Now to the other thing: we're cancelling the IUI this cycle. We're still going to try with timed intercourse (how romantic that sounds, my husband pointed out) but we're not going to go through a week of scans and $600 worth of treatment.
Here's why: I suspected, and was correct, that I'm responding to the Clomid even slower this time. I'm one day further in the cycle than last time, but it took the tech ages to find the follie on the right side, which was 1cm, and the left was 1.1cm. I then asked Dr K a series of questions I had prepared before hand (I get flustered sometimes and forget to ask things.)
Q: How am I responding?
A: Slowly, we need to wait more.
Q: Am I responding slower than last time?
Q: The thing is, the IUI is kind of expensive, so what do you think about waiting and trying timed intercourse this cycle, and then injections next time?
A: That is also an option...
Q: What was my husband's motility before treatment last time?
A: 60%, which is in the upper-normal range
We talked a bit more, and I decided to convert this to a medicated timed cycle, rather than the full IUI. As you can probably tell, I had been thinking about it this week while I was away. Given that the issue is probably my fallopian tubes, and my husband's motility is good without treatment, if I'm not really responding to the Clomid, it seems like a waste of time and money to go through all the hassle of an IUI this time around.
I mentioned this all to my husband last night, and he agreed with me. I wanted to wait and see how I had responded before making any real decisions, but I was determined to be brave rather than continue with an expensive cycle when the chances aren't really that much higher (or rather no one is able to tell me whether the chances are any higher) than Clomid with timed intercourse.
We're feeling good about this decision. While I'm not confident we'll get out bfp this way, I feel I've made the right decision financially. As Dr K said: 'cost-effective.'