After I had Sally, I sat on my donut while my womanly parts tried to shrink back to a non-raw-ground-beef-like consistency. Dick swept the kitchen floor, and I wept. Has any man shown this much love for his wife, that he would SWEEP THE FLOOR for her?
Motherhood, which I entered at 23, has been a series of stunning emotional highs and crazed, irrational rages. Fatherhood, for Dick, is no big deal. He likes our three girls (they are above-average), and when he is with them, he likes to play and go to the dollar theater and teach them how to ride bikes and to swim. He’ll also fold their laundry, never grasping that each has her own particular and exclusive size of clothing.
I am a stay-at-home mom. I do the (very) occasional freelance writing/editing project, and there is this blog, which will make enough for me to live on textured vegetable protein and ash cakes in another 5-10 years. I could go out and get a ‘real’ job. I could use my brain (which used to be very good, I want you to know). But I have chosen to “stay-at-home.” Not because that is all I am good for, or because I think that is a woman’s place, or because I am afraid of the working world or because I feel pressure from church or friends or family.
I stay-at-home because a) I have a husband who makes enough for us to live on (but not to own a second car), and b) my kids deserve me. I am the first to admit that I am not the best mom, and that there are probably nannies, child care centers, what-have-you that are better at crafts, guided-free-play, and Cooking in the Kitchen with Kids, but I am their mother, and as long as it is my name they call out when they need something, I’ll be there to negotiate. This is not a devaluing of me, it is a high-valuing of them. (Quite possibly too-high, especially when they’re tired and whiny, but that’s another subject).
Is being a stay-at-home mom a sacrifice of my other ambitions? Yes. Is it a betrayal of all the strides that feminists have made in the past century? That is the question.
Other questions are also raised by Lisa Belkin’s recent article When Mom and Dad Share It All. Beth Blecherman of TechMamas pointed me to Belkin’s new companion blog, Equal Parenting, at The New York Times. They’re both quite interesting, but also extremely maddening.
A lot of the parenting issues are relevant — I don’t know any woman who doesn’t wish her husband did more around the house and with the kids. And examining why we do what we do, and how that is often influenced by blind tradition rather than conscious thought is always a good thing. But two underlying premises were so wrong-headed as to make my three-year old’s tantrum look like a warm-up for Mama.
My first issue is a semantic one. Equal parenting sounds great to me: “equality in parenting should be every couple’s goal.” In scientific terms, equal usually means “the same.” Equal rightly meant “the same” in the social sphere after Brown v. Board of Education. Using “equal” and “the same” interchangeably makes things easy because equality becomes a matter of measuring and comparing quantifiable units.
But is “equality” as “sameness” even possible when it comes to parenting? Is it possible for mothers and fathers to do the exact same in terms of parenting? My husband contributed a sperm to each of our three girls. I contributed an egg, a uterus, nine months of morning sickness, frequent nighttime urination, and excruciating heartburn. Then I contributed my breasts for over three years total. Will he ever equal my contribution?
He’s already three body parts and 63 months behind. Obviously, the only way for me to honor my feminist urgings is to leave him with the kids and return in five years, hoping that they will have taken a physical toll on him equal to my sagging boobs and flapping belly.
On the other hand, is providing monetarily for children an aspect of parenting? If so, then I am eight years and many “metaphorical poopy diapers,” as Dick says, behind on this. He should be suing me for non-payment of child support. But that sounds just a bit ridiculous, doesn’t it?
Other definitions of equal include “as great as” and “alike in value.” We had friends in Cairo who were the best equal parents I’ve ever seen. I once asked Suzy how on earth they did it, and she said that when Josh was at work at the university, her job was to take care of the kids and house, and then when he came home, they split it (parenting/homemaking) equally. ! If only they could sell this secret to NASA.
You could (and probably should) make charts and lists for when both parents are home. This could be a regular, recalibrating exercise, like the helpful budgeting practice of tracking all the money you spend in a month. Once you see where your money or time goes, cooperative partners can make adjustments to make things better for each other, working from the premise that earning money and caring for children are both valuable contributions to parenting.
My second issue is with the very notion of what qualifies as “feminist” and “modern.” I have a lovely friend from college who is writing her doctoral thesis on Unassisted Childbirth (UC). When I first encountered UC, I was aghast. I’ve had three very medicated hospital births, thank you very much. Rixa has given birth at home, alone.
