February 9, 2010

adoption madness

Last week, I had dinner with a friend who goes to Haiti often and is headed back any day now to lend a hand.

I jokingly told him to bring me back a baby, but I was serious about mothering a child from Haiti, or any country for that matter — if only folks wouldn’t judge me based on my medical records.

Okay, so it hasn’t happened yet. But more than likely it will.

As part of my quest to adopt a child, I’ll have to answer questions about being a cancer survivor, and rightfully so. But regardless of how well I recover, or even if I battle the beast and win, my medical history is going to be problematic. As one adoptive mother I reached out to wrote me in an e-mail, “The biggest obstacle is your health.”

Yeah. No kidding.

I found out a long time ago that being a cancer survivor would be a huge strike against me when it came time to adopt a kid, and I was a bit irritated by her need to state the obvious. The adoption agencies worry about how long a cancer patient is going to live and whether we’re fit enough to be parents.

And it’s not just ovarian cancer patients; it’s all cancer patients. I heard of a woman with thyroid cancer, which is highly curable, having to wait years before she was allowed to adopt. Granted the five-year survival rate for ovarian cancer patients — about 46 percent — isn’t as encouraging as thyroid cancer or even breast cancer, but when I read that figure, I interpreted it as somebody out there is beating the odds.

A lot of somebodies actually.

The reality is that cancer is becoming a chronic but manageable disease for many. Yet when it comes to adoption, survivors are discriminated against despite that fact that other ailments are more pervasive and equally life-threatening.  More American women, for example, die from heart disease each year? A healthy cancer survivor (no, it’s not an oxymoron) should no more be given a hard time regarding adoption than someone who’s at risk for heart disease or someone who’s overweight.

Furthermore, there are conditions like depression that negatively affect child rearing more than cancer. Take for instance a family friend who battled bipolar disorder all his life. He stopped taking his medicine two years ago and shuttered himself in his apartment until he starved to death. He was healthy in almost every other respect. He just couldn’t triumph over the demons in his head.

I’m not arguing that this is the fate of everyone battling mania and depression, but those with ailments that severely compromise their cognitive abilities aren’t forced to come clean. In many cases, you’d never know.

And that’s exactly why this entire adoption process is dubious. Some folks can mask their issues, while others like me are forced to wear them for the world to see. Or, more accurately, to read.

Doctor’s visits, medical records, chemo treatments — they’re all there to be accessed by whoever will decide whether I should be allowed to adopt. I’m not suggesting that they shouldn’t be, but I wouldn’t be trying to be an adoptive parent if I thought I was physically unable to take care of a kid.

I have no plans to adopt by myself, which might make my situation a bit more palatable. But my sweetie and I haven’t even started the process and already people are talking to me about the difficulties ahead. That’s no reason to quit, though. In fact, it will just spur this cancer slayer on.

January 25, 2010

deathbed divorce

File this one under Say Word! — my new designation for cancer news that is downright unbelievable or bizarre.

The man himself

Word around the blogosphere is that actor Dennis Hopper, who is losing his battle to prostate cancer, is filing for divorce from his wife of 13 years. When the story broke last week, Hopper promptly wished his soon-to-be-ex the best but said he only wants to be surrounded by loved ones in the days ahead.

The wife’s friends are calling it a slap in the face. They claim Hopper wants to cut her out of his will before he kicks the bucket.

I have to admit that when I first heard the news, I thought it sounded heartless, even rash. I’ve heard of deathbed conversions. Even deathbed confessions. But a deathbed divorce? Well, that’s kinda of gangsta.

But then again, maybe it’s not. Maybe it’s a gutsy move more of us would admire if only we’d dig below the surface.

As is usually the case surrounding breakups, there’s likely more to the story. But leave it to those Access Hollywood types, who reported the “astonishing news,” to peg Hopper as some cruel and spiteful dead man walking.

Fortunately, I’ve taken the liberty of offering my unconfirmed yet expert theory in defense of the actor’s decision.

