I have a very pessimistic RE.
It's rather unfortunate, though I believe that it is inherent in his personality and may not necessarily be indicative of our potential for success with assisted reproductive technology.
Case in point -
I had an appointment today with him to further discuss my upcoming cycle (did I mention that we received the coveted "Call" off of the clinic's waiting list last week and we are poised to begin another IVF in early June?) Things weren't sitting well with me about what we were about to do - based upon the nurse's description of how my cycle was to evolve, it didn't sound like I was doing an Antagonist with Estrogen Priming cycle, the way I had originally thought. A few clicks of the old mouse and some posting to Dr. Hannam in Toronto helped me to learn that what was planned for me was far from the Antagonist/Estrogen Priming plan. Hence, the visit to my own RE to find out what the f*ck was going on...
It turns out that he has something even more special planned for us - we are being put on the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol with Estrogen Priming. This got me excited, as I had read about this at length and knew that it has proven to be quite effective with women who were poor responders. Pioneered by Dr. Geoffery Sher at the Sher Institute for Reproductive Medicine, the focus behind this protocol is in improving the environment that the egg grows in through promoting estrogen dominance in the ovary (read more here). Sounds great, right? So where does the pessimism come in?
Despite the fact that my RE is placing me on this protocol, he made it very clear that he doesn't necessarily believe that it will improve our chances - but that he was doing it because I had asked for it. Wait a minute, now - who's the doctor here?? If I had known that I could call my own shots like this, things would have been waaaay different waaaay earlier on!
In any case, my perception is that he is being negative because this protocol is relatively new to him (I don't believe he's done this with anyone else before). He said that there are some things about the protocol that seem unconventional to him. Clearly he is not a risk taker. Despite his penchant for repeatedly saying "This is what you've asked for..." I wanted to have a clear understanding that I wasn't totally off the beaten track (his unwillingness to assume accountability for making the decision to try this protocol was fine with me, as long as I was assured that it was the right direction to go in...) so I flat out asked him to tell me if this protocol was the wrong thing to try. He indicated that it wasn't - that it wouldn't hurt to go in this direction, that it did incorporate the antagonist protocol (which he originally recommended) and that it would allow us to say that we had tried everything. That was all that I needed.
I have written to Dr. Sher at SIRM to ask for his input into my situation - here's hoping that he writes back to me. Poor guy must have thousands of women writing him each day! I just wanted to hear some optimistic news about the journey that I am about to embark on. Everyone could use a little good news now and then, right?