Now that the miscarriage is well behind us...as in, life has continued forward at that break neck pace that comes with a growing toddler leaving me with just little snatches here and there in my days to contemplate what was lost, I've had this growing sense of the sacrifice it is to my one child to add another.
That's NOT to say that I'm seriously considering only ever having one child. By no means! I don't know what it is, evolutionary predilection of a species to want to produce in large numbers in times of plenty (which surely modern life qualifies), or the fact that I'm obsessed with birth and babies and want the chance to experience all of that again in this calmer, more observant place at which I now sit. Whatever it is, there's just no way I'd ever consider K to be my first AND last child. But, he IS my only child for the moment, and I'm ever more conscious of how much I give him, how much of me he takes, and what little there is left over for myself...much less another child!
A lot of people talk about the 'gifting' of a sibling to their first child. As though they're having a second simply to provide a playmate for their first. Which, is not a good reason. (or so I think) And, while I did, while pregnant with this past baby, think often of how great the two of them would get along, and how much my first WOULD enjoy the addition of a second, it was never a primary reason to have a second. Nor should it have been, because, as I see very clearly now, the addition of a second to a family structured such as ours is only taking AWAY something from the first and giving back very little in return.
Yes, there might be a time when they were playmates, and social skills developed more easily, or when the various 'mom'/parenting moments of the day seemed more 'fun' because of the dynamic of two children rather than one, but, mostly, I'd be draining away a good deal of my time away from my first.
Obviously, this isn't a horrible thing in my mind. There comes a time in every child's life when they can't have Mother around all the time, obviously. But, I wonder at the forcing of it. But, then what's the option, wait until my child avidly asks me for a sibling? Wait until he's grown and no longer needs much of my time? I don't have any answers because it's not really a thing I'm actually contemplating that hard. Given the right timing, yes, I'd have another right this moment, but while I'm waiting, I've been noticing....
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Fevers: A Personal Revelation
Last night, I was led to bed by my awakened (nearly!) 3 year old who was begging for more cuddles in the 'big' bed. Cuddling close to one another, I realized with a bit of surprise that he was feverish. Now, having been a mother for the whole course of his life, I will say that this particular fever bout was one of the mildest sorts...but it still made me think how much I've grown into my role of a stand-back parent. The sort that lets nature occur as it will with only the slightest nudges when appropriate or desired. Meaning that when a fever comes knocking, I just wait and watch and push the liquids.
Fevers are one of those things that we grow up to think are awful, horrible, scary signs of illness that should be smothered down to 'acceptable' ranges of human body temperature with all sorts of immune suppressing medications. Or, at least, that's how I was generally raised. My mother would get all sorts of anxious whenever one of us would show signs of a fever, and, rightly so, we always felt AWFUL whenever one of us was suffering with one, so it made sense that somehow this thing....this FEVER was dangerous and should be cause for alarm.
Of course, now that I've come to know what I know, and think what I think, I realize that fevers are GOOD. The body is fighting off infection...the body is waging war against some foreign invader that it perceives as a threat and the battle is so intense that it's creating excess body heat. (or, something like that) This is GOOD because it means that the body's defenses are reacting appropriately...that the body has taken charge of the situation, and given the extra rest and fluids to keep away dehydration will more often than not come out the victor. It's what our immune system is supposed to do and, believe it or not, it's very successful. After all, we've survived millenia as a species.
As a mother, my role is to watch. To be aware of a fever when it presents and then to wait and watch. I try to keep us home, and entertain the boy with games and diversions that are easy on the body and involve lots of extra cuddles. I keep his water cup constantly re-filled and urge him to drink more, and do little else to signify that anything at all is 'wrong' with him. Occasionally, his appetite is also gone and then I cook up a bit of homemade bone broth and brown rice, or we make slushy smoothies out of fresh fruit for an extra vitamin C boost. But, nothing excessive. Nothing to let him know that I think he's in 'danger' or that I'm any more 'aware' of him than when he's perfectly healthy and bounding around like a mad man.
Now, there have been some fevers in the past that were excessive. I can think of two that had me very concerned to the level that I was unable to sleep through the night. In one case, we ended up needing a antibiotic shot the next day after the illness itself presented with a very disgustingly bloody eye and a fever that had raged for far beyond my comfort level. Still, even in that case, I'm thankful we waited as long as we did and treated it as normal for as long as we could because we were lucky enough that the illness (a version of conjunctivitis) was easily identifiable to the doctor and not yet life threatening, something we were praised for by the doctor.
The second case of fever died off on its own but I did intervene with one dosage of children's Tylenol after the poor boy became flushed all over his body and the fever had raged at an 'uncomfortable' feel to me for much longer than I could relax through. Or, and this is important to mention, more than the boy himself seemed comfortable with. After the one dosage, the fever continued for another day or two, but at a less concerning level and we were able to wait it out.
When I realized that we were in our latest run in with 'fever', I was pleased to see how little concern it arose in me. How confident I was in the boy's ability to fight off whatever it was without my intervening. It's something worth writing about ;-)
Fevers are one of those things that we grow up to think are awful, horrible, scary signs of illness that should be smothered down to 'acceptable' ranges of human body temperature with all sorts of immune suppressing medications. Or, at least, that's how I was generally raised. My mother would get all sorts of anxious whenever one of us would show signs of a fever, and, rightly so, we always felt AWFUL whenever one of us was suffering with one, so it made sense that somehow this thing....this FEVER was dangerous and should be cause for alarm.
Of course, now that I've come to know what I know, and think what I think, I realize that fevers are GOOD. The body is fighting off infection...the body is waging war against some foreign invader that it perceives as a threat and the battle is so intense that it's creating excess body heat. (or, something like that) This is GOOD because it means that the body's defenses are reacting appropriately...that the body has taken charge of the situation, and given the extra rest and fluids to keep away dehydration will more often than not come out the victor. It's what our immune system is supposed to do and, believe it or not, it's very successful. After all, we've survived millenia as a species.
As a mother, my role is to watch. To be aware of a fever when it presents and then to wait and watch. I try to keep us home, and entertain the boy with games and diversions that are easy on the body and involve lots of extra cuddles. I keep his water cup constantly re-filled and urge him to drink more, and do little else to signify that anything at all is 'wrong' with him. Occasionally, his appetite is also gone and then I cook up a bit of homemade bone broth and brown rice, or we make slushy smoothies out of fresh fruit for an extra vitamin C boost. But, nothing excessive. Nothing to let him know that I think he's in 'danger' or that I'm any more 'aware' of him than when he's perfectly healthy and bounding around like a mad man.
Now, there have been some fevers in the past that were excessive. I can think of two that had me very concerned to the level that I was unable to sleep through the night. In one case, we ended up needing a antibiotic shot the next day after the illness itself presented with a very disgustingly bloody eye and a fever that had raged for far beyond my comfort level. Still, even in that case, I'm thankful we waited as long as we did and treated it as normal for as long as we could because we were lucky enough that the illness (a version of conjunctivitis) was easily identifiable to the doctor and not yet life threatening, something we were praised for by the doctor.