Hopper was diagnosed with cancer last year. His wife — his fifth by the way— stood by his side during the difficult time. A noble woman indeed. But there’s nothing like cancer to test the very core of a relationship.

A lot of couples don’t make it, as my boyfriend’s friend was kind enough to remind me on New Year’s Eve. To be fair, he speaks from experience. His ex-wife is a survivor, and her battle with the beast partly led to their demise. After they split up, he looked up statistics on how many married cancer patients wind up divorcing. Forty percent, according to some studies.

Initially, I was taken aback when he shared his unpleasant facts so soon after we counted down to midnight. But I realize now that he was just lamenting the breakup of his marriage.

Plenty of other couples though vow never to let each other go after cancer. In fact, I know more married survivors than I do divorced ones.

But what about the gray area? That in-between place where life rarely fits into neatly defined packages. This could be where Hopper dwells. In the gray space, there’s no right or wrong, good or bad, mean or nice. Here, once-healthy relationships sometimes run their course — even for cancer patients who have more yesterdays than they do tomorrows.

What I find most interesting about Hopper’s decision is that it challenges almost everything we’ve come to believe about living out one’s final days. Most of us grew up with images of the grieving spouse at the bedside, comforted by family and friends. So it’s a shocker to witness Hopper call a time-out late in the game and then change his lineup. Furthermore, we expect that when there is a breakup, it’s the healthy person who leaves the sick one, not the other way around.

Whatever the reasons for Hopper’s divorce, his notion of “loved one” no longer has room for his former spouse. It’s a bold move for sure, one I’m not convinced I could follow.

Chances are though he’s motivated by something far less sinister than hurting his wife. He could simply be grateful for the time he has left and plans to use it wisely. Or he may just want to be happy, no matter how bad the press.

Clearly, he refuses to let cultural norms dictate how he rolls. And why should he? Even in the face of a sobering prognosis, life is always there to be lived. The key is to do it with no regrets.

‘’

January 12, 2010

health care hangover

Watching the health care bill make its last rounds is like being at a New Year’s bash a few hours too long. At first, it’s all fun and excitement. But after the height of the celebration, when all the optimism of what’s to come has grown faint, it feels like a big, fat drag.

I was all hyped, for example, about universal coverage. As far as I’m concerned, there are times when the government has to ensure that resources are distributed equitably. And health care is just one such issue.

No matter, though. When conservatives cried foul, the president quickly ditched the idea for the seemingly more palatable public option, which was in and then it was out, and then it was in again and now it’s out.

Who can keep up? It’s difficult to figure out which reform is actually part of the reform. And am I the only one who feels like the entire debate has gone from energizing to energy draining? These days, health care reminds me of last week’s hangover: heavy, tiresome and short on fun.

In the latest non-progress surrounding the bill, the Senate race in Massachusetts is closer than Democrats expected. The party is in danger of losing its majority, which it needs to push health care legislation through. A surprise win for the GOP in Ted Kennedy’s old seat would no doubt be a setback for the Dems. In turn, that would likely delay the bill further, which translates into critical setbacks for me and many others.

You see, I’m one of those Americans who would be denied insurance coverage because of my preexisting condition, even if I pay for it out of pocket. My medical history sends up clouds of black smoke to carriers. But under the new health care bill, discriminating against folks based on health conditions would be illegal.

In the interim, a program like Medicare could offer a reprieve for people in my situation. Under the new bill, Medicare will be expanded to include Americans with serious diseases under the age of 65. These measures, however, take time to implement, and a languishing bill is only exasperating matters. According to a piece written by DNC Chairman Howard Dean, most Americans wouldn’t see the benefits of the bill until 2014.

A lot of good that’s doing for the uninsured or underinsured today.

The latest news out of Washington is that there will likely be another version of the health care bill before lawmakers agree on one. I’m feeling like they’ve had one too many already.