Earthy birthy mama

Bodily and spiritual integrity.

2006-03-28T19:54:00.000-05:00

- monday -
I just heard from another friend who has had a baby - another c-section. I don't know the details around how or why, and I'm very glad that they're all doing well, but it still depresses the hell out of me. Out of the last six babies born to people I know, four have been c-sections - and one of those vaginal births was my friend Heide, who had a homebirth and was never going to set foot in a hospital so it almost doesn't count in this case. In addition her child was posterior with an acynclitic head which means if she had been touched by a doctor it would have meant an automatic c-section. Yet she pushed that baby out herself. Go figure. If someone can tell me that surgery is only a "last resort" to the American medical establishment I certianly won't believe them. Hopefully at the very least my newest parent friends are nursing. I'll keep my fingers crossed for that.

I've been thinking a lot about our next child seeing as we've been allowing nature to take its course lately. I'm really on the fence about it, I mean, I'm SO averse to having another child torn from my body that I'm considering not even going to a midwife for prenatal care at all. Maybe that sounds insane to some people but I can't think of anything a medical professional can tell me that I don't already know. Heather really brought it to light for me, when she mentioned that there was nothing that was going to cause her to terminate a pregnancy anyway, so why get tests done?

I'm sure I'll get a whole mess of negative comments about this but I don't care. I already have a very healthy lifestyle (weight notwithstanding) and I know what I need to do to carry a healthy baby to term - or past that point, in Michael's case - and I know that my body can birth a baby even though it was violated the first time around. It's been 2-1/2 years and my uterus is as strong as it's ever going to be. I'm also not getting any younger, so the sooner the better.

The only things I can think of that would make prenatal care necessary is preventing things like eclampsia. Even so, there are signs of something this drastic and I'm sure I could do my own checkups to tell if there were something awry.

*Sigh* I don't know. Part of me still wants that "professional" to tell me that everything is okay, that I'm doing well. But I am so, so, so afraid of being railroaded into losing control over my life again. I'm even starting to question whether or not Michael's c-section was even necessary...could I have birthed him vaginally? I just don't know. I really wonder. I have to admit that everything surrounding his birth was handled as well as could be expected, and I received a huge amount of respect and care from the surgeon and the hospital staff, so I couldn't have asked for a better medical birth. However, it was still a medical birth and there is where the problem lies.

It's funny, the one thing that rings through my mind every time I think about my last pregnancy was that nurse telling me, "You read too much," when I called her with a question. I mean, honestly, what the fuck is that about? I READ too much? I'm sorry! How is it that doctors learn their trade? By reading! So was she telling me that by feeling responsible for my own health I was somehow infringing on the medico's hallowed ground?! Man, that pisses me right the hell off. I really wish I could remember her name so I could call her and bitch her out. I read too much. Please. It seems to me that a lot of the establishment likes their sheeple ignorant, so they can tell them what to do and they'll follow without question.

In regards to my last entry, I got a few comments saying I was judging that new mother's decisions. Not at all. I'm angry with the medical establishment, which is consistently feeding their patients incorrect information, or at the very best partial information slanted toward the almighty dollar. It's the new parents that get caught up in this shit and most of the time, they don't even realize it. They want to do the best for their child, and they are, but they're only given a very limited view of what is out there. THAT is my problem. And sure, every time I hear about another mother who has had life-threatening surgery, and every time I hear about another mother who can't or won't breastfeed their child, it bums me out. I am entitled to my feelings. I don't get in their faces about it because they're doing the best they can, just like I am, just like anyone else is, but I also feel that women are being short-changed on a worldwide level and it disgusts me.

Anyway, I'm getting all disgruntled so I'm going to change the subject.

Overheard

2006-03-23T20:52:00.000-05:00

While out at a restaurant last night we saw a young couple across the room and the woman was pregnant. I found myself watching her jealously. Toward the end of our meal, our waitress was talking to them about their baby and we overheard that this woman was told she was "too late" and that the baby was "too big" so she was going in the next day for a c-section (!!!!!) Actually, I didn't even hear that part, I was helping kidlet with his water when I heard daddy Michael groan. "What's wrong?" I mouthed at him, and he whispered back, "She's having a c-section tomorrow." I eavesdropped some more and that's when I heard all that bullshit that doctors tell women to scare them into having life-threatening surgery. "They could tell by the ultrasound that the baby is 9-10 pounds!" she said, astonished. First of all, most of the time they're WRONG, and second of all, women are perfectly able to birth a 10-pound baby. For pete's sake. Hearing she and her husband talk about this, so self-assured when I know for a fact that they have NO IDEA as this is their first child and are just parroting what they were told, made my heart sink and I literally felt sick.

I don't get it, I just don't get it. I hate the OB practice in America today. I can't believe that doctors can get away with telling the same lies and deceptions to women and are never called out or stopped. They're modern-day gods here in the United States, and they leave no room for nature to do what nature does.

I had to stop listening because I wanted to run over there, take her by the shoulders, and say right into her face, "WHY are you being so naive?!" The sad fact is that she probably read What to Expect When You're Expecting, given to her by her doctor's office, and never read anything else. WTEWYE is one of the worst books I could imagine giving someone. I read it myself, thinking it was as it professes to be the "#1 resource" and didn't question much of what I read even though so much of it seemed needlessly scary and patronizing. It wasn't until I read Henci Goer and Ina May Gaskin that I realized that women aren't being told the whole story. Why would doctors do that? Surgeons and hospitals make a heck of a lot more money out of c-section surgery and the resultant hospital stay than they would out of a woman giving birth at home, or even a vaginal birth in the hospital without medication.

I'm so, so, glad that Michael feels the same way about these things as I do. The fact that he felt sad when listening to the woman talk about her c-section like she was talking about her brand of fabric softener says a lot to me, and I feel more confident than ever about birthing our next child at home.

In a way I'm sad that my mother is gone and on the other hand I'm glad, because I know she would give me no end to grief about choosing to homebirth after having had a c-section. Part of me wishes I could do it and she'd see that I'm not crazy. That can't be helped, I suppose.

In other health news, my older brother called me last night and told me that the awful pains in his foot weren't from spraining his fractured ankle, but from gout. I looked up gout and it makes perfect sense that he would have it - he quit smoking cigarettes recently but before that smoked a LOT, he is overweight and doesn't exercise, and his diet is abhorrent. Lots and lots of meat and fat and processed foods. He said the doctor had given him a prescription, and I asked if they had talked to him about his diet and exercise. "Yeah, yeah," he said dismissively. He did admit that gout was "an old man's disease" so hopefully it will be enough motivation for him to actually do something about his habits. I tend to doubt it, though...this is the guy who always "gets his money's worth" when going to all-you-can-eat buffets. Man likes his meat, and he doesn't much care what quality it is as long as it's flesh of some sort.

Well, time will tell, I suppose.

Tea, and what comes of that.

2006-01-20T14:32:00.000-05:00

I just spent a rather pleasant half hour messing around with my tea stuff. I've been buying bulk herbs, both for cooking and for tea, and tonight I decided to try some new mixes and see how they taste.

(I also didn't forget that I owe Parliament some samples.)

Of course I made an entire Ball jar of my old standby, red raspberry leaf, nettle, peppermint, and lavender. I owe a big thanks to Heide for introducing me to this mixture, I just love it. I give it to whoever comes over to the house, and I have a jelly jar full at work that I've shared with one of my coworkers and she liked it, too.

I wanted to emulate my beloved Herba Tussin but didn't have all the ingredients, so I sort of hacked together my own version containing marshmallow root, spearmint, lemongrass, echinacea, and licorice root. It turned out really, really good. I'm drinking a mug of it right now. It doesn't even need any sweetner, the marshmallow and licorice give it a really nice flavor. I'm hoping to go to the local health food store tomorrow and get some slippery elm bark, that would be nice to add for its throat soothing properties.

Then I wanted to make a love tea as I had some hibiscus and it's just a gorgeous color when brewed (hmm, yarn? :). I mixed hibiscus blossoms, jasmine flowers, rosehips, and a little peppermint. I discovered that less rosehips is more, that too much makes the tea bitter. This would be really good with some honey and turned a beautiful pomegranite color.

Lastly, I wanted to make a really different tea that didn't taste at all flowery or minty, and would be good for colds (being sick I'm sort of in that mode right now). I mixed alfalfa leaf, echinacea, lemon balm, and powdered ginger root. Woo! That's some good stuff! It'll put hair on your chest. It's definitely got a kick. I really liked this one.

The oddest thing is that I simply stood at the counter and mixed things into my big glass measuring cup, choosing ingredients based on what seemed to go best together. After I made my mixes and taste-tested them, I looked up the individual herbs in my Cunningham's Encyclopedia of Magical Herbs, and then the ones that weren't in there I looked up online. I was surprised to find that the things I chose were extremely accurate for the use I intended them for. I had no idea that lemongrass and ginger are both good for colds, yet they just seemed to go with the echinacea when I was coming up with the blend. The same goes for the hibiscus, jasmine, and rose hips, all are used for attracting love and enhancing lust. I was just thinking a flowery tea would be really nice and the color would be attractive, something you would drink in the dark with someone you love.

While I blended the herbs, I got to do a lot of thinking. Cooking tends to have that effect on me, it's like my mind gets a break and can concentrate on other things while my hands do their work.

I'm starting to feel more like myself again - meaning, more in touch with myself again. It's hard to describe. Before Michael was born I always felt very much like I lived close to the earth, that I could be described as a pagan though I never belonged to a circle, I never observed the holidays through ritual, I didn't define myself by any belief system. Yet I always did things to put myself more in rhythm with the earth, so to speak, and felt a strong kinship with nature.

I've always been very good in the kitchen and feel best when I can provide something good to eat or drink to those I love. When I was a vegetarian I remember having a group of friends come to my apartment for Thanksgiving and made a huge feast, including a beautiful turkey which I never even tasted. Just having everyone there, eating and enjoying one anothers' company warmed my heart.

At some point I identified with the 'kitchen witch' persona as that is something I do well and enjoy. Preparing food and drink, for me, is like giving a part of myself to be ingested by others to help make them strong. I love to bake for people and will think lots of loving thoughts about them while I am doing it. So I guess that's sort of me.

Since Michael's birth by c-section I've had a really hard time feeling connected to the earth any longer...I've worked hard to instill in him a respect and love for nature, teaching him to thank the plants we harvest from and the trees whose leaves and acorns we gather, to thank the animals whose flesh we consume. Yet my heart has never been completely in it since the time my child was surgically removed from my body, since my failure as a woman. My inability to push out my own child shook me to my very foundations as this is what I was built to do, what I worked myself up to prepare for, and then ultimately it spiraled out of my control and was no longer mine. When my son's umbilical cord was cut by the surgeon it was as if my own tether to the earth was severed at the same time. I felt as if I floated upward and away, like a balloon on a string that has been let go.

It's been a long time since that happened yet I still feel some of the pain like it was yesterday. I spend a lot of time looking at my incision, worrying that should I become pregnant again that my body will split open like an overripe fruit. I know rationally that it's not likely to happen, but thinking about the secret inside of me being sliced open and turned inside out makes me feel very insecure. I think about my bladder being lifted out of my body and set on my groin, of my intestines being pushed aside and the temple of my uterus, still pulsing with contractions I couldn't feel, being parted by steel and laid open to the air and the light.

The incision itself is so small and light now, it's almost as if it weren't there. Yet there is no feeling directly on the scar. Last night I tried pinching it to see if there were some sensation, there was none. Just above and below the incision the skin is confused - if I pinch it, I feel the pain about an inch to the right. I don't understand that - nerves gone haywire and not where they're supposed to be. Touching that area feels more uncomfortable than if it had no sensation at all because it just feels wrong. The thing that's the worst about it is that area used to be one of my most sensitive and erogenous zones, and now I can't even stand to touch it myself when I'm in the shower, much less let my husband touch it in desire.

I know that this can't be true, but I swear I can feel the incision in my uterus itself. I think I can feel a raised ridge of scar tissue, though I know rationally this isn't possible, especially considering what a great job the surgeon did sewing me up, my scar is barely visible so I'm sure the one on the inside is much the same way. If I palpate my abdomen my uterus aches. I don't know why.