The second case of fever died off on its own but I did intervene with one dosage of children's Tylenol after the poor boy became flushed all over his body and the fever had raged at an 'uncomfortable' feel to me for much longer than I could relax through. Or, and this is important to mention, more than the boy himself seemed comfortable with. After the one dosage, the fever continued for another day or two, but at a less concerning level and we were able to wait it out.
When I realized that we were in our latest run in with 'fever', I was pleased to see how little concern it arose in me. How confident I was in the boy's ability to fight off whatever it was without my intervening. It's something worth writing about ;-)
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
How Doctor's Die
My partner found, and forwarded, this interesting post to me concerning how doctors die. Or, more specifically, how doctors choose to turn down many of the invasive "life-saving" options when faced with their own preeminent deaths.
The article makes the claim that many doctors know far too well that many of the tactics available to those faced with news of an impending death are painful, dehumanizing, and (often) thought of as worse than death by their patients. So, doctors take their knowledge of the medical technology available, the realistic quality of life expectations gained by interventions and often choose to wait out their own deaths within the peace and calm of their own homes and family with orders to avoid resucitation, or life support at all costs. They then go on to die in relative comfort having turned down many of the very things they would ordinarily suggest or actually DO to their own patients.
I found it very interesting, and it was a wake up call for my partner that when we concern ourselves with pregnancy and birth and the naturalness of it that does not call for it to take place within the medical community (more often than not). We are also calling attention to the medical community in general and MANY of the practices currently in use that are not called for and would not be chosen if people were EDUCATED about their options and the possible results of each choice. In realistic terms.
For example, I wish that every woman who gets anxious about 'waiting for labor' and agrees to a doctor's suggestion of induction KNEW the story of my doula client who literally suffered in a fevered haze for over 36 hours before finally becoming yet another (unwarranted) C-section case that had life-altering reproductive implications upon her future. But, unless they want to dig up that information, it's not there. The doctors certainly aren't sitting down their clients and spelling out in very layman's terms the risks imposed by the very nature of birthing in a medical environment. They certainly aren't making it clear that their priority is liability FOLLOWED by patient's health!
All very disturbing, and interesting to see that many doctors DO realize the base philosophy of enough is enough. There's a point at which we don't meddle because it's worse in the sense of quality of life if we do. And, that given the choice, one would ultimately choose to live their life to the fullest...not to the longest, most bitter end.
You can find the aforementioned post here,
http://zocalopublicsquare.org/thepublicsquare/2011/11/30/how-doctors-die/read/nexus/
The article makes the claim that many doctors know far too well that many of the tactics available to those faced with news of an impending death are painful, dehumanizing, and (often) thought of as worse than death by their patients. So, doctors take their knowledge of the medical technology available, the realistic quality of life expectations gained by interventions and often choose to wait out their own deaths within the peace and calm of their own homes and family with orders to avoid resucitation, or life support at all costs. They then go on to die in relative comfort having turned down many of the very things they would ordinarily suggest or actually DO to their own patients.
I found it very interesting, and it was a wake up call for my partner that when we concern ourselves with pregnancy and birth and the naturalness of it that does not call for it to take place within the medical community (more often than not). We are also calling attention to the medical community in general and MANY of the practices currently in use that are not called for and would not be chosen if people were EDUCATED about their options and the possible results of each choice. In realistic terms.
For example, I wish that every woman who gets anxious about 'waiting for labor' and agrees to a doctor's suggestion of induction KNEW the story of my doula client who literally suffered in a fevered haze for over 36 hours before finally becoming yet another (unwarranted) C-section case that had life-altering reproductive implications upon her future. But, unless they want to dig up that information, it's not there. The doctors certainly aren't sitting down their clients and spelling out in very layman's terms the risks imposed by the very nature of birthing in a medical environment. They certainly aren't making it clear that their priority is liability FOLLOWED by patient's health!
All very disturbing, and interesting to see that many doctors DO realize the base philosophy of enough is enough. There's a point at which we don't meddle because it's worse in the sense of quality of life if we do. And, that given the choice, one would ultimately choose to live their life to the fullest...not to the longest, most bitter end.
You can find the aforementioned post here,
http://zocalopublicsquare.org/thepublicsquare/2011/11/30/how-doctors-die/read/nexus/
Monday, December 5, 2011
Holistic Midwifery Arrived!
Today 'Solstice' came early for me, with a much anticipated parcel containing Anne Frye's Holistic Midwifery Volume 1. Yay! I'm super excited to thoroughly read it whenever enough moments of quiet come my way.
I've been studying...as mentioned before, but with Solstice and my son's birthday fast approaching, I'm finding that my sewing/knitting basket is overfilled with half-finished projects that demand large chunks of what free time I do get. I would say that I'm still averaging an hour or two a night though...which is pretty decent considering I have no end date, and no conception of how long this self-motivation "just do it" approach must last before I find the time is right for an apprenticeship.
Before I received this textbook, I stumbled upon a few sites of interest,
*A Fetal/Embryological development site that's just amazing!
http://www.visembryo.com/baby/index.html
*An online textbook for nurses concerning prenatal care and birth.
http://www.brooksidepress.org/Products/Obstetric_and_Newborn_Care_1/Index.htm
Enjoy!
I've been studying...as mentioned before, but with Solstice and my son's birthday fast approaching, I'm finding that my sewing/knitting basket is overfilled with half-finished projects that demand large chunks of what free time I do get. I would say that I'm still averaging an hour or two a night though...which is pretty decent considering I have no end date, and no conception of how long this self-motivation "just do it" approach must last before I find the time is right for an apprenticeship.
Before I received this textbook, I stumbled upon a few sites of interest,
*A Fetal/Embryological development site that's just amazing!
http://www.visembryo.com/baby/index.html
*An online textbook for nurses concerning prenatal care and birth.
http://www.brooksidepress.org/Products/Obstetric_and_Newborn_Care_1/Index.htm
Enjoy!
Sunday, December 4, 2011
The Brewer Pregnancy Diet
It's sometimes hard for me to know what to write on here. In my head, it's all a massive jumble of extraneous birth/pregnancy knowledge and questions and there's really not much in the way of a formulated beginning and end. So, when thinking of what topic to write upon, I often find myself just going with the first thing that pops into my head and belongs on this blog through any minute connection. So bear with me.
This past Thursday, in my midwifery 101 course with Gloria Lemay, we discussed the ever-important topic of high blood pressure in pregnancy. Now, I've never experienced this...nor have I actually KNOWN anyone who has struggled with this problem, but I've heard the horror stories. The high BP that very rapidly becomes pre-eclampsia followed by prolonged hospital stays, failed inductions, and eventually the dreaded (and probably unnecessary given what I have to say further on) C-section. I certainly wouldn't wish this problem on anyone, but being a firm believer in preventative care and the power of proper nutrition, I just have to add my two cents.
