It’s OK for Albert Garland to Hate His Unborn Twins

He fears the havoc and sleeplessness that two infants will create. So why the pro-life backlash?

Albert Garland hates his unborn twins. And I, for one, can’t blame him.

Aside from that, the first thing you should know about Garland is that, well, “Albert Garland” isn’t his real name: It’s a pseudonym he adopted … so that he could write, for Babble.com, about how much he and his wife are dreading the arrival of their unborn twin boys.

Really.

Our fear is not the new parent fear of the unknown. It’s the smart, informed fear of the known. Our biggest nightmare is that we’ll have colic again, or double colic. This time around, we’re counting down — not like expected parents but like cancer patients with only months to live. Enjoy life while you can, for soon it’s double the diapers, double the feedings. Half of zero sleep is … less than zero?

So tell me how this isn’t going to suck.

Now, a few other things you should know about Albert and his wife:

• They got the twin boys because they were trying to have a single girl, to balance out the boy they already had. They ended up using a fertility clinic to achieve their pregnancy—so complaining about the results is admittedly the churlish “white people problems” kind of thing that will, naturally, make people hate you.

• The couple considered aborting one of the twins—hoped for a reason to do so, in fact, but didn’t get one. So they’re going to carry the twins to term and then, it appears, raise them. Garland’s essay appears to be, well, a rather high-profile, semi-public act of venting before the getting down to work and being a parent.

Naturally, the piece has provoked a bit of a backlash—mostly, it seems, from the pro-life right.

“What a small, contemptible, inhumane vision this pseudonymously named Albert Garland has,” former Philadelphian Rod Dreher wrote at The American Conservative. “You know what, Albert Garland? It’s going to suck far, far worse for those poor boys. I wish you and that princess wife of yours would give those babies up for adoption to a home where they will be welcomed and cherished. Your think your punishment is having twins you don’t want in the house. Your real punishment is having to be you.”

You’d think Albert Garland is the first parent to acknowledge that raising kids isn’t all sweetness and candy corn. Sometimes it even sucks.

Me? I think Albert Garland is going to be alright. I think his kids are going to be alright. And I also think he’s right to be, well, scared of what’s coming. I remember well the first year of parenting just one infant—the lack of sleep turned those months into a bit of a waking hell. And then it was over. Parenting is hard. Parenting an infant is really hard. Doubling that up—as my Philly Mag colleague Steve Volk has noted—can be really, really hard. Seeing that experience come toward you, knowing what it will be like, must be a bit like sliding across the ice toward an oncoming 18-wheeler: You have a lot of time to anticipate the inevitable pain.

It’s harder to see through that dread and anticipate how much love you’re going to find as a result.

The thing that perplexes me about the reaction of pro-lifers is this: Garland and his wife made the choice pro-lifers would have them make. Yes, they had moments where they thought about having an abortion, but in the end they’re still choosing to carry the kids to term. Why is that not enough for now? Why not extend Garland and his wife support for the choice they’ve made, acknowledge the rough road ahead, and offer support for that journey as well? Why the dripping contempt? Why not a little sympathy?

Mr. Garland: You have my sympathy. Parenting can be a real pain.  Those twins are going to be hard to manage for a few months, and possibly forever. Fear and anger are natural reactions to the prospect of sleepless nights for months on end. To borrow a phrase: It gets better.

Humans have been parenting for millennia. You live through the rough times, love the hell out of your kids—sometimes discovering it in completely unexpected times and situations—and in the end wonder how you survived it all. Which is what I will predict will happen to you. You hate your unborn twins now. I suspect that won’t always be the case. Good luck.

Be respectful of our online community and contribute to an engaging conversation. We reserve the right to ban impersonators and remove comments that contain personal attacks, threats, or profanity, or are flat-out offensive. By posting here, you are permitting Philadelphia magazine and Metro Corp. to edit and republish your comment in all media.

  • http://twitter.com/italiancitygirl Rita Colasuonno

    I so agree with the blogger and you, Joel. It does suck and no one around me-never had the nerve to admit it and yes it does get better or at least I am hanging onto that thought!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=571634606 Joel Mathis

      Thanks for sharing, Rita.

      • Michelle McAlpin

        Funny how you only appreciate the comment that agrees with your article.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=571634606 Joel Mathis

          The article’s a few days old, Michelle. I hadn’t seen the others until just now. Jeepers, lighten up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/teresa.georgesargent Teresa George-Sargent

    its a good thing he is using a fake name, that protects him from “me”.

  • http://www.facebook.com/hbuell1 Heyde Buell

    Perhaps because he admits they resent the three year old son they already have. Perhaps because knowing they did not enjoy parenting him they still went ahead with pursuing having another child. Perhaps because they actually believed their willpower alone would make that child a daughter and that they are so self righteous they feel entitled to be offended that it was actually a boy, two boys! Yet they paid to have those two boy placed within the wife. He complains about their one bedroom, cramped living conditions now. This wasn’t considered before paying thousands to have multiple babies placed in the wife? He actually stated that him and the wife admitted they don’t like the children. thats a far cry from simply feeling normal pre parenting stress. Their attitudes, assumptions, and entitlement attitude is ridiculous!

  • http://twitter.com/KathyMartini Kathy Martini

    Douchery at it’s finest!!! For real !!What a bunch of self indulgent jerk offs they don’t deserve those kids and those poor babies don’t deserve their selfish creepy parents!!

  • Jes

    I’m glad to read this article. I wish the commentators railing against this guy all over the web would simply realize that he’s human and being honest in his feelings right now, which are influenced in large part by fear. It IS a huge pending life change for this family and he’s got to wait awhile to see how it all plays out. Sounds like he had a rough go around with his first, and simply put, he’s scared. I would be interested in hearing follow up to what his thoughts are months or years after their birth when they’re family is more settled and adjusted.

  • chatoyante

    I’m fiercely pro-choice, as are most of my friends, and I we all agree that these two have no business having any children. They have no empathy, no perspective, and no understanding of basic biology. Guess what, it’s possible to have naturally occurring multiples! It’s even more common when you are “older”! And you’re somehow “angry” when you chose to do a procedure where it’s even more common?

    Being a parent is hard — multiples or no. They made the choice to do it again, despite not even really seeming to like the kid they have because he has the nerve to annoyingly “cry” to push their buttons–telling themselves “it’s for our son!” Uh, no. It’s for you. Suck it up, or better yet, put all the kids up for adoption so that they aren’t being raised by sociopathic narcissists. Their worst nightmare is colic? I shudder to think what will happen if the kids are born with special needs (or need to be in the NICU, since they may be preemies). Even more insultingly, they compare their situation to having terminal cancer!

    Add that to ignorant — “Machiavellian” generally refers to political intrigue, not whatever the hell they meant. I honestly don’t know. Like, “well, we’ll admit to being monsters, but we’re not THAT monstrous…”