equal pay, but not the be-all, end-all. You agreed that these changes may be slow to take place: some companies will follow through, but others will "fall through the cracks" until threatened with a lawsuit or similar action. Some people expressed concerns that companies that are smaller or have lower-paid employees may not follow the law, because their employees do not have the means to sue them. Others are afraid that the dismal economy will hurt this act. Many people mentioned the issue of transparency: we are encouraged to keep our salaries private, which means that we do not know if we're being discriminated against.

The class seems to be in agreement that the courts were just following the laws, but that the laws themselves were flawed. SOmeone had the interesting (and frighteningly enough, probably true) thought that the laws were set up this way intentionally, to provide a loophole for discriminatory practices.

The class was also in agreement that this will advance the cause of feminist, not hurt it. It shows how much we still need to focus on feminism & gender equality. 

We all agree that the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act will help families, especially single mothers, and we are all glad that it was finally passed.

-Bonnie Bryant, Rhyanna Anderson, Rachel Badger, Mia Bloombecker