![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Forever Pregnant Reactions? Am curious here.
ED: Based on responses; I got this from![[profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
jupitah.
1 comments, 2 more comments, 3 yet more comments, 4 extra comments and 5 commenty comments and and even more commenty comments.
Best article so far thank youmaharetr. "So why did the WaPo misrepresent this report? Hell, they don’t even mention how important birth control is to this entire project except in passing at the bottom of the article. I think it’s because it’s a political hot potato to openly admit that the two most important steps towards reducing the infant mortality rate and improving the health of newborns in general is to get health care to every woman and to empower women with the knowledge and tools they need to get pregnant only when they want to."
ED: Based on responses; I got this from
jupitah. 1 comments, 2 more comments, 3 yet more comments, 4 extra comments and 5 commenty comments and and even more commenty comments.
Best article so far thank you
maharetr. "So why did the WaPo misrepresent this report? Hell, they don’t even mention how important birth control is to this entire project except in passing at the bottom of the article. I think it’s because it’s a political hot potato to openly admit that the two most important steps towards reducing the infant mortality rate and improving the health of newborns in general is to get health care to every woman and to empower women with the knowledge and tools they need to get pregnant only when they want to."Tags:
no subject
I'd be far more comfortable considering the idea if they talked about men too. They talk about how women shouldn't smoke, (which is sane and reasonable to me, but for her health, not for a potential baby's) or drink in case of those first few weeks where you may not know you're pregnant. What about the father? Is he smoking? Doesn't do any good if she's never smoked but he chain-smokes around her. What about also pummelling the "health advice" at men so that each and every sperm has the bestest chance of getting to that egg? etc etc
no subject
For me, I'm going to have to partially go along with it because I can't afford to be eating high protein foods from 3 months before I concieve, so I have to be really careful. (I have PKU - phenylketornuia - which means I can't metabolise phenylalanine and have to have a low protein diet, even stricter if I'm pregnant or breastfeeding).
no subject
no subject
I am more than my reproductive organs! I am not a machine in wait for conception and procreation. I have an identity separate to any offspring i may or may not choose to bear.... my existence is not soley for that purpose.
This comes across very sensational, it in my mind reads less like a serious health reccomendation and more a device for creating controversy - and through that establishing a point of...
'doctor knows best', or it could also be viewed.... 'man knows best'.
Most women know their own bodies much better than this article gives credence to.
no subject
no subject
I think it's a silly idea to bring in official guidelines regarding this. Like as in dumb. I don't agree with it at all. Sure, if you want to get pregnant, then it's your choice as to whether you suddenly stop eating all these perfectly normal things (unless you have a condition that prevents you from.. whatever) to prepare your body for a possible conception (and be prepared, if you really like it, not to drink caffine for years if you have a problem conceiving...), then that's up to you.
me? sure, take folic acid, make sure you have vitamins and eat all your RDI of veges and stuff... like a normal person. personally, people are going to be drinking and what ever during the first few weeks of pregnancy, cause unless you're super intune with your body, you're not going to know you're pregnant for at least 14 days or so.
So, this would be a negative response to that. (sorry - I decided about this when a friend of mine decided to go on a pre-pregnancy diet, and I thought it was the stupidest idea eva. Just my opinion.
no subject
no subject
The value of a woman seems to be entirely dependant on ability to reproduce. It's another way of seeing human beings (women) as vessels in which to carry something that's actually important (babies). Related to this is the conception that we should only be interested in women's health as it relates to pregnancy and babies. I'm not averse to being concerned about weight, smoking, diabetes control etc. But I do find it abhorrent that we should only care about it for women who fertile. It's an extension of the sort of thinking that really riles me up in the abortion debate.
Even calling it preconception care scares me, because there is so obviously no interest in the health of the woman. It's not about us, it's about those things that are actually worth something - babies.
I don't ever want to live in the USA and be considered a thing, rather than a person.
no subject
From over here, it looks like there is a constant chipping away at all the parts of women that are not directly related to reproduction. I find the priveleging of the not-even-existing-yet child over the currently-real-and-liveing-a-life-thank-you woman to be absolutely abhorrent.
I am incredibly resentful of being considered a convenient womb, regardless of my own plans for life.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
But. Here's the thing. I can see Bush and his "religious" friends in powerful places taking it one step at a time from "you shouldn't do any of these things just in case" through to "we're gonna keep you constantly monitored, locked in a birthary as soon as you hit puberty". Sounds paranoid, but that's the way things happen.
But hey, at least it's America, land of the free. You may be a slave who's only purpose is to produce babies, but at least no-ones forcing you to wear a burkha.