Having my insides cut open has knocked me out of balance with nature, I don't feel like a natural being any longer. I used to get really bent out of shape about getting fillings in my teeth, and getting crowns while in college for two molars that had been poorly filled when I was a child was hard for me to take - you only get one body in this life, and with every concession and change we make to it, that's what we have to live with. I am loathe to make any changes to my body. Now that I've had surgery I know I can never go back, never be a woman who has not had a c-section. It's who I am. I can never go back to the birthing center as I'm a 'high risk', and I can never go to the hospital to have a baby as I would be hooked up to machines and forced to undergo a battery of tests and indignities that would likely result in another c-section. In other words, I am no longer normal. I am something else. I have to accept the fact that even if I do have another child that I may never know the sensation of birthing them myself. That's probably one of the hardest things to face, that I may never realize my destiny as a mother.

In any case, I'll get off this topic as you can see it makes me go on and I get maudlin thinking about it.

This little exercise tonight, mixing tea and feeling like I was able to instinctually put the things together that belong, made me feel as if I'm starting to find my way back. I may never be complete and I can't change the past, but I can try to make peace with it.

BUTT!

2005-12-20T22:02:00.000-05:00

Here we are, talking about junk again. Honestly, though, I'm enjoying the conversation this whole thing has opened up. Ha ha, excuse the pun!

Re: The word "vagina" rather than "vulva" - we use vagina as a shorthand for the whole female package for the time being, mostly because saying "vulva" is hard for kids and not as recognizable to adults ("Whut? You got a car that yer husband don't?"). My friend Heide brought this up with me as she has a daughter and therefore talks about vaginas as much as we talk about penises in our male-centric household. We both wondered: Should we say "vulva"? Should we try to explain all the individual parts by their names? Our kids were hardly vocal at that point, their repertoires consisted of "mine", "bye" and "kitty". We agreed that "vagina" was distinct enough until they were older.

Once kidlet is older I plan to explain the whole deal. Fortunately for me "penis" is what dangles out there, and though we've gotten him to identify his scrotum, it doesn't rank as high up there for recognition as penis does.

In fact, and this just occurred to me, but on Saturday I found Michael and Thomi their own wooden anatomy puzzles for xmas - a girl for Thomi, and a boy for Michael. The girl puzzle has a tiny uterus and ovaries, and the boy has testes, look at the closeups on those links. They're wicked cute. I figure we'll end up swapping them back and forth between the kids...or even swapping body parts! Cool!

So, there you go.

When he's older I totally want to get him those clear plastic models that you put together with all the body parts inside...what were they called...I wanted one so bad when I was a kid.

Ah ha! I found it! The Visible Man and Visible Woman. Cooool!

Maybe I'll just get them for myself ;)

This morning we had a little conversation - I was in a bathrobe while getting kidlet dressed and he spied my pubic hair.

"Mommy 'gina?"

"That's right, Mommy has a vagina."

"Where Mommy penis?"

"Mommy doesn't have a penis, she's a girl. Boys have penises."

"Michael 'gina?"

"No, Michael has a penis, not a vagina."

"Daddy 'gina?"

"No, Daddy has a penis, too - Michael and Daddy are boys, Mommy is a girl."

"Mommy BUTT?" (said with a big grin)

"Yes, Mommy has a butt. We all have butts."

"Daddy butt? Michael butt?"

"That's right!"

"Hahaha! BUTT!"

Because, as you know, "butt" is a funny word all the time.

Here is your excercise for today.

Vagina vagina vagina vagina vagina vagina vagina

Say it with me!

Penis penis penis penis penis penis penis penis

Ohm.

You'd think it was all about the penis...

2005-12-19T22:01:00.000-05:00

...and, strangely, most of my comments I've gotten are from women.

Allow me to address the "penis comment" from my last entry.

(I predict that I'm going to get some strange-ass links to this site from search engines. I see shit like "naked toddler" and "kids naked butts" - they make me want to puke. Pervs can take my personal invitation to fuck off.)

We taught and continue to teach Michael the proper words for what things are. No "pee-pees" or "wee-wees" or "privates" - the kid's got a penis and a scrotum and eventually he'll realize he has a foreskin, too, and that his daddy doesn't have one but they're both still boys.

He knows that Uncle Leonard, Uncle Keith, Grandpa, and Thomi's Daddy have penises, too. Sometimes when asked he'll even declare that he has "nine penises!" If that were true, we'd make a million bucks on the freak show circuit, but as it is he has only the one, and that's just fine.

He also knows that Mommy has a vagina, as do all other girls, Mommies, and Grandmas. He knows where they're located though he doesn't know really what they do, and he doesn't know a thing about labia or clitorises. Then again, that's pretty much on-par with most men these days so I'm not too concerned about that at this juncture.

He thinks he has a baby in his belly. He knows that babies come out through the vagina, but he still thinks he has a baby in there even if he doesn't have a vagina personally.

He knows that Mommy has breasts, though he likes to call them "boobies" and sometimes "Buddha" when Thomi's around (that's her pet name for them). He knows that milk only comes out of mommies' breasts, and that Daddy's are too hairy to nurse from. He claims that boys have coffee and ice cream coming out of their breasts, and iced tea comes from his belly button. He's also been known to profess that Mommy's milk tastes like ice cream, which I take to be a compliment.

He knows that cows have udders though we'll call them "boobie" for short. Calves drink milk from their mommies' boobies. He thinks this is unendingly amusing, as it is when cows poop or pee. He always says, "WHOA!"

I've never felt awkward about talking to my son candidly about his body and our bodies - we all see one another naked on a daily basis so it's not like there's some big mystery. He likes to watch us use the toilet and always offers to wipe...though it seems weird, it makes perfect sense as we're always looking up his ass and making a big deal out of wiping it. We even exclaim over poop and pee, its size, shape, color, consistency - and when it falls into the potty we even sing and dance over it, so why wouldn't he have the same curiosity about it?

I guess to me calling a penis "pee-pee" or a vagina "privates" would be the same as calling your heart a "thumpa-thumpa" or your eye a "see-see." It's all just pieces and parts. The first few times you say "vagina" conversationally in public might be a little uncomfortable, but you'll quickly get used to it.

And with that, I need to go pee-pee.

Negative.

2005-11-29T12:01:00.001-05:00

Not being pregnant isn't bothering me at all. Michael even asked me, "Are you sure you're okay? You're not sad?" "Hell no!" I said, "It's really not a big deal. It'll happen eventually." I really do feel that way, too. In a way I feel a little relieved, as I can work out and not worry about losing weight being bad for a bebe. I keep telling myself that there is a chance in hell I could actually get to the gym before leaving for work each day...but we'll see how that goes. If it doesn't go well, the gym is open until 8pm. I need to get out of this funk that I've been in since Mom died and get my considerable ass to the gym.

Of course, seeing the finale of The Biggest Loser tonight didn't help. I was all like, "Damn!" and then I felt all like, "Damn." It made me wonder why Caroline Rhea wasn't working out, being the host of the show...she's a little chunky and I wonder if the contestants look at her and think, "Pfft, she only has to lose twenty pounds, the lazy ass."

Hey, maybe I'll apply for the next show! Yeah! Wouldn't that be a gas. Now that I know I'm not preggers maybe I will...of course, I'll do it tomorrow when the NBC website isn't down from so many people hitting it at once.

And of course, just when I start to wonder where my period is and I haven't had a real and true period since October 2002, I get home today and there it is. Sheesh. Why couldn't it have started yesterday and saved me the pee stick?

Busy day.

2005-11-29T12:01:00.000-05:00

Have to go to Portland to pee in a cup for my pre-employment drug test, go to the daycare to get Michael signed up, and then to his new naturopath for an initial consultation.

Since I was peeing in a cup anyway, I decided to test and it came out negative. Oh well, I guess we'll just keep on trying, and on the bright side at least I don't have to feel at all guilty about taking this job now!

Still wondering where my period is, though.

More later, kiddos, after I get through my laundry list of appointments.

Hrm.

2005-11-21T12:01:00.000-05:00

It's weird...last week I definitely felt pregnant. Recently, though, I haven't felt pregnant at all. No, I still haven't pissed on a stick, I'm waiting to do it, but it's weird that all of a sudden I don't feel anything that I did before. I wonder if it was just gas. Ha! We're still going for it, though, so it's only a matter of time.

We've asked kidlet if he wants a baby brother or sister and I don't think he completely gets it yet. His mind still works in absolutes. However, now he goes around telling people that HE has a baby in his belly. He says, "Michael baby belly," and lifts his shirt to point at his own stomach. It's very cute. When we're in public and I want to hold his hand so he doesn't run off, he yanks his arm away and curls it protectively around his belly, saying, "No hurt Michael baby!" Weirdness. He also acts like my taking his hand hurts him terribly, but that I chalk up to being two. So independent, he doesn't want to be carried, doesn't want to hold hands, wants to walk on his own thankyouverymuch.

In any case, I think he's getting the concept, only he's not getting the fact that it would be ME with the baby in my belly and not HIM.

Monday, Monday...

2005-11-14T12:01:00.000-05:00

In other-other-other news, the last three days I have definitely felt pregnant. I still haven't pissed on a stick to confirm it, but there's no refuting the hard softball feeling I'm getting in my uterine area. The best way to describe it is I can feel a pressure, like a thick water balloon, when I press against my lower abdomen. I remember distinctly having this same feeling when I was about 6-8 weeks pregnant with Michael. For all intents and purposes, I'm going to assume I'm pregnant at this point, though I still need to confirm it.

Michael and I were talking about it in the car last night and he asked when we should talk about where and how our next baby will be born. "I've already decided that," I said, "I'm having the baby at home with a homebirth midwife." "All right, then it's decided," he said.

I feel strangely calm about this whole thing...sure, it's scary and I have NO frickin idea how I'm going to handle another kid on top of my all-too-energetic kidlet, but I also know that we'll figure it out somehow and our family will be a bigger, happier group with another addition. I'm really looking forward to it...well, maybe to spending time with a newborn, then fast-forwarding until they're through teething and potty training and know how to read. Yeah.

Midwifery, etc.

2005-09-15T01:28:00.000-04:00

The conversation has been touching upon the fact that it is now September, and there was that whole discussion a while back about getting the Mirena out for my birthday. I'm shocked at how time has flown and now here we are. We've determined that we definitely do not want Michael to be an only child, and if the hardest (at least labor-intensive) years are the first few, it would make the most sense for my sanity to have another child sooner than later, not to mention I'd like siblings to be under 4 years apart. That's my own set of reasons - my older brother and I were 4 years apart and I think it was ever so slightly too much. Then again, we had a shitty home life so who knows, maybe it wouldn't matter with my family. So, yeah. Another kidlet. There are days that I think it would be so wonderful and that Michael would be a great and helpful sibling as he'll be three by the time another baby was born. I think that it will be so great for his temperament and keep him from being a spoiled only child. Then there are days when I can't even contemplate having an active toddler and a newborn at the same time, that it would make me want to kill myself. I mean, if I had dependable family in town it would make it a lot easier, I think of Jenn with her mother, her father, and various grandparents/friends/whatnot all willing to lend a hand. For us it's just us, and our friends, and most of our friends have little ones of their own to worry about. But still, I don't think it would be the same as when Michael was born.

Then again I'm thinking of my desire to go to midwifery school. If I got pregnant in October I'd have the baby in July/August, and the semester starts in September. Would I be able to pick myself up and go to classes with a newborn? The upside is that now that I've had a child and I'm familiar with how things work, I'd have no problems with bringing a newborn with me in a sling, especially to a midwifery school. It's not like U of Maine or anything like that. It would be cutting it very close, even assuming we'd get pregnant again right out of the gate. I suppose that with things like this they will always work out, one way or the other.

That reminds me, I never talked about the discussion Michael and I had about me and my job aspirations. I told him that I hoped he wouldn't be upset but that I would be just as happy if I never got another computer job again in my life. I always love my jobs the first six months or so, until the loneliness and frustration set in and then I'm miserable. Plus I get bored easily if not challenged, and it seems like most positions these days are the same drudgery over and over again. He said that he wasn't upset, that his only regret is that if I had concentrated on one thing back when I started this career track that I'd be really awesome at it by now and be able to command a lot of money. True, very true, but I can't help it that I get sidetracked by other opportunities and spread myself too thin. "You're just good at everything you do," he said. That was nice.