High BP may very well come about in a pregnancy no matter what the woman does to prevent it, but while the prevailing theory of thought among the medical community is that such a thing cannot be treated outside of removal of the placenta (and therefore the baby), I (and many others more informed than myself) believe that the same measures that may help to prevent pre-E and high BP may also help to "cure" it or at least keep it at bay long enough to allow further fetal development and or the natural initiation of labor.
There was a man, named Dr. Brewer, who spent over 50 years of his life devoted to the study of maternal nutrition and the resulting outcome of pregnancies. In layman's terms, Dr. Brewer was one of the first to realize that high BP tended not to result in women of wealthy income, while it was a common complaint amongst the underprivileged. Further pinpointing the cause of this difference, Dr. Brewer realized the importance of certain components of a prenatal diet such as high intake of protein, butters and other natural fats, and salt. He determined that nutritional was of significance for every pregnant woman and felt that it was a birth worker's responsibility to educate their clients in the importance of proper nutrition. He also found that his diet worked both to "cure" high BP and the problems caused by it in pregnancy, AND to prevent the same problems. He is directly responsible for determining that "inadequate prenatal nutrition has predictable obstetrical and neonatal consequences that matter for mother and baby." (1)
One of the reasons why I love the Bradley Childbirth Education classes is because the Brewer prenatal diet plays a large part in each class. You are given a worksheet to fill in each week that makes it easy to keep track of grams of protein, the amount of orange veggies, and butter servings, ect... Each week, the facilitator of the class will help you to examine your nutritional intake and suggest areas you might try to improve as well as provide examples of complimentary foods of which you may not be aware. It's great! and one of the easiest ways to protect yourself from a wide variety of prenatal complaint not the least of which is high BP.
To quote Dr. Brewer,
"Research done over the past fifty years [as of 1983], including some of my own, has made it increasingly clear that if the mother's diet is inadequate in any of several different ways, these difficulties may result:
To simplify the diet extremely for the shortening of this post, Dr. Brewer suggests a diet high in protein. The idea being that the amino acids necessary for putting together a baby all must come from the body's breakdown of protein. Protein being a nutritional need found only in food. The suggested intake is 80-100 g, which many women will find is significantly higher than their ordinary consumption and does take some dietary adjustments.
The diet also encourages a "Liberal" usage of salt. Note: that's NOT to taste...salt, particularly quality Celtic Salt rich in trace minerals is GOOD for the pregnant body as it facilitates the increase of blood volume necessary in a healthy pregnancy. It can also keep down edema (swelling) and if one is suffering from problems of this sort an increase in salt intake can significantly help.
Another significant factor in the Brewer diet is the increase in overall calories to 2500-3000/ day. Along with a focus on healthy fats/oils .
There is worlds to say about this diet and the transformative effect it can have on any pregnancy but I'll save that for other posts and leave you with some wonderful links that probably do a better job explaining than I ever could. Please do peruse them and let me know what you think!
Nutritional Checklists (often printable):
http://www.blueribbonbaby.org/brewer-diet-checklists/brewer-diet-basic-plan-checklist/
http://www.drbrewerpregnancydiet.com/id89.html
Facts of the Diet:
http://www.drbrewerpregnancydiet.com/id96.html
http://www.blueribbonbaby.org/healthy-pregnancy/brewer-diet-for-healthy-pregnancy/
http://livingawholelife.blogspot.com/2009/08/brewer-pregnancy-diet.html
http://www.bradleybirth.com/Diet.aspx
This past Thursday, in my midwifery 101 course with Gloria Lemay, we discussed the ever-important topic of high blood pressure in pregnancy. Now, I've never experienced this...nor have I actually KNOWN anyone who has struggled with this problem, but I've heard the horror stories. The high BP that very rapidly becomes pre-eclampsia followed by prolonged hospital stays, failed inductions, and eventually the dreaded (and probably unnecessary given what I have to say further on) C-section. I certainly wouldn't wish this problem on anyone, but being a firm believer in preventative care and the power of proper nutrition, I just have to add my two cents.
High BP may very well come about in a pregnancy no matter what the woman does to prevent it, but while the prevailing theory of thought among the medical community is that such a thing cannot be treated outside of removal of the placenta (and therefore the baby), I (and many others more informed than myself) believe that the same measures that may help to prevent pre-E and high BP may also help to "cure" it or at least keep it at bay long enough to allow further fetal development and or the natural initiation of labor.
There was a man, named Dr. Brewer, who spent over 50 years of his life devoted to the study of maternal nutrition and the resulting outcome of pregnancies. In layman's terms, Dr. Brewer was one of the first to realize that high BP tended not to result in women of wealthy income, while it was a common complaint amongst the underprivileged. Further pinpointing the cause of this difference, Dr. Brewer realized the importance of certain components of a prenatal diet such as high intake of protein, butters and other natural fats, and salt. He determined that nutritional was of significance for every pregnant woman and felt that it was a birth worker's responsibility to educate their clients in the importance of proper nutrition. He also found that his diet worked both to "cure" high BP and the problems caused by it in pregnancy, AND to prevent the same problems. He is directly responsible for determining that "inadequate prenatal nutrition has predictable obstetrical and neonatal consequences that matter for mother and baby." (1)
One of the reasons why I love the Bradley Childbirth Education classes is because the Brewer prenatal diet plays a large part in each class. You are given a worksheet to fill in each week that makes it easy to keep track of grams of protein, the amount of orange veggies, and butter servings, ect... Each week, the facilitator of the class will help you to examine your nutritional intake and suggest areas you might try to improve as well as provide examples of complimentary foods of which you may not be aware. It's great! and one of the easiest ways to protect yourself from a wide variety of prenatal complaint not the least of which is high BP.
To quote Dr. Brewer,
"Research done over the past fifty years [as of 1983], including some of my own, has made it increasingly clear that if the mother's diet is inadequate in any of several different ways, these difficulties may result:
To simplify the diet extremely for the shortening of this post, Dr. Brewer suggests a diet high in protein. The idea being that the amino acids necessary for putting together a baby all must come from the body's breakdown of protein. Protein being a nutritional need found only in food. The suggested intake is 80-100 g, which many women will find is significantly higher than their ordinary consumption and does take some dietary adjustments.
The diet also encourages a "Liberal" usage of salt. Note: that's NOT to taste...salt, particularly quality Celtic Salt rich in trace minerals is GOOD for the pregnant body as it facilitates the increase of blood volume necessary in a healthy pregnancy. It can also keep down edema (swelling) and if one is suffering from problems of this sort an increase in salt intake can significantly help.