Gah. I've not even begun to consider the other aspects of this, and already it pisses me off.
no subject
no subject
We could just do it to young black women - I mean they have a much greater risk of neonatal death.
no subject
What the article fails to mention is this: These standards will do no good, at all. Why? Because most of our infant mortality rate comes from lower-income areas, from minority populations. The 1993 infant mortality rate for whites was 6.8 in 1000. For blacks it's 16.5 in 1000. Why? Because these populations are (statistically) far, far less likely to have access to things like health care -- or even prenatal care -- that they can afford. So right off, you're missing a huge percentage of your target population.
Moreover, this is 'treating' -- if you can call it that -- a symptom, not a disease. The article mentions that 50% of all pregnancies are unplanned, and maybe it's just me, but I think that that's the biggest fucking problem, here. They want everyone to act like they might be impregnated at any minute, and moreover, they're unwilling to give people the knowledge or tools that might allow them to AVOID that.
This policy is, once again, encouraging health care providers to see women as nothing other than an incubator. No mention of their lives, how maybe you should try and keep your asthma in check because it can kill you -- no, no, do it for your hypothetical child! Furthermore, I have yet to hear of a child being hurt because their mother has asthma. Because the child has asthma and they can't afford medication, yes, all the time. But not because their mother had asthmatic complications when she was pregnant.
The worst part is, to me, that it sounds so reasonable. Who doesn't want to lower the infant mortality rate? I live right outside of Cleveland, where a year or two back, we had the same mortality rate as Guatemala. Please reread that: A city in the richest nation in the world had the same infant mortality rate as Guatemala, which is a third world country. Obviously, something needs to be done. But this -- this is not that thing.
I want to be seen as more than the sum of my reproductive system. It's certainly not like we value mothers or children in this country, and I remain very aware of the fact that while I chose to have my child, I have, on a daily basis, to prove to people that I'm more than that. I can't count the number of times that I've been dismissed by people asking to speak to my husband, or 'the child's father', or who have assumed that because I am (reasonably) young and have a child, I'll be unable to understand what they're saying.
For a long time, I got all my health care at a Planned Parenthood clinic. Sometimes it was fantastic, and sometimes it was awful, but I'll always be grateful to them for treating me like I was someone, like I was a person who deserved to be allowed to take care of her own body in the way that she saw fit. Not once was I lecture on the morality (or lack thereof) of sexual activity -- instead, it was stressed over and over again that it should be safe, that it should be consentual. Every time I left I was given handfuls of condoms, pamphlets on STDs, pamphlets on breast exams, information on rape and rape crisis centres, and information on different kinds of birth control, including the morning after pill. Every time. I was fifteen when I started going there, and I'd been having fairly regular sex for a year at that point. The horrifying thing is that had I not gone to Planned Parenthood, I never would have got any of that information -- it was never presented in school, it wasn't talked about at home. And while I did a lot of stupid, stupid things when I was younger, but I can tell you right now that had I not been given that information, I would have done stuff that was even stupider.
The idea that the government is trying to prevent this information from reaching people, the idea that my daughter might, at thirteen, be given information on how to keep her body ready to have a baby but not information on contraception, is absolutely chilling. It also seems to be exactly where this country is headed, and I don't -- I'm not convinced, anymore, that we can stop it.
no subject
Thank you for being passionate, articulate and wonderful.
no subject
no subject
Particularly to do with demographics.
I think the washington post article was sensationalist and a little bizarre.
I didn't realise so many women would take it an attack on personal freedom.
I'm fascinated.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Lets all just have Folic Acid implants ...sheesh
Men to consider themselves 'pre-grumpy old bastards'
George Stott, from the Department of Health, said that 'many men suddenly discover that they have turned into a grumpy old bastard, without adequate preparation'.
The Government's recommendations suggest that men take the time to comment about volume of their neighbour's music, and complain loudly on public transport about the low standards of youth today.
Dr Valerie Pinger, of the National Institute for Lower Moral Standards, has recommended that men initialise an action plan of preparation to be undertaken prior to their 60th birthday. Dr Pinger explained that 'Research shows that many males have the potential to be grumpy old bastards by the age of 25, but most do not recognise this until years later'.
The social cost of unplanned grumpiness includes a projected decline in the level of patronising behaviour undertaken by adults towards people under the age of 16.
'Young people have come to rely on this sort of criticism in order to define themselves', said Dr Pinger, 'We ask that men make an effort to complain a little more now, as preparation for their future'.
The Government recommendations point to the strong tradition of grumpiness in Australian culture, and conclude that with adequate public support, Australian men can continue to complain with the best in the world.
Dr. Robert McLaughlin
Re: Men to consider themselves 'pre-grumpy old bastards'