So anyway. We talked about potential income and how he would really like to see me making something, even if just working part-time from home or for someone else. I'm going to doink away at some home business ideas and look for outside jobs to satisfy Unemployment. Once that runs out or I find a position, I do that until next Autumn when I go to midwifery school. He has enough faith in me that I'm really serious about this and will plan accordingly. That's cool. I just hope that I'm not all head in the clouds about this, too. I always worried when I was a kid that I'd never figure out what I wanted to do with my life, and I had good reason because I still don't know.

So now I have a target date, though it seems like a world away at this point. Once I start school it'll be three years before I'm done, so I have some time to get my head on straight and figure out what I'll want to actually do with my newfound knowledge once I have it. In the meantime I can flesh out this Somali idea some more.

My place in the universe?

2005-09-04T12:01:00.000-04:00

I was just winding a ball of yarn at 3am and thinking and that always leads to an introspective entry.

I received my course catalog from Birthwise on Thursday and had taken a quick look at it when it first arrived. On Friday Heide was over and we started talking about it, and I flipped through it again in more detail while discussing my thoughts with her. The price of the three-year program is more than it states on the website, and I'm sure it's going to go up again for 2006, putting it somewhere over the $20k mark. Even so, $6000 to $7000 a year isn't too bad and we could definitely swing it. Only 16 students are accepted per year, which was a little disenheartening though I wonder how many women are pursuing a career in midwifery. Then my eye fell upon a paragraph entitled "birthwise scholarship" which read as follows:

Birthwise awards one student a full scholarship each year. Applicants for this scholarship must be a member of a distinct community with a clear need for midwifery services. The recipient of this scholarship must return to service this community for a minimum of two years following graduation from Birthwise. Contact Birthwise for more information on this scholarship program.

That got me thinking - what "distinct community" was I a part of, or could I get involved with? Then it hit me, suddenly and completely. An idea unfolded into a complete plan that made sense and resonated with something deep inside myself within an instant, and I felt as if a bright light had just shone down upon me and I raised my face, squinting, into that light.

Let me run this by you to see what you think.

The Somali population of Lewiston is a very recent addition to our community, and they have had a number of obstacles to overcome being direct transplants from their native land. Being black isn't the only issue; being completely foreign and Muslim to boot makes them a tough sell to a lot of the good old boys around here. For some reason the French Canadians that arrived here in much the same scenario three generations ago can't remember what it's like to be discriminated against for being outsiders.

So right here is a distinct community of people, integrating themselves into American culture while still holding on to their own. I know that I'm the whitest of the whiteys ever to walk the planet, but I wonder if I might be able to act as a midwife and women's health resource for Somali families? I can guarantee that the level of treatment they receive here isn't exactly tailored to their culture, and especially if they don't speak fluent English it would be even more confusing and overwhelming. I think about that Somali woman I encountered in the grocery store, asking me for advice on formula. It was obvious that she had no idea what she was looking for and her doctor hadn't given her much advice on the matter. I wanted to go back to her house with her and help her nurse and give her all the information she needed to keep her baby healthy.

Heide had a great idea that I should find a Somali woman (or women, ideally) who could be my liason(s) into the Somali community here...women who could help me communicate with other Somalis and get the word out to those seeking care. I could depend on them to teach me about Somali culture, which I know next to nothing about. I think I could really make a difference for these families and build my own little bridge across the cultural gap. I could go to their homes and catch their babies in a safe, supportive, familiar environment, without the intrustions of Western medicine and abrupt doctors speaking to them in a language that frightens and bullies even the most learned American native. Heide also knows a bit about the Muslim religion, again something I know next to nothing about, and I'm hoping she can give me a primer. I need to know a lot more to be able to function effectively and not blunder around offending people. I don't even know where to start looking for that sort of information.

That's my idea. Propose that I would like to work with the Somali community in Lewiston to give women a choice. To learn as much about their unique needs as I can to best assist them with woman care, birthing, and post-partum issues. I could defnitely see myself doing this, and in my pie-in-the-sky view I could see encouraging Somali women to become midwives and starting our own little practice.

What do you think?

My opinion on poo, or, From Whence Poo Comes

2005-07-14T11:24:00.000-04:00

Here is my theory on children learning to use the toilet, from my limited experience.

Just about anything that I've encountered when dealing with Michael lately becomes a power struggle. He's at that age where he's primed to throw a fit the moment something goes not according to his plan. Or the wind blows. Or the dog barks. You get the point. Kid is MOODY. Using the toilet is just one tiny facet in the matter, as I think it affects and is affected by everything around him.

The way I see it, the less I can clash over with Michael, the better. I think that the less stress in the home and environment, the better off we'll all be. Now this isn't at all to say that Michael never fusses, because he does, constantly some days. It just means that I deal with it as calmly as I can, and I think very hard when I pick my battles.

Some people might call this "permissive", because I don't always put my foot down and don't yell and scream at Michael to make him bend to my wishes. But I do remove him from the situation and deal with it on the spot in as quiet a manner as I can. Again, this isn't to say that I don't occasionally lose my shit and freak out on him, but these incidents are few.

I've discovered that the moment Michael figures out I don't want him doing something, he will do it intentionally just to get a reaction. Therefore I choose my battles carefully. Is his playing with that book really going to hurt anything? Even if he tears it, I bought it for 0.75 at Goodwill so maybe I should just relax a bit. Instead of trying to take it from him, I ask him to "please be gentle" when he handles it. Nine times out of ten he'll look at it for a few minutes, then discard it and not think of it again. If I take it away, even if I try to give him something else to replace it, he will focus on the object of his desire and do anything to get it. This leads to other contests of will as he screams, cries, wails, and climbs on things.

My mom gets irritated sometimes, saying, "You shouldn't let him do that, you said no," when I can sense Michael is just trying to get my goat, and I've explained to her that it's easier to let him get it out of his system and when he realizes he's not going to get a reaction, he stops and moves on to something else. He knows better, and he is challenging that.

Anyway, the end result is that Michael isn't pressured to do much of anything, and most times when he's getting into a dangerous situation he knows we're serious and stops. It's a very fine balance and I worry all the time that by not enforcing my first reaction that I'm sending the wrong message, or if letting him flip out and not giving in is the right thing to do.

An important thing to remember, too, is that I tailor his environment to reduce the number of potential contests...I don't leave things around without fully expecting him to get into them. When things get really bad and he's being destructive, I'll take him outside to burn off some energy or I'll bring him upstairs to the guest room, which has all of his extra toys and he can touch pretty much anything in there without a problem. Usually this is enough to defuse a situation like climbing on a chair and sweeping everything off of the dining room table. He only does this sort of thing because he's bored and/or doesn't feel he's getting enough attention, both of which are valid needs only he doesn't know any other way to express them.

On the positive side, he's started to learn to calm himself down. Example: this morning he was grouchy when we were getting ready to leave. He wanted a yogurt, then he wanted the hard roll I was eating for breakfast. He pulled my lunch box and roll off the table, then flipped when I said, "That is Mommy's, you can have something to eat when you get to daycare." I would have fed him right then, but I was running very late and we were on our way out the door. Much screaming and crying ensued. I told him a couple of times, "I know you're upset, but screaming at me is not the way to get what you want," and when he got madder I simply said, "I am not going to talk to you as long as you're screaming at me. I don't like it. Please calm down and use your words." He cried all the way to the car and as I buckled him into his car seat. I told him again that I loved him but that I didn't like being screamed at, to use his words when he was ready to tell me what he wanted. As we were pulling out of the driveway he looked around, sniffled a couple of times, and shut off the waterworks immediately. I let him sit quietly for a minute, then said, "Hello Michael, I'm glad to see you're feeling better. Would you like to listen to some music?" He shook his head yes and then started chatting with me as we drove to daycare. I ended up sharing my roll with him, saying things like, "Thank you for asking, I would be happy to share with you," and reaffirming that being calm and polite yields the desired result. There was a moment in the beginning when the veins in my forehead were ready to explode, I was angry and impatient that I was running so late and here was my child, red-faced and wailing on the floor like a rag doll, flailing whenever I tried to pick him up. I had to take many deep breaths and not let my irritation show. He doesn't understand being late or waiting like adults do, and I need to be sensitive to that. Overall I think this was a successful negotiation...I think I let him know that his needs are important, but he needs to express them rationally in order to get them fulfilled.

With the potty the first thing we did is we let him watch us go to the bathroom. I know it sounds weird, but how is he supposed to make the connection to pee and poop coming out of his body and going into the toilet unless he sees us doing it? We are also very comfortable with our bodies in our household. I grew up with such a terrible self-image that I don't want Michael to feel the same way. We walk around naked or in our underwear pretty often, and when Michael's outside playing in the wading pool he's usually naked. I will sit with my shirt off if he's nursing, and both Dad and I bathe with him frequently.

Once he saw what we were doing, he wanted to be involved, too. At first it was pulling off toilet tissue to hand to us, and once in a while we'd sit him on the big toilet so he could see what it was like. He never did anything on it, but he enjoyed the attention. Then we bought a little potty and put it in the bathroom. When we would go, we'd sit him on the potty across from us (with or without a diaper). Our bathroom is extremely tiny so we moved the potty out to the room next to our bedroom, and let him pretty much carry it around wherever he wanted. It spends some of its time in the bathroom, in the spare room, in the living room, and in the hallway.

When we'd give him a bath or shower we'd ask him, "Do you have to use the potty?" and sit him on it. Sometimes it was only for a few seconds, but we were consistent about it. I taught him to sit down and tuck his penis in so he didn't spray urine everywhere should he urinate.

Eventually he started asking to sit on the potty, usually in the mornings after waking up. These occurences yielded nothing for a long time, just the occasional fart. Michael liked to get toilet paper and push it into the potty between his legs the way he had seen us do it. We showed him how to empty the potty into the big toilet, flush, and then wash his hands. He enjoyed watching the water swirl around.

Wearing cloth diapers helps, too, I think. When I'd shake the solids out of a diaper I'd call him over so he could see that the poop goes into the potty, then gets flushed down. That made the connection of where it ends up. Cloth diapers also feel wetter than disposables, so he knows when he's peed or pooped. He started telling us when he would poop, usually just after he did. We would promptly change him and put the poop in the toilet to flush it down. If he said, "Poop" but hadn't done so, we'd sit him on the potty to give him a chance to poop in it.

It wasn't until a few weeks ago that he actually went in the potty consciously. It was a weekend and he was running around without a diaper on - I think this made him more conscious of his bodily functions as he knew it would end up on the floor - he was sitting in his high chair ready for lunch and said, "Potty!" We immediately got him down and took him to the potty, where he sat for a moment, then stood up and showed me he had peed. There was much rejoicing, and he was so pleased with himself. We poured it in the toilet and said goodbye to it.

Every time after that when he would say "Potty" we would immediately get him to one. This was tricky one weekend when we were on the turnpike and he had to go - we stopped at a rest area and brought him inside, all for naught and he didn't have to go. This is when I think he equated gas to pooping. The moment we were back on the road he started saying, "Potty!" again, and we had to ask him to hold it while we headed for the next exit. I don't want to stress him out and make him retain feces, but at the same time I didn't want to upset him by ignoring his plea. We took the next exit and found a rest room, where again there was nothing. It was a little frustrating as it made an hour trip take nearly two, but at the same time it's important to me to respect my son's needs even at the expense of a little drive time.

I think a lot of positive child development is rooted in demonstration, patience, and respect. Practicing these three things is so hard at times, especially when pressed for time or tired, frustated, angry, etc. I certainly don't accomplish this all the time, but I do feel that I keep his needs in mind as much as I can. As a result, he's confident and curious and explores a lot of things on his own without our prompting. We show our support for his curiosity and we're there to commend him when he makes an accomplishment. It's very tough sometimes but in the long run it's like breastfeeding is for me - once it clicks, it clicks, and it becomes second nature. I am very happy with our breastfeeding relationship because it has produced so many wonderful results, and I'm glad I muddled through the terrible parts. Same thing with Michael's tantrumy tendencies right now...it's so hard dealing with his outbursts, especially in public while being scrutinized by strangers, but I know that if I keep at it and I'm consistent that he'll eventually grow out of it and the results will be wll worth it.

As for the actual potty learning thing, sure, I'd love it if he was out of diapers sooner than later, but I'm also accepting of the fact that he might regress and he will take it at the speed he's comfortable with. We're just there to support him and help him when needed.