Another significant factor in the Brewer diet is the increase in overall calories to 2500-3000/ day. Along with a focus on healthy fats/oils .
There is worlds to say about this diet and the transformative effect it can have on any pregnancy but I'll save that for other posts and leave you with some wonderful links that probably do a better job explaining than I ever could. Please do peruse them and let me know what you think!
Nutritional Checklists (often printable):
http://www.blueribbonbaby.org/brewer-diet-checklists/brewer-diet-basic-plan-checklist/
http://www.drbrewerpregnancydiet.com/id89.html
Facts of the Diet:
http://www.drbrewerpregnancydiet.com/id96.html
http://www.blueribbonbaby.org/healthy-pregnancy/brewer-diet-for-healthy-pregnancy/
http://livingawholelife.blogspot.com/2009/08/brewer-pregnancy-diet.html
http://www.bradleybirth.com/Diet.aspx
Friday, December 2, 2011
Moving
Per usual, our little family is in the midst of the chaos of choosing a new 'home'. I'm not exactly sure what our deal is, but for the past two...nearly three! (omg!) years, we've seldom lived longer than a few months in any one location. We've traveled across the country and back again three times, we've lived everywhere from the tropics of Hawaii and Puerto Rico to the bitter cold of New Hampshire in later winter. And, somehow, nothing sticks.
The idea, when we started this journey so long ago was that we had nothing tying us to our (then) present location...we were free to pack up the car and abandon the usual path of life and find 'home'. Since then, 'home' has become this word that is sort of revered. We have put SO much meaning into the word, so many expectations of what the perfect community will be like, that I'm beginning to think it just doesn't exist. And, in the meantime, life is flying by at an ever faster pace, and there doesn't seem to be much hope of suddenly stumbling upon wherever it is that we're meant to be living happily.
As it happens, we jointly hate our current location. It was an arrangement chosen under circumstances that urged us to choose rashly, and now we fervently wish to live elsewhere...any place else really. Our lease is up in two months, and we'll have to do something. The problem is that we just can't pick where. I know, that's probably not something most people complain about...or can even imagine BEING a problem. But, trust me, if you're in a constant state of relocation for three years, you'll eventually run out of places that seem worth the move and expense.
It's become something of an issue for my partner and I. Neither of us is happy here, and its near impossible to pick a next location, so we're both in grumpy moods whenever the topic of "where to next, honey?" comes up...which, lately, seems to be nightly. I'm beginning to think I should just make a list of where I'd live in reasonable peace, close my eyes, and point!
To make it all more difficult, we're a car-less family. Currently, we're enjoying the gift of my mother-in-law's car for a brief period of time because otherwise we'd surely die from boredom, but we do hope to return to car-less living at our next home site. I never really enjoy driving, although I DO enjoy the freedom it provides, but lately, it's grown even more tiresome and annoying and hardly seems worth the expense of buying our own car and then maintaining it. So, when we look for a new location, we have to factor in that we need walkability...walkability with a three year old in mind. In the middle of winter...
Yes, now you begin to see the problem. And, we need it close because money is a factor this go around and we'd rather not give up all the furniture ect... we had to buy for this current location. And, we need some manner of people we would get along with or we will truly go insane...which means folks who fall a bit outside the box...if there's ever a chance of having another child, then I need a local birth community that is active and quite comfortable with homebirth/unassisted birthing. If we are to keep our son happy, then there must also be a community of parents who raise their children without the assistance of traditional schooling. If my partner is to be happy, then we need a community of people who fall under the title of 'radical'. If I am to remain at home with my children and not feel shut-in, then I need a community where the right sort of parents actually DO things with one another...and it would be nice to have a local vibe of creativity/ eclecticism.
Do you see now?
And I haven't even BEGUN to list all the things like proximity to parks, libraries, ect...
So, good luck to us in these next two months as we try to figure out the 'next' place!
The idea, when we started this journey so long ago was that we had nothing tying us to our (then) present location...we were free to pack up the car and abandon the usual path of life and find 'home'. Since then, 'home' has become this word that is sort of revered. We have put SO much meaning into the word, so many expectations of what the perfect community will be like, that I'm beginning to think it just doesn't exist. And, in the meantime, life is flying by at an ever faster pace, and there doesn't seem to be much hope of suddenly stumbling upon wherever it is that we're meant to be living happily.
As it happens, we jointly hate our current location. It was an arrangement chosen under circumstances that urged us to choose rashly, and now we fervently wish to live elsewhere...any place else really. Our lease is up in two months, and we'll have to do something. The problem is that we just can't pick where. I know, that's probably not something most people complain about...or can even imagine BEING a problem. But, trust me, if you're in a constant state of relocation for three years, you'll eventually run out of places that seem worth the move and expense.
It's become something of an issue for my partner and I. Neither of us is happy here, and its near impossible to pick a next location, so we're both in grumpy moods whenever the topic of "where to next, honey?" comes up...which, lately, seems to be nightly. I'm beginning to think I should just make a list of where I'd live in reasonable peace, close my eyes, and point!
To make it all more difficult, we're a car-less family. Currently, we're enjoying the gift of my mother-in-law's car for a brief period of time because otherwise we'd surely die from boredom, but we do hope to return to car-less living at our next home site. I never really enjoy driving, although I DO enjoy the freedom it provides, but lately, it's grown even more tiresome and annoying and hardly seems worth the expense of buying our own car and then maintaining it. So, when we look for a new location, we have to factor in that we need walkability...walkability with a three year old in mind. In the middle of winter...
Yes, now you begin to see the problem. And, we need it close because money is a factor this go around and we'd rather not give up all the furniture ect... we had to buy for this current location. And, we need some manner of people we would get along with or we will truly go insane...which means folks who fall a bit outside the box...if there's ever a chance of having another child, then I need a local birth community that is active and quite comfortable with homebirth/unassisted birthing. If we are to keep our son happy, then there must also be a community of parents who raise their children without the assistance of traditional schooling. If my partner is to be happy, then we need a community of people who fall under the title of 'radical'. If I am to remain at home with my children and not feel shut-in, then I need a community where the right sort of parents actually DO things with one another...and it would be nice to have a local vibe of creativity/ eclecticism.
Do you see now?
And I haven't even BEGUN to list all the things like proximity to parks, libraries, ect...
So, good luck to us in these next two months as we try to figure out the 'next' place!
Thursday, December 1, 2011
State Birth Certificate
There was an interesting thread that developed the other night on a forum I often frequent concerning Unassisted Birth and choosing to forego a standard, state-issued birth certificate. Now, social security # questions often come up, because it's not particularly life-affecting to your child if you wait on it and let him or her make the decision later in life. Not to mention, enough people don't have one that there are various (difficult and time-consuming ) ways around it. However I'd never seen anyone bring up birth certificates, and it was inspiring to see someone actually questioning the need for a state birth certificate!