It's funny, thinking about this, at how I was worried back when Michael was a year old as he was only using a few words and not very vocal. I heard from one person that her son was speaking in sentences at ten months! Wow, SuperBaby! Why wasn't Michael talking like that? It wasn't until after a huge physical growth spurt that he started talking, and then it was a flood all at once. Now he's asking questions and chatting with us and offering his opinions - that's the weirdest part, we'll be eating and he'll say out of nowhere - "Mmmm, Daddy - good!" when we haven't discussed the food at all before that point. Or he'll smell a flower and say, "Ewwww! Yucky!" It's really wild.

Ah, kids. If I ever have another one it'll be interesting to see how they differ. I am certainly not the be-all, end-all to parenting, but I will say that it makes me so happy to see things I've done what feels like futilely for months and months actually work in the end.

Vaccinations, what I've done.

2005-06-17T14:12:00.000-04:00

Someone asked me if little Michael is vaccinated, and the answer is yes. He's had everything on schedule except for the Chicken Pox vaccine, which I refused, and took tons of shit from the pediatrician for it. He has never been vaccinated for the flu, which caused my family to erupt in no end to bitching about how I was "risking his life" and etc. (Oddly, this winter he was the healthiest ever.)

The reason Michael was vaccinated? I didn't know any of the stuff that I do now. I remember hearing somewhere the dangers of mercury in vaccines and asking the pediatrician about it, and getting a curt "that's a myth" in response.

Luckily for us, Michael has never exhibited any terrible after-effects to being vaccinated and appears to be developing normally. I won't be able to breathe a sigh of relief until he's over 3 and is exhibiting healthy 3-year-old behaviour.

I get mad at myself, now, because I really read up on all of the things done to newborn babies at the hospital. We refused the Vitamin K injection, the eye ointment, and I *think* we delayed on the newborn Hepatitis B shot as I tested negative, though to be honest I can't remember. I was very specific about my wishes when it came to all of these treatments, and I cried inconsolably when they pricked his heel (twice!) for the PKU tests which are required by the state of Maine. Sure, it was only blood taken, but it was MY baby's blood, and he was so tiny and perfect and serene that it seemed a rude violation to shatter that peace within the first days of life.

I'm mad because I took such care to cover everything happening in the hospital and be in control of that, only to willingly offer my child up for vaccinations on a schedule once home with him.

What would I have done had I known what I do now? I definitely would have at LEAST delayed vaccinations, and I would have been extremely persistent in finding out the maker, batch, and contents of any shots to be administered before allowing them. I worry every day that my son got a shot with mercury in it, even though I specified that I didn't want that. It turns out that shots that don't use mercury as a main ingredient can still have trace amounts, considered so negligible that they don't matter, so the doctors never mention them (this is what I was told by a doctor, by the way).

To me, it sure as hell DOES matter.

It also bothered me that at one point my son got FIVE shots at the same time. That seems like a pretty potent volume of some drug cocktail pulsing through his tiny body. Is a baby that small truly equipped to deal with it? If he were getting sick and I didn't know it yet, would his immune system been *just* weak enough that the foreign substance could cause a problem? There's no way to tell.

What it comes down to is this: I didn't do enough research so I didn't have any hard facts to back up my questions. The pediatricians I was seeing were very pro-vax and aggressive, and I allowed myself to be intimidated. I finally got my legs under me by the time I had to insist that Michael not get the Chicken Pox vaccine, but even then I was shaking and insecure when the pediatrician more or less accused me of risking my son's life through my selfishness.

I look at my sweet, sparkling, smart-as-a-whip son every day and think to myself, "What if one day that all just went away? What if it were something I did to him?" I don't know how I could live with myself. So each day I watch and I hope and I try not to feel too guilty about the past.

The most asinine thing I think I've dealt with are mothers who say things like, "You didn't get your son vaccinated, he could get a disease and make other children sick!" The thing is, if everyone else is vaccinated, they shouldn't GET sick, so who cares? And for something like Chicken Pox, it comes, it goes, it's done. I've had it, Michael the elder has had it, everyone else I know has had it, and we've been fine. The pediatrician made it sound like I'd be doing myself a favor, because I wouldn't have to spend a week at home with a miserable, sick kid. Like I care! I don't MIND mothering my child, if that's what you mean. That's my job. If it means he won't get a life-threatening case of Chicken Pox when he's 25, then it's a no-brainer.

If/when I have another child I plan to be much better prepared. I'm still not sure what I'll do, and I'm sure I'll change my mind a million times before then, anyway.

More information

Vaccines and autism

2005-06-17T11:51:00.000-04:00

A very lengthy article, but super important.

A Salon/Rolling Stone joint investigation
Deadly immunity

When a study revealed that mercury in childhood vaccines may have caused autism in thousands of kids, the government rushed to conceal the data -- and to prevent parents from suing drug companies for their role in the epidemic.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

June 16, 2005 | In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to 52 attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva, and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.

The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children.

Even for scientists and doctors accustomed to confronting issues of life and death, the findings were frightening. "You can play with this all you want," Dr. Bill Weil, a consultant for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told the group. The results "are statistically significant." Dr. Richard Johnston, an immunologist and pediatrician from the University of Colorado whose grandson had been born early on the morning of the meeting's first day, was even more alarmed. "My gut feeling?" he said. "Forgive this personal comment -- I do not want my grandson to get a thimerosal-containing vaccine until we know better what is going on."

But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line.

"We are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits," said Dr. Robert Brent, a pediatrician at the Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children in Delaware. "This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country." Dr. Bob Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, expressed relief that "given the sensitivity of the information, we have been able to keep it out of the hands of, let's say, less responsible hands." Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, declared flatly that the study "should not have been done at all" and warned that the results "will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. The research results have to be handled."

In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism.

Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants -- but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines -- including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to 11-year-olds.

The drug companies are also getting help from powerful lawmakers in Washington. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has received $873,000 in contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, has been working to immunize vaccine makers from liability in 4,200 lawsuits that have been filed by the parents of injured children. On five separate occasions, Frist has tried to seal all of the government's vaccine-related documents -- including the Simpsonwood transcripts -- and shield Eli Lilly, the developer of thimerosal, from subpoenas. In 2002, the day after Frist quietly slipped a rider known as the "Eli Lilly Protection Act" into a homeland security bill, the company contributed $10,000 to his campaign and bought 5,000 copies of his book on bioterrorism. Congress repealed the measure in 2003 -- but earlier this year, Frist slipped another provision into an anti-terrorism bill that would deny compensation to children suffering from vaccine-related brain disorders. "The lawsuits are of such magnitude that they could put vaccine producers out of business and limit our capacity to deal with a biological attack by terrorists," says Andy Olsen, a legislative assistant to Frist.

Even many conservatives are shocked by the government's effort to cover up the dangers of thimerosal. Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal after his grandson was diagnosed with autism. "Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic," his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. "This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal, a known neurotoxin." The FDA and other public-health agencies failed to act, the committee added, out of "institutional malfeasance for self protection" and "misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry."

The story of how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public is a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed. I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. Privately, I was skeptical. I doubted that autism could be blamed on a single source, and I certainly understood the government's need to reassure parents that vaccinations are safe; the eradication of deadly childhood diseases depends on it. I tended to agree with skeptics like Rep. Henry Waxman, a Democrat from California, who criticized his colleagues on the House Government Reform Committee for leaping to conclusions about autism and vaccinations. "Why should we scare people about immunization," Waxman pointed out at one hearing, "until we know the facts?"

It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation's preeminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation -- those born between 1989 and 2003 -- who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in 25 years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931.

Some skeptics dispute that the rise in autism is caused by thimerosal-tainted vaccinations. They argue that the increase is a result of better diagnosis -- a theory that seems questionable at best, given that most of the new cases of autism are clustered within a single generation of children. "If the epidemic is truly an artifact of poor diagnosis," scoffs Dr. Boyd Haley, one of the world's authorities on mercury toxicity, "then where are all the 20-year-old autistics?" Other researchers point out that Americans are exposed to a greater cumulative "load" of mercury than ever before, from contaminated fish to dental fillings, and suggest that thimerosal in vaccines may be only part of a much larger problem. It's a concern that certainly deserves far more attention than it has received -- but it overlooks the fact that the mercury concentrations in vaccines dwarf other sources of exposure to our children.

What is most striking is the lengths to which many of the leading detectives have gone to ignore -- and cover up -- the evidence against thimerosal. From the very beginning, the scientific case against the mercury additive has been overwhelming. The preservative, which is used to stem fungi and bacterial growth in vaccines, contains ethylmercury, a potent neurotoxin. Truckloads of studies have shown that mercury tends to accumulate in the brains of primates and other animals after they are injected with vaccines -- and that the developing brains of infants are particularly susceptible. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to much lower concentrations of ethylmercury than those given to American children still suffered brain damage years later. Russia banned thimerosal from children's vaccines 20 years ago, and Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have since followed suit.

"You couldn't even construct a study that shows thimerosal is safe," says Haley, who heads the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky. "It's just too darn toxic. If you inject thimerosal into an animal, its brain will sicken. If you apply it to living tissue, the cells die. If you put it in a petri dish, the culture dies. Knowing these things, it would be shocking if one could inject it into an infant without causing damage."

Internal documents reveal that Eli Lilly, which first developed thimerosal, knew from the start that its product could cause damage -- and even death -- in both animals and humans. In 1930, the company tested thimerosal by administering it to 22 patients with terminal meningitis, all of whom died within weeks of being injected -- a fact Lilly didn't bother to report in its study declaring thimerosal safe. In 1935, researchers at another vaccine manufacturer, Pittman-Moore, warned Lilly that its claims about thimerosal's safety "did not check with ours." Half the dogs Pittman injected with thimerosal-based vaccines became sick, leading researchers there to declare the preservative "unsatisfactory as a serum intended for use on dogs."

In the decades that followed, the evidence against thimerosal continued to mount. During the Second World War, when the Department of Defense used the preservative in vaccines on soldiers, it required Lilly to label it "poison." In 1967, a study in Applied Microbiology found that thimerosal killed mice when added to injected vaccines. Four years later, Lilly's own studies discerned that thimerosal was "toxic to tissue cells" in concentrations as low as one part per million -- 100 times weaker than the concentration in a typical vaccine. Even so, the company continued to promote thimerosal as "nontoxic" and also incorporated it into topical disinfectants. In 1977, 10 babies at a Toronto hospital died when an antiseptic preserved with thimerosal was dabbed onto their umbilical cords.

In 1982, the FDA proposed a ban on over-the-counter products that contained thimerosal, and in 1991 the agency considered banning it from animal vaccines. But tragically, that same year, the CDC recommended that infants be injected with a series of mercury-laced vaccines. Newborns would be vaccinated for hepatitis B within 24 hours of birth, and 2-month-old infants would be immunized for haemophilus influenzae B and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.

The drug industry knew the additional vaccines posed a danger. The same year that the CDC approved the new vaccines, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, one of the fathers of Merck's vaccine programs, warned the company that 6-month-olds who were administered the shots would suffer dangerous exposure to mercury. He recommended that thimerosal be discontinued, "especially when used on infants and children," noting that the industry knew of nontoxic alternatives. "The best way to go," he added, "is to switch to dispensing the actual vaccines without adding preservatives."

For Merck and other drug companies, however, the obstacle was money. Thimerosal enables the pharmaceutical industry to package vaccines in vials that contain multiple doses, which require additional protection because they are more easily contaminated by multiple needle entries. The larger vials cost half as much to produce as smaller, single-dose vials, making it cheaper for international agencies to distribute them to impoverished regions at risk of epidemics. Faced with this "cost consideration," Merck ignored Hilleman's warnings, and government officials continued to push more and more thimerosal-based vaccines for children. Before 1989, American preschoolers received only three vaccinations -- for polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and measles-mumps-rubella. A decade later, thanks to federal recommendations, children were receiving a total of 22 immunizations by the time they reached first grade.

As the number of vaccines increased, the rate of autism among children exploded. During the 1990s, 40 million children were injected with thimerosal-based vaccines, receiving unprecedented levels of mercury during a period critical for brain development. Despite the well-documented dangers of thimerosal, it appears that no one bothered to add up the cumulative dose of mercury that children would receive from the mandated vaccines. "What took the FDA so long to do the calculations?" Peter Patriarca, director of viral products for the agency, asked in an e-mail to the CDC in 1999. "Why didn't CDC and the advisory bodies do these calculations when they rapidly expanded the childhood immunization schedule?"

But by that time, the damage was done. Infants who received all their vaccines, plus boosters, by the age of 6 months were being injected with levels of ethylmercury 187 times greater than the EPA's limit for daily exposure to methylmercury, a related neurotoxin. Although the vaccine industry insists that ethylmercury poses little danger because it breaks down rapidly and is removed by the body, several studies -- including one published in April by the National Institutes of Health -- suggest that ethylmercury is actually more toxic to developing brains and stays in the brain longer than methylmercury.

Officials responsible for childhood immunizations insist that the additional vaccines were necessary to protect infants from disease and that thimerosal is still essential in developing nations, which, they often claim, cannot afford the single-dose vials that don't require a preservative. Dr. Paul Offit, one of CDC's top vaccine advisors, told me, "I think if we really have an influenza pandemic -- and certainly we will in the next 20 years, because we always do -- there's no way on God's earth that we immunize 280 million people with single-dose vials. There has to be multidose vials."

But while public-health officials may have been well-intentioned, many of those on the CDC advisory committee who backed the additional vaccines had close ties to the industry. Dr. Sam Katz, the committee's chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and shares a patent on a measles vaccine with Merck, which also manufactures the hepatitis B vaccine. Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine.

Indeed, in the tight circle of scientists who work on vaccines, such conflicts of interest are common. Rep. Burton says that the CDC "routinely allows scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on intellectual advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines," even though they have "interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight." The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisors who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine laced with thimerosal "had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine."

Offit, who shares a patent on the vaccine, acknowledged to me that he "would make money" if his vote to approve it eventually leads to a marketable product. But he dismissed my suggestion that a scientist's direct financial stake in CDC approval might bias his judgment. "It provides no conflict for me," he insists. "I have simply been informed by the process, not corrupted by it. When I sat around that table, my sole intent was trying to make recommendations that best benefited the children in this country. It's offensive to say that physicians and public-health people are in the pocket of industry and thus are making decisions that they know are unsafe for children. It's just not the way it works."

Other vaccine scientists and regulators gave me similar assurances. Like Offit, they view themselves as enlightened guardians of children's health, proud of their "partnerships" with pharmaceutical companies, immune to the seductions of personal profit, besieged by irrational activists whose anti-vaccine campaigns are endangering children's health. They are often resentful of questioning. "Science," says Offit, "is best left to scientists."

Still, some government officials were alarmed by the apparent conflicts of interest. In his e-mail to CDC administrators in 1999, Paul Patriarca of the FDA blasted federal regulators for failing to adequately scrutinize the danger posed by the added baby vaccines. "I'm not sure there will be an easy way out of the potential perception that the FDA, CDC and immunization-policy bodies may have been asleep at the switch re: thimerosal until now," Patriarca wrote. The close ties between regulatory officials and the pharmaceutical industry, he added, "will also raise questions about various advisory bodies regarding aggressive recommendations for use" of thimerosal in child vaccines.

If federal regulators and government scientists failed to grasp the potential risks of thimerosal over the years, no one could claim ignorance after the secret meeting at Simpsonwood. But rather than conduct more studies to test the link to autism and other forms of brain damage, the CDC placed politics over science. The agency turned its database on childhood vaccines -- which had been developed largely at taxpayer expense -- over to a private agency, America's Health Insurance Plans, ensuring that it could not be used for additional research. It also instructed the Institute of Medicine, an advisory organization that is part of the National Academy of Sciences, to produce a study debunking the link between thimerosal and brain disorders. The CDC "wants us to declare, well, that these things are pretty safe," Dr. Marie McCormick, who chaired the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee, told her fellow researchers when they first met in January 2001. "We are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect" of thimerosal exposure. According to transcripts of the meeting, the committee's chief staffer, Kathleen Stratton, predicted that the IOM would conclude that the evidence was "inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation" between thimerosal and autism. That, she added, was the result "Walt wants" -- a reference to Dr. Walter Orenstein, director of the National Immunization Program for the CDC.

For those who had devoted their lives to promoting vaccination, the revelations about thimerosal threatened to undermine everything they had worked for. "We've got a dragon by the tail here," said Dr. Michael Kaback, another committee member. "The more negative that [our] presentation is, the less likely people are to use vaccination, immunization -- and we know what the results of that will be. We are kind of caught in a trap. How we work our way out of the trap, I think is the charge."

Even in public, federal officials made it clear that their primary goal in studying thimerosal was to dispel doubts about vaccines. "Four current studies are taking place to rule out the proposed link between autism and thimerosal," Dr. Gordon Douglas, then-director of strategic planning for vaccine research at the National Institutes of Health, assured a Princeton University gathering in May 2001. "In order to undo the harmful effects of research claiming to link the [measles] vaccine to an elevated risk of autism, we need to conduct and publicize additional studies to assure parents of safety." Douglas formerly served as president of vaccinations for Merck, where he ignored warnings about thimerosal's risks.

In May of last year, the Institute of Medicine issued its final report. Its conclusion: There is no proven link between autism and thimerosal in vaccines. Rather than reviewing the large body of literature describing the toxicity of thimerosal, the report relied on four disastrously flawed epidemiological studies examining European countries, where children received much smaller doses of thimerosal than American kids. It also cited a new version of the Verstraeten study, published in the journal Pediatrics, that had been reworked to reduce the link between thimerosal and autism. The new study included children too young to have been diagnosed with autism and overlooked others who showed signs of the disease. The IOM declared the case closed and -- in a startling position for a scientific body -- recommended that no further research be conducted.

The report may have satisfied the CDC, but it convinced no one. Rep. David Weldon, a Republican physician from Florida who serves on the House Government Reform Committee, attacked the Institute of Medicine, saying it relied on a handful of studies that were "fatally flawed" by "poor design" and failed to represent "all the available scientific and medical research." CDC officials are not interested in an honest search for the truth, Weldon told me, because "an association between vaccines and autism would force them to admit that their policies irreparably damaged thousands of children. Who would want to make that conclusion about themselves?"

Under pressure from Congress, parents and a few of its own panel members, the Institute of Medicine reluctantly convened a second panel to review the findings of the first. In February, the new panel, composed of different scientists, criticized the earlier panel for its lack of transparency and urged the CDC to make its vaccine database available to the public.

So far, though, only two scientists have managed to gain access. Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC. Since August 2002, when members of Congress pressured the agency to turn over the data, the Geiers have completed six studies that demonstrate a powerful correlation between thimerosal and neurological damage in children. One study, which compares the cumulative dose of mercury received by children born between 1981 and 1985 with those born between 1990 and 1996, found a "very significant relationship" between autism and vaccines. Another study of educational performance found that kids who received higher doses of thimerosal in vaccines were nearly three times as likely to be diagnosed with autism and more than three times as likely to suffer from speech disorders and mental retardation. Another soon-to-be-published study shows that autism rates are in decline following the recent elimination of thimerosal from most vaccines.

As the federal government worked to prevent scientists from studying vaccines, others have stepped in to study the link to autism. In April, reporter Dan Olmsted of UPI undertook one of the more interesting studies himself. Searching for children who had not been exposed to mercury in vaccines -- the kind of population that scientists typically use as a "control" in experiments -- Olmsted scoured the Amish of Lancaster County, Penn., who refuse to immunize their infants. Given the national rate of autism, Olmsted calculated that there should be 130 autistics among the Amish. He found only four. One had been exposed to high levels of mercury from a power plant. The other three -- including one child adopted from outside the Amish community -- had received their vaccines.

At the state level, many officials have also conducted in-depth reviews of thimerosal. While the Institute of Medicine was busy whitewashing the risks, the Iowa Legislature was carefully combing through all of the available scientific and biological data. "After three years of review, I became convinced there was sufficient credible research to show a link between mercury and the increased incidences in autism," says state Sen. Ken Veenstra, a Republican who oversaw the investigation. "The fact that Iowa's 700 percent increase in autism began in the 1990s, right after more and more vaccines were added to the children's vaccine schedules, is solid evidence alone." Last year, Iowa became the first state to ban mercury in vaccines, followed by California. Similar bans are now under consideration in 32 other states.

But instead of following suit, the FDA continues to allow manufacturers to include thimerosal in scores of over-the-counter medications as well as steroids and injected collagen. Even more alarming, the government continues to ship vaccines preserved with thimerosal to developing countries -- some of which are now experiencing a sudden explosion in autism rates. In China, where the disease was virtually unknown prior to the introduction of thimerosal by U.S. drug manufacturers in 1999, news reports indicate that there are now more than 1.8 million autistics. Although reliable numbers are hard to come by, autistic disorders also appear to be soaring in India, Argentina, Nicaragua and other developing countries that are now using thimerosal-laced vaccines. The World Health Organization continues to insist thimerosal is safe, but it promises to keep the possibility that it is linked to neurological disorders "under review."

I devoted time to study this issue because I believe that this is a moral crisis that must be addressed. If, as the evidence suggests, our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine. "The CDC is guilty of incompetence and gross negligence," says Mark Blaxill, vice president of Safe Minds, a nonprofit organization concerned about the role of mercury in medicines. "The damage caused by vaccine exposure is massive. It's bigger than asbestos, bigger than tobacco, bigger than anything you've ever seen." It's hard to calculate the damage to our country -- and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases -- if Third World nations come to believe that America's most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It's not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by America's enemies abroad. The scientists and researchers -- many of them sincere, even idealistic -- who are participating in efforts to hide the science on thimerosal claim that they are trying to advance the lofty goal of protecting children in developing nations from disease pandemics. They are badly misguided. Their failure to come clean on thimerosal will come back horribly to haunt our country and the world's poorest populations.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

About the writer
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, chief prosecuting attorney for Riverkeeper and president of Waterkeeper Alliance. He is the co-author of "The Riverkeepers."

Formula and public perception

2005-06-14T15:46:00.001-04:00

There are a lot of times when I wonder if I should just stop worrying about how slimy and underhanded formula companies are. The things they do make me so angry, slipping formula samples to women in the hospital whether they want them or not, sneaking onto maternity wards to trade their product for another company's, their crooked dealings in third-world countries, the way they sway people in the medical profession with bribes hidden beneath the more socially acceptable word "funding."

The thing is, if my best friend (who will probably read this) decides to feed her future daughter formula, yes, I would be sad, there's no doubt. I might even feel a little upset over it. However, Jenn is a very smart and intelligent person, and she will do whatever is the best for her and her daughter, and about that I have no doubt. I know she's well educated and informed about the benefits of breastmilk over formula, and I know that she will advocate for herself and seek answers if she has problems. I totally respect her decisions, whatever they may be. It's not people like Jenn that I worry about, the people I worry about are those who either don't know enough to have formed their own opinion or aren't aware of the options and support available to them. These are the people who are being preyed upon by big business and it's not fair.

The thing that's most ironic is that the influence of formula companies has changed public perception so much that my going about my own business and breastfeeding my son is seen as an aberration and an offense, especially now that he's almost two years old. I don't even have to do or say anything to anyone to be looked down on as some sort of hippy or sexual deviant. That just sucks. Yet the moment I open my mouth about how much formula companies suck, people jump down my throat.

So anyway. It really does get to the point that I want to say "fuck it" and just let money-grubbing companies determine how we live our lives, and then Fate steps in and kicks me in the ass to remind me why I was born with such strong convictions.

I was at the grocery store today as I had to buy some emergency sippy cups before snack time...Michael forgot to pack cups into little Michael's bag so the poor kid was at daycare with nothing to drink. I found what I needed and was heading out of the row when a soft-spoken Somali woman stopped me to ask for help.

A little backstory - a few years ago there was a huge influx of Somalians who had come to America and lived in Georgia for a time, then spread out to other smaller communities in the hopes of finding a good place to raise their families, about 1200 of them coming to Maine. There was a big to-do amongst the natives as many of them are pretty bigoted. Anyway, the Somalis been doing pretty well I'd assume as I see them all over the place now, going about their daily lives more or less unmolested. I do know that there's an undercurrent of mistrust and hatred amongst some of the older and more rednecked set, however. Sad.