Unfortunately, the thread degenerated into the usual anarchist vs. State naysaying, with insinuations of legality and illegality looming around in a manner that I felt was quite threatening in some instances. But, at least it was brought up, and I think the original poster got a decent share of viewpoints from those of us who do consider foregoing birth certificates.
I first came to unassisted birthing out of fear/distrust of the current birth establishment...including, to some degree, traditional midwifery, but as my own political views evolved, I became more firmly entrenched in the idea that home and family is absolutely a place that I do not wish to share with the State. Just as I have chosen, with my partner, to forgo a traditional marriage out of disinterest in sharing our intimacy with the church and State, I also consider doing the same for my children. Meaning, that I do wonder about that need for a birth certificate.
My son presumably has one...no, I've never seen it, and once it was sent back to us for correction, and I can't rightly remember if that was followed through, but in any case, paperwork was turned into the state at the time of his birth that rightly or wrongly filled out was viewed by someone who probably made up something 'official'. We did turn down a social security card, which caused quite a stir at the time.
For a next, I've often thought that I might go without a social security card AND birth certificate. The idea being that I would bring up the lack of paperwork to my child well before he or she would need them for work or driving, and allow him/her to decide if they would like to document themselves with the State. I think the chances are 90% or higher that I will then find myself running around like a chicken with it's neck cut off trying to gather all the government documentation needed for a social security card/birth certificate, BUT at least my child was given the opportunity to choose the level of his or her involvement with the State.
This is really important to me. That I give my child the opportunity to choose. Choice is vital in all of our lives, and I hope that I AM raising my child(ren) such that they are constantly making conscious decisions in the direction of their lives. Meaning that, given the proper information concerning these documents, my child will truly be able to make an educated decision about their necessity for him or her. And, I as the parent will assist that choice in any way I can with my mouth firmly shut as to whether or not I agree with it.
Unfortunately, the thread degenerated into the usual anarchist vs. State naysaying, with insinuations of legality and illegality looming around in a manner that I felt was quite threatening in some instances. But, at least it was brought up, and I think the original poster got a decent share of viewpoints from those of us who do consider foregoing birth certificates.
I first came to unassisted birthing out of fear/distrust of the current birth establishment...including, to some degree, traditional midwifery, but as my own political views evolved, I became more firmly entrenched in the idea that home and family is absolutely a place that I do not wish to share with the State. Just as I have chosen, with my partner, to forgo a traditional marriage out of disinterest in sharing our intimacy with the church and State, I also consider doing the same for my children. Meaning, that I do wonder about that need for a birth certificate.
My son presumably has one...no, I've never seen it, and once it was sent back to us for correction, and I can't rightly remember if that was followed through, but in any case, paperwork was turned into the state at the time of his birth that rightly or wrongly filled out was viewed by someone who probably made up something 'official'. We did turn down a social security card, which caused quite a stir at the time.
For a next, I've often thought that I might go without a social security card AND birth certificate. The idea being that I would bring up the lack of paperwork to my child well before he or she would need them for work or driving, and allow him/her to decide if they would like to document themselves with the State. I think the chances are 90% or higher that I will then find myself running around like a chicken with it's neck cut off trying to gather all the government documentation needed for a social security card/birth certificate, BUT at least my child was given the opportunity to choose the level of his or her involvement with the State.
This is really important to me. That I give my child the opportunity to choose. Choice is vital in all of our lives, and I hope that I AM raising my child(ren) such that they are constantly making conscious decisions in the direction of their lives. Meaning that, given the proper information concerning these documents, my child will truly be able to make an educated decision about their necessity for him or her. And, I as the parent will assist that choice in any way I can with my mouth firmly shut as to whether or not I agree with it.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Predibirth- Creepy?
Alright, you knew a post about THIS mess was coming, right?
To summarize, some doctors in France coupled new computer programming and MRI of the fetus and scored a sample set of women (24) on the predicted outcome of their individual births. An apparent success at predicting birth outcomes, the new software, Predibirth, is being cited by various doctors as a GOOD thing because it will lessen a woman's chances of undergoing an emergency C-section. The idea here is that anyone who scores in a 'less than ideal' range on the prediction software will choose to undergo an elective C-section, rather than risk an emergency C-section thereby decreasing many of the risk factors associated with emergency C-sections on both mother and child.
....
Am I the only one incredibly freaked out by this news?!
...
Yes, it's only been compared against 24 births, yes, it's going to be years before it receives approval for use, and then I'm sure it'd only be used on high risk cases anyway for a while before eventually, MAYBE, becoming a common technology utilized on all women in the name of safer birth practices. Safer....because...well, cutting into a women before her due date, before she's gone into labor, before her Baby is ready might be considered crazy and creepy and detrimental to all involved UNLESS one cited the save-all catch-phrase, 'safety of mother and child' as a viable reason.
I only know what I've experienced in birthing my own child, what I've seen in the births of the women I've attended as a doula, and what I've read and studied through commonly available sources, but really...there doesn't seem to be much call for INCREASING the elective C-section rate when we're already dealing with a national C-section rate of over 33%!!! Well, over the WHO's suggestion of a 10% rate.
There's no indication that Predibirth is intended to LOWER the overall C-section rate. No indication of that whatsoever, and if we follow through with that train of thought, one might become quite concerned that this will result in a stronger association of fear, risk, and emergency with vaginal delivery. (we're not even talking 'natural', drug-free, here...we're talking pushing a baby out of your womb along the same passageway as our ancestors.) And, with an increase in these associations, and an increase in elective C-section options, then it only follows that more and more women will choose surgery over vaginal delivery simply because it gradually (one can only hope gradually!) becomes the socially 'safer' option.
It's all very sad.
To summarize, some doctors in France coupled new computer programming and MRI of the fetus and scored a sample set of women (24) on the predicted outcome of their individual births. An apparent success at predicting birth outcomes, the new software, Predibirth, is being cited by various doctors as a GOOD thing because it will lessen a woman's chances of undergoing an emergency C-section. The idea here is that anyone who scores in a 'less than ideal' range on the prediction software will choose to undergo an elective C-section, rather than risk an emergency C-section thereby decreasing many of the risk factors associated with emergency C-sections on both mother and child.
....
Am I the only one incredibly freaked out by this news?!
...
Yes, it's only been compared against 24 births, yes, it's going to be years before it receives approval for use, and then I'm sure it'd only be used on high risk cases anyway for a while before eventually, MAYBE, becoming a common technology utilized on all women in the name of safer birth practices. Safer....because...well, cutting into a women before her due date, before she's gone into labor, before her Baby is ready might be considered crazy and creepy and detrimental to all involved UNLESS one cited the save-all catch-phrase, 'safety of mother and child' as a viable reason.