The woman was standing before the formula display and asked me which formula she should be using to help her son, who had "hard poos." I talked to her for a few minutes and determined that her son was only one month old, but she was having trouble with breastfeeding so her doctor had told her to put him on iron, DHA and ARA fortified soy formula. The doctor also told her that the problem was with her milk, and that's why her baby was having trouble with gas and constipation. She had planned to get another brand of formula and not tell her doctor.

The whole story cut me right to the quick because here was this mother, trying to do what she thought was best for her baby, being given misinformation and not being offered the right kind of support or all of the information she needed. I can't even imagine how hard it must be, leaving the country of your birth to come to a place where you are completely different, learning the language, trying to make a life for yourself...not really the position from which you'd advocate for yourself much.

I explained to her that she definitely shouldn't switch formulas without first consulting her doctor as very young children can have some serious issues with digestion if their formula were changed suddenly. I asked her if she was still breastfeeding and she said she was trying, but that she wasn't getting a lot. I recommended that she drink more water (she said she wasn't drinking much at all) and to nurse as much as possible to encourage milk production, as breastmilk would be the best thing to help her son's digestion. I also gave her some advice on massaging her son's abdomen and bicycling his legs to help relieve his gas, relating my own experiences and success.

She thanked me for my help and it was all I could do not to hug her. What I really wanted to do was to come to her house and cuddle her baby, then see what she was doing and offer her the support she sorely needed to figure out the problem. How do you initiate such a thing with a total stranger? Would what I had told her make any difference?

I had a heavy heart because I knew it was her doctor who was making her give up on breastfeeding and switch to formula (and soy formula, no less, which can cause some pretty nasty allergies and is worse than cow's milk formula). It's not uncommon for infants to go 2-3 days without a bowel movement, and relieving gas is often easily done without changing their diet. I remember Michael had terrible gas as a tiny infant, and I found that if I burped him very frequently and did the massage/bicycling thing that it helped more than anything else. Eventually his guts matured and he grew out of it.

It's people like this woman who were being affected. Who was her son's doctor? Why weren't they getting her in touch with a lactation consultant to help her with breastfeeding? Did they recommend the most expensive formula in the store because they were being given a bribe by the formula company? There was no way to tell. The one thing I could tell is that she was feeling guilty and confused and sad for no reason. She wasn't a stupid or bad person, she was just doing what she knew how to do.

If the US were a place where breastfeeding was the most popular option, would things have happened to her as they did? I highly doubt it. But mothers using their boobs to make free milk isn't profitable.

Slingin' it

2005-06-14T15:46:00.000-04:00

At the Fiber Fest on Sunday Kerry offered to watch Michael so I could run in and pick up the spindle and roving I'd decided to get, and when I emerged from the exhibition hall they were nowhere to be found. I knew that Michael was safe with her but I had a quick moment of panic not being able to see him. I looked around in all directions and started to head back into the hall when I heard Kerry shout, "Jen!" from one of the other buildings. And not a moment too soon! She said, "I hope you weren't going into panic mode," to which I replied, "I'll admit I had a panicky squeezed-heart moment there, I had to take deep breaths." I noticed that she had Michael in my sling and he looked very content sitting there. It was different than I've been doing it all along, so I asked her about it and tried it myself. It worked great! First, I put Michael on my left side, leaving my dominant right hand free. Then, I wrapped around my right upper arm instead of draping over my shoulder...when pulled tight, Michael was more snug and it didn't ride up to choke me at the same time. It was SO much better! I couldn't stop thanking her.

Note to self: When wondering if there might be an easier way to do something, ask the woman with four kids.

It was a boring day...nothing much happened.

2005-06-08T16:43:00.000-04:00

Formula companies can suck my ass!

I fucking HATE them.

(If by my saying 'I hate formula companies' you interpret that as my saying, 'I hate you' or 'I hate people who use formula and they're rotten parents,' feel free to move along because you're just being silly.)

I couldn't stop thinking about formula companies last night and how many ways they sink their greedy money-grubbing fingers into American, and now worldwide, society. It's sick and it's wrong and the worst part is, most parents think they're being done a favor. I just can't believe it!

It's so hard to talk about things like this because I've noticed, when it comes to social issues as a whole, that many people don't like to hear about complicated issues that are outside their immediate sphere of existence.

For instance, I won't shop at Wal-Mart because they treat their employees like shit, force local businesses out of communities, and buy cheap foreign-made goods fueled by child labor. The thing that sucks is that in many poorer communities, Wal-Mart is one of the only choices left, and things ARE so cheap that people can't justify spending more money to drive to a neighboring town and pay more for a locally-produced item. And it's sad, because it's this exact behaviour that causes the problem in the first place, but we either can't or won't see it!

Everyone has excuses (and when it comes to Wal-Mart, I know I did too), talking about their budgets, or availability, or convenience...and these are all real and valid things. However I really think it takes people getting OUT of their comfort zones and seeking other alternatives to truly drive the point home to them. Problem is, lots of people are too busy/broke/apathetic/lazy to care.

Anyway, this isn't about Wal-Mart, though in a way it's related because it's all Big Business. The number of mergers in the US is astronomical and staggering, yet we little people just go about our daily lives more or less ignoring it. We don't connect the fact that we have fewer choices available to us and that we're being slowly railroaded into pouring all of our hard-earned money into the pockets of a handful of corporations, who then turn around and control the market and tell us how much MORE money we need to spend. It's insane!

So, formula companies. The biggest biggie is Nestle, you know, the chocolate people. They make great cocoa. They also push their formula advertising in third world countries and undermine breastfeeding. Big deal, people say, women should be able to decide what to do with their own breasts. That is all fine and good. There are some women who are determined to breastfeed no matter what. There are some women who are determined NOT to, no matter what. However, there are many, many women who don't have an opinion either way, or a slight desire that can be easily derailed by the wrong message or a lack of support.

In these impoverished countries breastmilk is the most plentiful, sterile, and nutritionally complete food for infants and is completely free. In such an impoverished country this is a huge boon to societal health and economical well being. Yet Nestle comes in and passes out "free" samples of its formula, which it touts as being practically as good as breastmilk. It's given to new mothers so that they never establish breastfeeding with their babies, then, when they have no milk, they're sent home to fend for themselves. Most women can't read the packaging, they use less than the recommended amount so it'll last longer, resulting in malnourished children, they use tainted water that gives their baby diarrhea. Did you know 4,000 children die every day from improper bottle feeding? To top it all off, once the freebies run out and the mothers need to buy more, they have to spend most of their family's money on fake babymilk.

Does that sound fair to you?

Children are being malnourished and DYING so that Nestle can put impoverished peoples' money in their pockets.

THIS is why I hate formula companies. One of the many reasons. They don't make formula because they love children. They make formula because they love money.

I learned something new today...I actually looked up all the products made by Nestle so I can put my money where my mouth is and never buy them again.

http://www.babymilkaction.org/pages/products.html

I totally ask for it but...

2005-06-07T16:42:00.000-04:00

...I still can't get over how personally offended people get over things. You can't say anything these days without pissing off someone.

So instead I shall talk about me!

I feel that the way I raise my child is not optimal, but it is better than adequate. Every day I keep my eyes and ears open for better ways to do things for him. That also means that if someone says to me, "Why do you do things X way? Y way is better," I don't get indignant and protest, "How dare you crap on me! I'm a great mom!" I think about what they said and consider it, because maybe they're right.

If they're right, I make a change. If they're not, I let it go. The only time I get upset is if someone says, "Jen, you're a rotten parent because you XYZ," or make a crude reference or call me a name. Then I get pissed, and oh yes I will stand up for myself, only because people shouldn't treat one another like that.

We're all doing the best we know how. I like to talk about things that make people uncomfortable, because it gets them to think. I'm not judging them, but if they think I am, there's not a whole lot I can do about it.

I remember when we were meeting with my doula and I had my little birth plan all written out, asking to have an epidural on hand "just in case" I needed it, and my doula said that she was "surprised" to see that there. Well, at first I got pissed. Who was SHE to judge ME, anyway? Then I thought about it and realized that she was surprised because she knew there were other options, while I did not! I read up on it and lo and behold, there were other options! You actually COULD have a baby without pain medication! I had no idea. I changed my mind.

I remember getting lots of great advice from my family. Make sure the first night I have the baby home that I put him in a crib in the other room and let him cry. Don't get up for anything, just wait it out and he'll sleep great after that. Also, if the child ever bites or hits me, bite or hit them back to teach them that it hurts. Put the kid on a schedule or they'll manipulate you. Don't breastfeed over 6 months because it's icky and you'll be going to school during his recess period to nurse him when he's five.

Just to name a few.

And I was 100% on-board with those things, back when I was pregnant. After all, if it worked for someone else, of course it would work for me! Then I happened to hear the term "Attachment Parenting" while perusing BabyCenter, and I thought to myself, "What is that all about? Probably some new age mumbo jumbo."

I did some reading and my eyes opened to many, many things. There were OTHER ways of doing things that worked just as well, if not better, than what I believed. I could have gotten pissed off and closed my mind to all of that, but I didn't. I considered that perhaps what advice was given to me wasn't the sort of thing I was really comfortable with doing. I changed my mind.

I nearly got my son circumcized. It's cleaner, people said, he'll look like his dad, people said. Then I happened to ask a Greek friend of mine who was pregnant with a boy what she planned to do and she said she wasn't getting her son circumcized, that's just the way Greek men are. Really? I hadn't thought of it that way. So I read about circumcision and I realized that leaving my son intact wasn't going to be harmful to him, while having his foreskin torn off would definitely be harmful to him.

I was going to give birth in a hospital "just in case". I thought that's how it was done, I never even knew that it was possible to give birth anywhere else. Then I talked to my midwife and my doula and realized that there were other options out there. I looked into these options and I read the book Birthing From Within and I realized that doctors treat conditions, but childbirth is not a condition! A laboring woman is not sick and does not need to be managed. So I changed my mind. I went to a birth center. The shit hit the fan and I ended up in the hospital with an unplanned c-section, and it affected me deeply. People tried to tell me that all that mattered was that I had a healthy baby, and I felt as if they were saying I was so callous that I wasn't concerned with my baby's life over my birth experience. Then I thought about it and realized that my son's life and his birth are two different things entirely, and I can feel joy about one and pain about the other and it's okay. I made the decision that the next time I give birth it will be at home, because it's safer even with a prior c-section. These are the things doctors don't tell you, because they are trained to view everything as a condition or an illness.

When I was in the hospital I couldn't get my son latched on because I had flat nipples. I had never even heard of such a thing. Every nurse that came on duty I begged for help, and they all had different advice. One said it was suppoesd to hurt (wrong). One said that it was okay that he was sleeping all day long (wrong). One said that I absolutely had to supplement him with formula (wrong). I was told that if I was going to breastfeed that I could never use a bottle otherwise my son would get nipple confusion (wrong). I took all this advice because it's all I had to work with. When I got home I called a lactation consultant and that turned things around for me. She helped me but it took a lot of very hard work on my part. My milk didn't come in for at least four days due to my surgery, and it hurt to move around. Yet I pumped and pumped and cried and raged and pumped some more and used a nipple shield and felt inadequate when I could only produce 5ccs of breastmilk and cried every time I had to feed my son formula from a cup. But I did it, and after a week he was off the formula. After two weeks he started latching on to my breast without the nipple shield. After a month my milk was (somewhat) steady. Twenty-two months later he is still nursing. I could have stopped in any of a hundred different places, after a hundred different obstacles, but I didn't.

I returned to work and pumped my milk in a dusty closet full of files, constantly on the alert of being walked in on unexpectedly. I drank gallons of herbal tea as my supply was still crap. I pumped at home with my son on one breast and the pump on the other just so he'd have enough for daycare. I got up in the middle of the night to pump to bolster my milk supply. I visited my son at daycare so that I could nurse him during my lunch break. I did all these things because it was really important to me not to give him formula ever again. I regret none of it. Would I have ever seen myself doing all of this before having a baby? Never. No way. I changed my mind.

Knowing what I do now, I would have done things differently. I would have started pumping in the hospital immediately. I would have called a lactation consultant to be there the day my son was born. I would have made my own formula to use in supplementation instead of that factory-made crap. I would have eaten and drunk more to help with milk production instead of getting depressed and allowing myself to get run down from not eating, drinking, or bathing. I would have asked for more help.