I only know what I've experienced in birthing my own child, what I've seen in the births of the women I've attended as a doula, and what I've read and studied through commonly available sources, but really...there doesn't seem to be much call for INCREASING the elective C-section rate when we're already dealing with a national C-section rate of over 33%!!! Well, over the WHO's suggestion of a 10% rate.
There's no indication that Predibirth is intended to LOWER the overall C-section rate. No indication of that whatsoever, and if we follow through with that train of thought, one might become quite concerned that this will result in a stronger association of fear, risk, and emergency with vaginal delivery. (we're not even talking 'natural', drug-free, here...we're talking pushing a baby out of your womb along the same passageway as our ancestors.) And, with an increase in these associations, and an increase in elective C-section options, then it only follows that more and more women will choose surgery over vaginal delivery simply because it gradually (one can only hope gradually!) becomes the socially 'safer' option.
It's all very sad.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Gender Neutrality for the Newborn
My sister-in-law happens to be pregnant. Which, is utterly beyond exciting to me because it's another birth experience I'll hear about, another baby to hold one day, and another woman entering motherhood. The close proximity of all of this brought on by our familial connection just makes it all the more wonderful.
Anyway, since it's not my OWN baby, I'm finding that there are all these adorable little 'gift's for babies that you just wouldn't buy for yourself, but suddenly become too cute to resist when you imagine the item going to someone else and their new child. Which, is weird, and I know I should have better self-control because babies really don't need much of anything beyond love and mother's milk, but...well...maybe time will help me to resist.
To come to the point of this blog post, I found myself in Kohls today...don't ask me why. And, saw literally twenty mothers with practically newborns shopping in the baby section. (alright, I might be exaggerating a bit here, but, trust me, it's more mothers with newborns than I've ever seen in a store before!) I assumed there was a sale, so wandered over to have a look at the gender neutral selection. And, I remember feeling this way while shopping for my son, but it's utterly amazing how ridiculous some of the baby stuff IS. Not to mention how incredibly NON-gender neutral. I saw lots of brown...which I actually like on babies...good camouflage for all the mess...but brown is only available with complimentary colors of pink, purple, blue, or green. With boy puppy dogs, or girly bunny rabbits. *sigh*
There was an article out not too long ago about a family who was choosing to raise their child gender neutral. And, I still think it's a bit odd, and far-fetched to put into practice to the extreme that they have chosen to go, BUT there's some valid points about why must we classify our children by sex from the moment of birth! Whatever happened to the white layette? or yellow? or greens and blues that don't instantly bespeak BOY. I mean, what about grey? It's handsomely appropriate for a baby in a light color, and yet, it's nowhere except in hand-knit sweaters!
It's not that I really think you should avoid gender identifying clothing, it's just odd that there's no other options. The conspirator in me wonders if perhaps it's contributing to all the ultrasounds to check the sex of the unborn child. It's a legitimate thing new parents wonder about, and when surrounded by very little in the way of gender neutral options to prepare for baby, well, it can only encourage those sorts of ultrasounds right?
Anyway, since it's not my OWN baby, I'm finding that there are all these adorable little 'gift's for babies that you just wouldn't buy for yourself, but suddenly become too cute to resist when you imagine the item going to someone else and their new child. Which, is weird, and I know I should have better self-control because babies really don't need much of anything beyond love and mother's milk, but...well...maybe time will help me to resist.
To come to the point of this blog post, I found myself in Kohls today...don't ask me why. And, saw literally twenty mothers with practically newborns shopping in the baby section. (alright, I might be exaggerating a bit here, but, trust me, it's more mothers with newborns than I've ever seen in a store before!) I assumed there was a sale, so wandered over to have a look at the gender neutral selection. And, I remember feeling this way while shopping for my son, but it's utterly amazing how ridiculous some of the baby stuff IS. Not to mention how incredibly NON-gender neutral. I saw lots of brown...which I actually like on babies...good camouflage for all the mess...but brown is only available with complimentary colors of pink, purple, blue, or green. With boy puppy dogs, or girly bunny rabbits. *sigh*
There was an article out not too long ago about a family who was choosing to raise their child gender neutral. And, I still think it's a bit odd, and far-fetched to put into practice to the extreme that they have chosen to go, BUT there's some valid points about why must we classify our children by sex from the moment of birth! Whatever happened to the white layette? or yellow? or greens and blues that don't instantly bespeak BOY. I mean, what about grey? It's handsomely appropriate for a baby in a light color, and yet, it's nowhere except in hand-knit sweaters!
It's not that I really think you should avoid gender identifying clothing, it's just odd that there's no other options. The conspirator in me wonders if perhaps it's contributing to all the ultrasounds to check the sex of the unborn child. It's a legitimate thing new parents wonder about, and when surrounded by very little in the way of gender neutral options to prepare for baby, well, it can only encourage those sorts of ultrasounds right?
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Natural Transitioning from Co-sleeping
I've been a proud co-sleeping mother by every sense of that phrase for nearly 3 years. In fact, to be exact, JUST under 2 years and 11 months.
As with everything having to do with 'parenting' my son, it's been a journey. We started with a Snuggle Nest after falling prey to the horror stories of parents rolling onto their tiny babies and smothering them to death. After the first four hours of sleeping our own bed, the baby was brought onto my partners stomach in a sort of cuddle sleep, and the Snuggle Nest was abandoned forever as essentially useless. T refused to sleep in any longer, and both my partner and I found that we were fully confident that there was no logical way that either of us would EVER be able to sleep so soundly that we would unconsciously smother our baby.
We also forewent the warnings about pillows, comforters, and whatever else is warned about in the common co-sleeping literature. I'm not sure I'd go ahead and vote that that's the 'safest' way to co-sleep, but again, it's one of those things that we gradually became ok with.
By the time he was 9 months or so, I was beginning to wonder how we'd ever get him OUT of our bed. I still enjoyed our sleep together, but at times it was frustrating. T tended to sleep in the middle of the bed, and he also tended to take over the entire bed in that way of small children. I wanted to be able to cuddle against my partner, but alas, there was always a flailing hot little body preventing me.
This past August, T and I entered into a mutual weaning. I'm not even so sure how it 'happened' anymore, but whatever the cause, or how we did it, within a week or two, he was completely weaned without fuss. We spent lots of time cuddling more directly in bed, and he slept EVEN closer to me than he had in the past. Which, at the time, I enjoyed because some vital bit of our bonding experience had come to an end, and I wanted reasurance that we were still just as close.
Fast forward to the present day, and T has slept in his own bed, of his own choice for the past 4-5 nights. ALL night I should add. It seems like such a natural transition that I laugh to think that at some point in the past I'd actually devoted attention to the how's and why's of this happening. His 'bed' is just a futon couch moved beside our own bed, but he's possessive about it in a way that lets me know this is probably 'for real'. He's ready to have his own sleeping space. And for the first time in nearly three years, I'm getting uninterrupted sleep. Which, is something I'd given up on years ago!