I primarily used disposable diapers on my son for the first five months of his life. I felt incredibly guilty about the waste and the landfills but it was too overwhelming to do it any other way. But I continued to research my options and when I felt I could handle it I made the switch. I changed my mind. Looking back I realize that it didn't need to be as difficult as I made it for myself, but that again is the clear vision of experience.

God, if I had to count the number of things I've changed my mind about I don't think I could remember them all. I am a person who is constantly learning and constantly seeking information. I do the best with what I am equipped with, and don't take it too hard if I find out later that maybe it wasn't the best decision I could have made. Am I ashamed of that? Hardly. There isn't a thing I do or have done that I am ashamed of, because I AM a great mom and my kid IS a great kid.

I've never dealt well with excuses, so I don't give them. This is the way I do things, and that's that. Sure, there will always be people who do things "better" than me, and that's fine. I can't be perfect nor do I try. But I also think that talking about my experiences and voicing my opinions will help other people make their own educated decisions. It makes people uncomfortable. Good! Because it also makes them think.

I felt guilty about things that I knew in my heart of hearts was inadequate. That led me to explore them further and find the solution that worked best for me. It's as simple as that. Just because I felt guilty didn't mean I should go take it out my doula, or my midwife, or my family, or my friends, for having a differing opinion.

Do people judge me? I'm sure they do. Do I care? I'm sure I don't.

Controversial entry of the day.

2005-06-07T08:50:00.000-04:00

1. Formula should only be available with a doctor's prescription.

2. Women who "can't breastfeed" should use wet nurses.

3. Breastfeeding is often hard. Get over it and get through it.

I am just so sick and tired of how much advertising has changed the perception of we average Americans so that we think we need a certain thing. Formula companies don't give a shit about our babies' health. They don't come up with all these new innovations in fake babymilk because they truly care about how our children develop. They want to make money, period.

Why people can't see that the free cans of formula in the mail or the "checks" sent to us are nothing but crutches they give us, hoping to make us dependent on them once they chop our legs out from under us. Oh, they're sly about it too, saying that "we all know breast is best," and then following it up with, "but if you can't..." and "you should make the choice that's best for you and your baby..." and they've convinced us that their product is what is best. And it's not.

I think we all know it.

Those who sound off in anger defending their "choice" are just feeling guilty. I don't completely blame them because they've been convinced that what they've chosen is the only choice, when truly it's not. There are other options out there. You can make your own "formula", you know...it's like the equivalent of feeding your family a home-cooked meal or taking them out to a fast food chain. You can hire a wet nurse, though I'll admit there aren't a lot out there any more, but I can guarantee if it was once again perceived as an available option there would be. You can work really friggin hard to make sure you have enough milk for your child.

I'm not just saying that rashly, I assure you - I had it very, very, very hard in the beginning, and when I say "the beginning" I mean the first year of my son's life. I had all those classic symptoms that cause mothers to quit, but I didn't quit. Yeah, it was hard and I was miserable much of the time and it was a lot (a lot A LOT) of work. But, you know, a year out of my life really isn't that much and it is so important to my son that who am I to take that from him?

So, yeah, go ahead and flame me if you feel guilty, project your anger on me if it helps you sleep at night. I don't care. I know what it takes because I've done it and I succeeded. You know, I have a few friends who ended up formula feeding, but they never got indignant about it. They accepted their choice and don't try to defend it as the only option, because they know their options. I have a lot of respect for someone who can make a choice, no matter how different from my beliefs they are, and be okay with it without feeling the need to lash out at other people about it. There's a big difference. And if you're reading this entry and getting pissed off personally, you're missing the point. It's not about YOU.

But as far as public perception goes as a whole, it sickens me. These huge companies convince mothers to do something they'll feel guilty about, convince them that it's all right to feel that way, and then take their money. It's just so fucked up I can't stand it. Why can't we see this?

All those free samples and savings checks say one thing to me - "This crap costs NOTHING to make, which is why they're giving it away." Do you really think a can of formula is worth $11 when they give you a $5 off coupon? That means every other time you buy that product you're putting $5 in their pockets FOR NOTHING. Not to mention that even at $6 it's heinously overpriced. The formula companies are smart, you see. "If we give someone $10 in coupons every month for a year, they'll spend an additional $30 a month on our products." Multiply that by 100,000, or 500,000, or a million.

How can people support companies that cause the death of millions of children in third world countries? What, you don't believe me? Read this article. Sure, it's from 1995, but it's still happening. This isn't made up. This is real, and these are the ends to which formula companies will go...taking money out of the pockets of people so poor that we here in America can't even imagine it.

It makes me sick.

How willing are we to accept what is told to us that we can allow this to happen? How many shiny pieces of paper with pictures of smiling moms and babies on them do we have to get in the mail to turn our moral compass? How many glossy magazines objectifying the female breast as a sex object does it take to turn breastfeeding from something natural into something perverted?

Fuck you, advertisers!

Fuck you, big business!

Stop insulting our intelligence!

Stop harming our children!

Kiss my ass.

P.S. I was formula fed. Why? Because I was a sleepy baby. What a stupid fucking excuse, huh? So now I know better, and I do better.

This makes me smile!

2005-06-06T16:10:00.000-04:00

Birth, etc.

2005-05-24T17:12:00.000-04:00

Last Friday my unit leader invited me to her house for her Friday crop. I hadn't done any actual scrapbooking for a really long time so I figured sure, what the heck. Michael got his sister to come visit and watch the kidlet while Jenn and I went to Maureen's house.

I'm glad she was with me because I'm always so awkward in those situations where I don't know anyone, and I'm just no good at gossiping about silly things. Anyway, the night went fairly uneventfully until we got to the end and were getting ready to go. Maureen and one of her friends (I forget her name) got talking about pregnancy as Jenn is eight months along. The first thing they both said was, "GET THE DRUGS!" and then proceeded to tell their own tales of horror.

I bit my tongue very hard and didn't say anything, as Maureen's friend went on and on about how she went into labor at 8pm and by 6am the next morning was at the hospital insisting on getting an epidural. I'm sorry, but I laugh at her silly little ten hours of labor. Anyway, then of course she can't feel anything and they had to put her on pitocin to "speed things up" and then turned the epidural off when it was time to push, and oh wow it hurt! No wonder it hurt, doofus! Forcing your body to have stronger contractions and then shutting yourself off from the pain is only going to be a nasty surprise later on because you're not prepared for it.

Maureen talked about how her first son she had an epidural and it was fine, but for her second son she had a midwife (said distastefully) who "wouldn't let me" get the drugs and by the time she insisted it was too late so she had to birth him naturally. She told her tale with lots of shouting and grimaces and all I could think was, "Yeah, of course it hurts more than the first time, and no wonder it was so painful, being all tense and angry like that!" "Get yourself a GOOD doctor!" she said. THEN her friend piped in, saying, "Oh my god, I had a doula--and I don't know if you know about THEM, but what a total crackpot," and on and on. You can pretty much see where this was going. They both had a great time trashing on using the birthing ball, the shower, the hot tub, walking and squatting and laboring on all fours. They used a very mocking tone of voice and laughed throughout. I could feel myself getting madder and madder but I breathed deeply and kept my cool.

After they ran on and on for a while more or less trashing every single facet of natural birth, I cleared my throat and said, "It's funny you should mention all that...I was in labor for 44 hours drug-free at a birthing center with a wonderful midwife, doula, my husband, and two best friends. I loved being pregnant and I loved being in labor, but after all that time I ended up in the hospital with an emergency c-section, which was pretty devastating."

I think Maureen's friend was embarrassed, which I was glad about, as she had just finished extolling the virtues of "definitely have the baby sleep in the nursery for the first night, that way YOU can get some rest and it'll be easier to breastfeed." (I know, I know...WHA?!) They did a little backpedaling and I gave an abbreviated version of my birth story, stressing that the natural approach was a wonderful and beautiful thing and I wouldn't have done it any other way.

I considered telling Maureen's friend that I wanted to be a doula myself someday, but decided to let it be. I don't think she realized just how offensive her comments were, but hopefully this will make her think twice in the future.

"This will probably shock you," I said, "but my next baby I'm planning on having at home because I don't want to be labeled a high-risk pregnancy and have to labor in the hospital. If that happens I guarantee I'll have another c-section because doctors can't leave well enough alone." A few minutes later Maureen's friend asked me, "Were you really serious? Where would you have the baby...like, your bedroom or something?" I answered, "I suppoose so...or in the living room, or in the bathtub, or in a kiddie pool in the back yard. Wherever. I'll invite you so you can come watch."

Anyway. The conversation went back and forth a little more and I did my best to uphold my beliefs on natural childbirth. It really did stun me just how similar the stories of intervention-filled births are the same, all contain stress and pain and unhappiness. "Ha ha, yeah, birth is SUCH a beautiful thing," Maureen's friend said jokingly. It made me sad for her.

Probably the best part for me was when Maureen and her friend were exclaiming over the length of my labor and how did I possibly manage it, and Jenn said, "Actually, she did a fantastic job, she was really awesome." My heart swelled fit to burst when I heard that.

When we left I waited until we got in the car and then I said I was saddened by their birth experiences, and that it really seemed to me that many of their 'troubles' they brought upon themselves through allowing intervention in the first place. Jenn said she had thought the same thing. She also said she could tell I was getting mad, but that I had handled myself well. "You were great, but your neck was getting really red," she said. Heh, I can't hide my feelings being so fair.

I'm so glad she and I can talk about these things...I know that we have different ideas when it comes to personal decisions like childbirth and child rearing and all that, but we can still talk about them subjectively even if I'm coming from my life's experience and she's coming from hers and we're both VERY strong personalities.

I've already told her that I love her and want only the best for her, and of course I have my opnions of how I would want her birth experience to be, but that I also trust her to do her own research and come up with a decision that makes sense to her. She's a smart cookie, that's why she's my friend. Of course I would be thrilled if she wanted to give birth in the kiddie pool in my back yard, but I can already hear her laughing at that one. My second wish will have to be for a safe, beautiful birth.

Midwives of Maine event

2005-05-23T10:29:00.000-04:00

On Saturday I wanted to go to Deering Oaks Park in Portland for a concert held by Midwives of Maine, there were scheduled to be some vendors there and all that good stuff. We get down there and park and find it to be a *very* small affair...disappointingly so. The flyer said it was from 1-5 though the website said it was from 2-5 so when we arrived at a few minutes past 1 o'clock the music was still being set up and the sky was looking angry.

Having traveled from inland to the coast, it was considerably breezier and colder in Portland, making me wish I had packed kidlet a warmer coat. We put two sweatshirts on him and called it good.

Overall it was a nice little event, once the music started Michael sat in my lap and watched the performers, too shy to get up and dance with the other kids. The performers were...uh, not that good. It's too bad, too, because it was a neat venue.

I walked around and looked at the exhibits that were set up, and gathered a lot of info about area midwives. I guess I was expecting the midwives to be there and available so I could talk to them. I think a few of them were around as I saw people going up to hug one another and act familiar, but without name tags or some other identifier I was just too uncomfortable to approach anyone.

The thing I've noticed is that the "crunchy" people in Maine, and Portland primarily, is that they are very trendy crunchy. What I mean by that is they all have that air of affluence which allows them to be "radical", but in a real yuppie sort of way because they have money. I don't feel that the Michaels and I fit into that group all too well. It's so weird because it's as if there's as much cliqueishness amongst the natural folk as there are any other social demographic. Michael and I just sort of are who we are, and nothing else. It's so hard to descibe unless you're there. Everyone knows one another, and everyone is dressed in appropriately Earthy-yet-pricey clothing. The majority of the men had that scraggly unkempt-yet-similar facial hair thing going on, and there were lots of distinctly untrendy-yet-fashionable hats. In any case, I felt that we didn't really fit in.

You know what it is? There's this whole group of people, this whole culture, surrounding "natural family living" (for lack of a better term) that embody the whole idea of being Earthy and laid-back and open and sort of like modern-day hippies with Volvos. Yet, they're not very friendly or open to people who aren't part of the culture. To me, that sort of lifestyle should be all about being open and accepting. We've been to a number of Portland events with this crowd and rarely has anyone approached us. I can't shake the feeling that these people find it fashionable to be so "different", yet really they're not.

It's frustrating and makes me sad that I don't feel "cool" enough to hang out with the crunchy crowd when to me that's not what it's supposed to be about.

Anyway. We stayed for a little while but the weather looked more menacing by the minute, so around 3pm made the call to leave. I did manage to get some cute shots of the Michaels that I hope come out all right. The light was decent, I like filtered natural light, especially dusk. It's hard to get the balance right, though, so we'll see how it looks when I get it developed.

Quickie

2005-04-26T12:01:00.000-04:00

So last night at dinner I told Michael about my thinking about homebirth and the reasons why. Before he could reply the phone rang, and then the kid needed tending to, and then something else and something else until it was an hour later and he STILL hadn't given me a reaction.

He's good at that. It drives me batty!

Anyway, I finally cornered him and asked point-blank how he felt about homebirthing and he said, "I think it's a great idea."

What? Really?

This is coming from the same guy who said he was afraid of having another baby because he was so scared during Michael's birth when things spun out of control and I was in so much pain.

He said that he thinks if we could get that 3-D ultrasound once the baby is at term to verify that there's no nuchal cord (cord around the neck - kidlet's was a triple) that would prevent them from descending, we should "go for it."

!!!!

I thought I would have to dicuss it and convince him because there is no way I would go into this without his full support. But he agrees that it's safer than going to the hospital to get hooked up to a bazillion machines and, "if something goes wrong we only live five minutes from the hospital anyway."

He never ceases to amaze me. I am so thankful that I've found a partner with whom my values are so aligned.

More later.

HBAC Midwives

2005-04-25T12:01:00.000-04:00

So...have I mentioned this? I don't remember. I've been thinking about when we have another baby. We're still on track to get the Mirena out in September, so if things happen as they're bound to happen, Michael could be getting a sibling right around his birthday in 2006. That part I think we're pretty okay with.

The part I'm NOT okay with, however, is that every medical professional I mention this to gets "the look". The look that says I have a blinking neon sign above my head reading "WARNING!! HIGH-RISK!!" They all say, "Of course you can have another baby. But..."

In general the adage is no longer "Once a c-section, always a c-section," (though this IS Maine, mind you) but regardless of why you've had one if you decide to deliver vaginally with subsequent babies you are treated as a high-risk patient. It doesn't make a bit of difference that my first and only pregnancy was picture-perfect right up until the end. It doesn't matter that Michael's triple nuchal cord was a physical fluke and had nothing to do with his health or my own. It doesn't matter that I've never had any other pregnancies, miscarriages, abortions, even an abnormal pap smear in my entire life. I feel as if the temple of my body has been torn wide open and is no longer sacred space.

So...I've been thinking more and more about homebirth. Not just homebirth, but unassisted homebirth. I have to admit it scares the piss out of me just thinking about it, but I think it's the only way I won't be strapped to a bed on my back with a fetal montior attached to me my entire labor and delivery. If I go anywhere near a hospital my next birth will be anything but no-intervention. It will belong to the doctors or the certified nurse-midwives who have to bend to the doctors' and hospitals' will, no matter how good their intentions.

Out of curiosity I did a search to find homebirth midwives here in Maine. There aren't many, and I thought that there would be no way in hell they would touch a VBAC (vaginal birth after c-section) due to liability issues. I found one about 1-1/2 hours away from me and sent them an email without much hope.

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 11:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Homebirthing services

Hello,

I found your website through Google and I wanted to ask you about your homebirthing services.

I have one son, who was born via C-section in August 2003. I started out at Ballard House but was transferred to Mercy Hospital due to failure to progress after 40 hours of labor. It turned out that my son had a triple nuchal cord and never descended--I think he was at -2 station when he was delivered. It was determined that this was the only cause of difficulty, otherwise I had a perfect pregnancy and my son has had no medical problems since his birth.

My husband and I wish to have another baby, and the plan is to remove my IUD in September 2005 to let nature take its course. We do not anticipate any difficulty in my getting pregnant again, so that would put a tentative EDD for another baby sometime next summer.

The midwife I have now handles VBACs as does the hospital she is affiliated with, but I am concerned that since I would be considered a high-risk pregnancy that I would be pressured to have a higher intervention birth than I desire, as well as my fear that my midwife would be off-duty when I went into labor and I would have to deal with one of the hospital's OBs. In giving it a lot of thought, I would really like to birth at home.

I live fairly close to the hospital and have seriously considered giving birth unassisted, but at the same time I am still afraid of something happening and not recognizing the warning signs. I am seeking a homebirth midwife who is willing to handle VBACs.

If this is something you do, great. If not, do you know of anyone who does?

I hope you can assist me, and I look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you,
Jen Xxxxxx

Subject: RE: Homebirthing services
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 18:32:58 -0400

Hello Xxxxxxxx, Well, there are many ways I would like to respond. Let me see if my typing skills can get it all out there. First, yes, I do VBACs at home. Because of the recent change in ACOG policy--once a c-section, always a c-section--at least at smaller Maine hospitals, we are having an inflow of women wanting to VBAC at home. There is such a movement in this direction that there are HBAC chat lines and info on the web HBAC(home birth after cesarean). My partner and I attend about 2 or more VBACs each year. We attend about 20 births total in a year. So far, we have never had an unsuccessful VBAC in our 6 years of working together. The only "criteria" we have for women wanting to VBAC at home is to obtain their surgical records and find out if they had a low transverse uterine incision (most all women do) or a classical incision. Classical is much less common and usually only performed if the surgeon is having difficulty removing the baby through an already made low transverse incision. Classical incisions have a significantly higher (though still low) rate of rupture.

I wasn't sure from your inquiry where you live. I live in Xxxxxxxx, and have a midwifery office in Xxxxxxx. So, I technically attend births anywhere within about an hour, or a little more, radius of my home. Xxxxx and I offer free initial consultations for women and their families.

These consultations are one hour and fifteen minutes long, as are all of our prenatals. If you wanted to, you could come and meet with us even before conceiving to see if we were a good fit for you. I think for women who are overcoming a difficult first birth experience, it is a comforting feeling to know that you will have a relationship with a good care provider even before conception. ie. it's safe to get pregnant. Xxxxx and I work together, we do all of our births together, and most all of our prenatal appointments.

So, we don't share on-call, like midwives and OBs.

Also, as Certified Professional Midwives working in the state of Maine, we do not work under doctor protocols, like CNMs in the hospital and at the Ballard House. We do not need to risk women out, or transfer care so long as we are all comfortable with the safety of mother and baby. In other words, if you are planning a VBAC in the hospital, they may put time limits, movement limits, require continuous fetal monitoring, etc. etc. At home, so long as we know a mother has good reserves, and that their baby is having good response to contractions, we can help with with a VBAC even if it takes 36 hours.

I'm glad to help you figure out a plan for your upcoming pregnancy. If Xxxxx and I are too far away, I could recommend another midwife who might be closer to you. Also, I should let you know that most private insurances do not cover homebirth in Maine. For now, homebirth is something that folks need to pay out of pocket for. For this reason, we work on a sliding scale, as do a number of other midwives.

Hope this info is helpful. Please don't hesitate to inquire further.

Thanks, Xxxxx

Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: RE: Homebirthing services

Wow, thank you for all the great information!

I am so relieved that you handle HBACs. I can't believe I didn't tell you where I live! I'm in Xxxxx, which is over an hour away from you (77 miles) so I don't know if you would come here. If you do not go that far from home, do you handle births in Xxxxxxx?

Assuming that you would hoof it all the way to Xxxxx, payment on a sliding scale would be perfect for us. I completely understand that insurance doesn't cover homebirths and I fully expected that. I was shocked to discover they covered Ballard House. The good thing about investigating this NOW is that we can prepare for whatever costs will be incurred and save up.

I would still be interested in coming to meet with you and Xxxxx, regardless of whether you would birth in Xxxxxx or not. I find it really helpful for me to talk to other women who share my feelings about pregnancy and birth. Since my son's birth I would like to become a doula but I realize that I still have too many feelings about my own experience that I need to deal with properly before trying to help other women. I welcome your insight.

As for the nitty-gritties of my medical history, I did have a low transverse incision and I requested that the surgeon (Dr. Xxx Xxxxx of Portland) use a double layer suture when closing the incision in my uterus, which she did. I had no trouble with the incision and healed quicker than I expected. I have copies of all of my records and I would be happy to bring them with me. If you would like to request them from Dr. Xxxxx and the hospital directly, I can supply you with all my information before we meet.

Yes, you're right--I am still processing a lot of what happened with my son's birth; my husband and I are afraid of getting pregnant again for a number of reasons. I think that's why I am looking around the birthing community many months before I plan to get pregnant again. The thing that is most tragic in my mind is that I loved being pregnant so much, I loved laboring and had a wonderful support group with me the entire time (doula, husband, two best friends), and now I'm scared of being "selfish" with a homebirth and harming myself or, worse, the baby.

Everything that you have told me about your practice sounds so wonderful...I feel as if a weight has been lifted from me. When talking to medical professionals about having another baby I feel as if I have a big red stamp reading "WARNING - HIGH RISK!" on my forehead and everyone says things like, "You can have another baby, BUT..." It makes me doubt myself. I keep re-reading Birthing From Within and Ina May's Guide to remind me that I am not broken.

Okay, sorry for getting a little emotional there, I can't help it. Thank you so much for getting back to me, and I look forward to speaking with you further. Have a great day.

Subject: RE: Homebirthing services
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 11:15:00 -0400

Hi Jen, Glad to hear back from you. First, let me say that Xxxxx and I live in Xxxxxxxxx, which is a bit closer to Xxxxxx than Xxxxxx--about 15 miles closer. I think we are about 1 1/4hrs. from your house. However, we do the majority of our appointments in Xxxxxx, which is a hike for you. However, we would still be happy to meet with you if you are searching out a good match in a practitioner, because it may be us. However, I will also say that there are two midwives who practice together in the Xxxxxxx area, Xxxxxxx Xxxxx--###-#### and Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx--###-####. Xxxxxxx actually just assisted us at a complicated birth requiring three midwives.

Anyways, I believe they are doing HBACs as well.I was glad to hear that Xxx closed you in double-layer suturing, it's such an argued over subject amongst OBs and some refuse to see the benefit of it, and insist on singlelayer closure.

I'll also say that it seems like your thoughts are in the right place. Honestly, it makes perfect sense to choose practitioners to help you with a VBAC that are comfortable with VBAC, that have seen numerous successful VBACs, that don't use terms like "trial of labor" or put you in a high risk category, or put parameters on your next labor and birth. I see no reason, based on the information you gave me, that you couldn't have a lovely home waterbirth with the same type of monitoring as a woman giving birth without a previous c/sec. Also, please let go of the guilt of choosing what you want for your birth. How many times in your life do you plan on giving birth? And we know, it's an amazing event that impacts our lives as parents, and women. Why wouldn't we be selfish and choose what felt right for us? If people give you a hard time in regards to your consideration of a homebirth, it's because they are not well informed.

Homebirth is as safe, and slightly safer than hospital birth. We have better outcomes for mothers and babies, and have a significantly lower rate of interventions. Homebirth midwives carry equipment and skills to births much like are available in the hospital, we just don't need to use them very often. And that's the difference, we only use them when needed. Homebirth midwives carry oxygen, resuscitation equipment, anti-hemmorhagic medications, suturing equipment, suctioning devices, herbs and homeopathics, and a lot of wisdom. The only thing homebirth midwives don't bring to a homebirth is an operating room. You'll have to excuse me, this is a subject I feel pretty inspired about. Anyways, people who have a lack of knowledge about homebirth assume that there's not a lot of "medical" support available to women if they need it. And so, they worry about women choosing to have their babies at home. I worry when women I know and care about choose to have their babies in the hospital.

So Jen, good luck with your process. Keep reading Ina May's book. It seems to me that you are very much on the right path to having a lovely second pregnancy and birth--a very healing one. I encourage you to feel all the emotions that come up for you around your first birth--get yourself free and clear and ready for your second baby. Also, keep searching information, talking to people, making plans, it's all important work. And, don't hesitate to call if you and your partner would like to come and meet us.

And if you call Xxxxxxx and Xxxxx, please let them know we sent you. They are the best midwives in the southern part of the state (I think).

It's good emailing with you. Peace, Xxxxx

I see no reason that you couldn't have a lovely home waterbirth.

I feel as light as a feather.