As with everything having to do with 'parenting' my son, it's been a journey. We started with a Snuggle Nest after falling prey to the horror stories of parents rolling onto their tiny babies and smothering them to death. After the first four hours of sleeping our own bed, the baby was brought onto my partners stomach in a sort of cuddle sleep, and the Snuggle Nest was abandoned forever as essentially useless. T refused to sleep in any longer, and both my partner and I found that we were fully confident that there was no logical way that either of us would EVER be able to sleep so soundly that we would unconsciously smother our baby.
We also forewent the warnings about pillows, comforters, and whatever else is warned about in the common co-sleeping literature. I'm not sure I'd go ahead and vote that that's the 'safest' way to co-sleep, but again, it's one of those things that we gradually became ok with.
By the time he was 9 months or so, I was beginning to wonder how we'd ever get him OUT of our bed. I still enjoyed our sleep together, but at times it was frustrating. T tended to sleep in the middle of the bed, and he also tended to take over the entire bed in that way of small children. I wanted to be able to cuddle against my partner, but alas, there was always a flailing hot little body preventing me.
This past August, T and I entered into a mutual weaning. I'm not even so sure how it 'happened' anymore, but whatever the cause, or how we did it, within a week or two, he was completely weaned without fuss. We spent lots of time cuddling more directly in bed, and he slept EVEN closer to me than he had in the past. Which, at the time, I enjoyed because some vital bit of our bonding experience had come to an end, and I wanted reasurance that we were still just as close.
Fast forward to the present day, and T has slept in his own bed, of his own choice for the past 4-5 nights. ALL night I should add. It seems like such a natural transition that I laugh to think that at some point in the past I'd actually devoted attention to the how's and why's of this happening. His 'bed' is just a futon couch moved beside our own bed, but he's possessive about it in a way that lets me know this is probably 'for real'. He's ready to have his own sleeping space. And for the first time in nearly three years, I'm getting uninterrupted sleep. Which, is something I'd given up on years ago!
Friday, November 18, 2011
Midwifery Self-Study
Not surprisingly, given the topic (s) of this blog, I have a driving aspiration to one day assist women as a homebirth midwife. I've thought about what this means quite a LOT in the past years. Over three years now to be more exact.
When I first realized that perhaps a calling of mine might be midwifery, I was consumed by quantity. I couldn't imagine saying no to possible clients; picking and choosing among them for those that most desired my services from those that perhaps thought that they might like to utilize my midwifery skills. I wanted only to be at as many births as possible, and attend as many prenatal appointments as I could squeeze inbetween family life and that busy schedule of nightly births.
Which, in my mind, meant training as a CNM (certified Nurse Midwife). I'd be able to work in hospitals, large OBGYN practices, birth centers, and/or even my own practice.
A year or so down the line, and I began to waver. I had learned a lot more about the various distinctions between a CNM, CPM (certified professional midwife), and DEM (direct entry midwife), and I had had the opportunity to serve as the primary birth doula at three drastically different births. That experience alone clarified, for me, that the only births I was interested in regularly attending were those that took place at the woman's home, and that I was actually very interested in screening future clients.
So, I planned on training as a CPM through either a traditonal midwifery school, or directed self-study course along with an apprenticeship. Following either of those two courses of training, I intended on sitting for the NARM (North American Registry of Midwives) exam, and turning in mountains of paperwork in order to 'prove' to this overseeing body of registered midwives, that I was properly trained.
Now, I've reached some new epiphany. I still want to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to safely and skillfully assist women with their pregnancies and births. I still want to apprentice, but suddenly, the distinction between legal and illegal, for me, holds no meaning. I plan on apprenticing when the time is right. And, again when the time is right, I plan on opening my own homebirth practice without seeking registration or licensure through NARM.
If I am a 'good' midwife, then women will come to me. It's just that simple. And, if I work without care for the expense of licensing and then maintaining said licensure, or the rules/restrictions that govern such licensing, then I will be more able to assist the women who come to me in achieving the births every one of them deserves.
I think it's important here to mention that I absolutely 100% agree that some small minority of births should/must take place in the hospital or some other place where there is a supervising surgeon or doctor. However, I also believe that birth is not an illness. It is something that most women can undergo with little to no assistance and a whole lot of support.
So, certifying myself in such a way where I am then restricted via liabilities and regulations as to who I may attend, how I may assist them, and where I may attend them does not make sense with my personal take on birth. I do still want to assist as many women as desire my services. I also want to do the best I personally (and safely) can to maintain their birth as a natural affair that takes place within the privacy and sanctuary of their chosen place of birth. Which means, I simply cannot be concerned with the overwhelming practical liabilities that come with national regulations of midwifery.
So, DEM it is!
Having made this final decision on what path I will follow, I still have to wait on a more appropriate timing before attaining an apprenticeship. My partner and I are travelers at heart although perhaps that's been more a characteristic of our youth than our innate personalities as my desire for a stable, "Home" is increasing with the passing of time. There's not yet a standing promise of staying in one place for the length of time I'd prefer for an apprenticeship, so that may yet wait for a better time. However, I've begun a personal course of self-study based loosely on the NARM syllabus found in the Candidate Information Bulletin.
Yes, self-study. It sounds ludicrous at first, I know, but remember, there are textbooks, workbooks, a wealth of valid research to be found both online and in countless 'birth' books. There are midwives to talk to, forums filled with debates upon the appropriate course of action for literally thousands of specific instances, more blogs, and personal accounts of midwives all around the world than could ever be read, and even online midwifery classes with such infamous midwives as Gloria Lemay!
For both myself, and any future midwife I seek an apprenticeship with, I am trying to keep very physical documentation of my studies. Lots of notes, well-ordered binders, notecards, physical copies of the books I am using, and copies of any research or articles I find useful throughout my studies.
It's exhilarating to finally feel as though I am settled in my future path, and to also feel as though I am making real headway in making it one day happen.
When I first realized that perhaps a calling of mine might be midwifery, I was consumed by quantity. I couldn't imagine saying no to possible clients; picking and choosing among them for those that most desired my services from those that perhaps thought that they might like to utilize my midwifery skills. I wanted only to be at as many births as possible, and attend as many prenatal appointments as I could squeeze inbetween family life and that busy schedule of nightly births.
Which, in my mind, meant training as a CNM (certified Nurse Midwife). I'd be able to work in hospitals, large OBGYN practices, birth centers, and/or even my own practice.
A year or so down the line, and I began to waver. I had learned a lot more about the various distinctions between a CNM, CPM (certified professional midwife), and DEM (direct entry midwife), and I had had the opportunity to serve as the primary birth doula at three drastically different births. That experience alone clarified, for me, that the only births I was interested in regularly attending were those that took place at the woman's home, and that I was actually very interested in screening future clients.
So, I planned on training as a CPM through either a traditonal midwifery school, or directed self-study course along with an apprenticeship. Following either of those two courses of training, I intended on sitting for the NARM (North American Registry of Midwives) exam, and turning in mountains of paperwork in order to 'prove' to this overseeing body of registered midwives, that I was properly trained.
Now, I've reached some new epiphany. I still want to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to safely and skillfully assist women with their pregnancies and births. I still want to apprentice, but suddenly, the distinction between legal and illegal, for me, holds no meaning. I plan on apprenticing when the time is right. And, again when the time is right, I plan on opening my own homebirth practice without seeking registration or licensure through NARM.
If I am a 'good' midwife, then women will come to me. It's just that simple. And, if I work without care for the expense of licensing and then maintaining said licensure, or the rules/restrictions that govern such licensing, then I will be more able to assist the women who come to me in achieving the births every one of them deserves.
I think it's important here to mention that I absolutely 100% agree that some small minority of births should/must take place in the hospital or some other place where there is a supervising surgeon or doctor. However, I also believe that birth is not an illness. It is something that most women can undergo with little to no assistance and a whole lot of support.
So, certifying myself in such a way where I am then restricted via liabilities and regulations as to who I may attend, how I may assist them, and where I may attend them does not make sense with my personal take on birth. I do still want to assist as many women as desire my services. I also want to do the best I personally (and safely) can to maintain their birth as a natural affair that takes place within the privacy and sanctuary of their chosen place of birth. Which means, I simply cannot be concerned with the overwhelming practical liabilities that come with national regulations of midwifery.
So, DEM it is!
Having made this final decision on what path I will follow, I still have to wait on a more appropriate timing before attaining an apprenticeship. My partner and I are travelers at heart although perhaps that's been more a characteristic of our youth than our innate personalities as my desire for a stable, "Home" is increasing with the passing of time. There's not yet a standing promise of staying in one place for the length of time I'd prefer for an apprenticeship, so that may yet wait for a better time. However, I've begun a personal course of self-study based loosely on the NARM syllabus found in the Candidate Information Bulletin.
Yes, self-study. It sounds ludicrous at first, I know, but remember, there are textbooks, workbooks, a wealth of valid research to be found both online and in countless 'birth' books. There are midwives to talk to, forums filled with debates upon the appropriate course of action for literally thousands of specific instances, more blogs, and personal accounts of midwives all around the world than could ever be read, and even online midwifery classes with such infamous midwives as Gloria Lemay!
For both myself, and any future midwife I seek an apprenticeship with, I am trying to keep very physical documentation of my studies. Lots of notes, well-ordered binders, notecards, physical copies of the books I am using, and copies of any research or articles I find useful throughout my studies.
It's exhilarating to finally feel as though I am settled in my future path, and to also feel as though I am making real headway in making it one day happen.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Hats and the Newborn
One of the things I'm constantly reminded of, is that much of what I still presume to be true about fertility, conception, pregnancy, birth, and the immediate postpartum period is just as false or exaggerated (in a fearful sort of way) as those glaring falsehoods I've already come to recognize.
For instance, this one isn't a big deal, but until a day ago, I actually believed that hats on a newborn were 'necessary'. I'm a knitter, so maybe that made it easier to forego questioning when my time came to give birth...after all, I arrived at the birth center and then, eventually, the hospital with no less than FOUR hand-knit hats. But whatever the presumption, I never once in all these years thought to question the reasoning behind 'hatting' our babies from the moment of birth.
I had always seen newborns wearing a hat of some sort...generally with an anxious guardian ensuring that the hat was never off of Baby's head for longer than the seconds it took to replace. And, when I entered into my own prenatal period, I was reminded continuously to provide a hat for my babe at his birth; it was a bulleted item on every single "What should I Pack for the ______(enter place of much looked forward to Birth)" list we ever received, and I know that it was verbally mentioned to me by both my midwife and obstetrician at various points in the pregnancy.
But here I am, nearly three years after my child's birth, and three years deep into my growing obsession into all things birth-related, and I come to find that hats are relatively pointless. In fact, under normal, healthy circumstances, they may actually be more harmful than good! (think overheating and infringing upon quality mother-child bonding time)
Research has proven that 'Hatting' a baby born under normal, healthy circumstances does little in the way of benefit. In fact, it was found that the best course of 'action' regarding a normal, healthy newborn would be to leave it and the mother well enough alone. The baby's body would take care of itself.
Gloria Lemay recently published a blog post on this same issue bringing up some good points about how the obsession with placing a hat on Baby's head immediately following his birth interrupts the primal imprinting that takes place between the Mama and her child in those first moments after birth. Instead of leaving the two alone, much is made of finding Baby a hat, fitting it onto his head, and then, ensuring that said hat remains on his head. There are hands in and out of the mother's field of vision, and one of the first decisions of new motherhood (how and when to clothe her child) is removed from the Mother.
Common Sense Breastfeeding also wrote an interesting post stating many of the reasons mentioned above for why it might make better sense to "Hold That Hat".
For instance, this one isn't a big deal, but until a day ago, I actually believed that hats on a newborn were 'necessary'. I'm a knitter, so maybe that made it easier to forego questioning when my time came to give birth...after all, I arrived at the birth center and then, eventually, the hospital with no less than FOUR hand-knit hats. But whatever the presumption, I never once in all these years thought to question the reasoning behind 'hatting' our babies from the moment of birth.
I had always seen newborns wearing a hat of some sort...generally with an anxious guardian ensuring that the hat was never off of Baby's head for longer than the seconds it took to replace. And, when I entered into my own prenatal period, I was reminded continuously to provide a hat for my babe at his birth; it was a bulleted item on every single "What should I Pack for the ______(enter place of much looked forward to Birth)" list we ever received, and I know that it was verbally mentioned to me by both my midwife and obstetrician at various points in the pregnancy.
But here I am, nearly three years after my child's birth, and three years deep into my growing obsession into all things birth-related, and I come to find that hats are relatively pointless. In fact, under normal, healthy circumstances, they may actually be more harmful than good! (think overheating and infringing upon quality mother-child bonding time)
Research has proven that 'Hatting' a baby born under normal, healthy circumstances does little in the way of benefit. In fact, it was found that the best course of 'action' regarding a normal, healthy newborn would be to leave it and the mother well enough alone. The baby's body would take care of itself.
Gloria Lemay recently published a blog post on this same issue bringing up some good points about how the obsession with placing a hat on Baby's head immediately following his birth interrupts the primal imprinting that takes place between the Mama and her child in those first moments after birth. Instead of leaving the two alone, much is made of finding Baby a hat, fitting it onto his head, and then, ensuring that said hat remains on his head. There are hands in and out of the mother's field of vision, and one of the first decisions of new motherhood (how and when to clothe her child) is removed from the Mother.
Common Sense Breastfeeding also wrote an interesting post stating many of the reasons mentioned above for why it might make better sense to "Hold That Hat".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)