Recently another blogger found her and asked if “we are living in the 1800s” and, to explain her rationale for a hospital birth said, “I guess I’m just a modern lady, huh?”
Now, UC is not for everyone: it’s not for me. But I am struck by one woman thinking that another woman’s desire to be educated and deliberate about her birth choices is backwards and old-fashioned. As if childbirth in a hospital, where, despite the best laid-out birth plan, the medical hierarchy has the first, second, and final say in when the mother can poop, much less push out the baby, is the more modern, enlightened choice. Rather, a woman making her own choices (whatever they might be) strikes me as the very epitome of feminism.
Lisa Belkin has a similarly condescending attitude towards women and men who would choose a different lifestyle to the one that she has decided is modern and “equal.” She writes, of those who might object that:
If part of the security and warmth you feel from marriage is because of the familiarity and tradition of husband and wife roles, this won’t work for you, either.
Apparently, only an emotional, instinctive need to cling to the security blanket of “familiarity and tradition,” rather than conscious thought and rational consideration could possibly be behind anyone choosing not to parent “equally.” Let’s not even talk about whether logic should be privileged over “warmth.” And how that sort of ordering of reason over emotion is a patriarchal tradition clouding poor Lisa Belkin’s thought processes.
If the only way to be modern and a feminist is to follow the herd of working women to the office, then count me out, Gloria Steinem. My feeling unworthy as a woman for choosing to stay home would be just as unfeminist as a woman feeling unworthy for choosing to go to work. Feminism is (or should be) all about choices — women being able to make their own without worrying whether other women will consider the choice modern or hopelessly old-fashioned, progressive or lamentably traditional.
As a woman, I can be anything I want to be: a working mom or a stay-at-home mom or a work-at-home mom or a Britney-Spears-wannabe mom. Just don’t tell me that the only thinking choice is the first.
Tags: equal-parenting, fatherhood, feminism, lisa-belkin, marriage, motherhood, parenting
Subscribe by email
Sharla (7)
big mamma frog (5)
Emily H. (5)
steff (5)
rixa (4)
I can’t put is as eloquently as you, but well said!
JanMary, N Irelands last blog post..Father’s Day digi-scrapbooking style
[Reply]
I don’t see how Brad could engage in “equal” parenting when he works 80 hours a week. And then if I worked too, I wouldn’t earn enough to cover day care, and parenting would be even less equal 80% done by a nanny, 15% by me, 5% by Brad. How is that equal parenting?
Memarie Lanes last blog post..myfacekirtsylicioustumblespacebooktwitteruponmake it stop!
[Reply]
Honestly, am i the only one who knows/remembers learning that childbirth was the number one killer of women a hundred years ago?!?! I guess is must be my medical school training, but sooo many things can go wrong in a pregnancy, why wouldn’t people want to do anything and everything they can to protect their children. I personally think it’s a form of selfishness to not have competent medical help available for their baby when it’s born. I suppose if they are aware of the medical risks (which are many) of having a home birth and they still choose it, then so be it, still seems very selfish, but that’s just me.
[Reply]
Okay Jane, the gauntlet has been tossed. You have said what I have thought for years. I’m going to have to think about this and continue the discussion on my blog. Rock on!!
Beths last blog post..Sticks and Stones
[Reply]
I’m amused by the small thinking people that truly think there is only one way to live. That the only “right way” is the way THEY have chosen.
Honestly, I will never regret the years of being home with my kids. I could never have “made those up” as I can if/when I go back to work. Those reports and meetings I could have made and attended? Hmmm… Somehow, I don’t think I was missed. Those school plays, zoo trips, questions answered, pictures colored, hugs given, jokes shared, and memories made? No one has them but me. No daycare provider could ever love my children the way I do.
Again, my choice is that: MY CHOICE. I feel strongly about it, and know that I shall never regret it. In fact, I regret those first 15 months of my son’s life that I worked. I’ll never get those back…
traceys last blog post..Boiling over
[Reply]
I have been the full time student mom, the full time working mom (while my husband was a stay at home dad) and now I am the stay at home mom. I have at times felt my resources “maxed out” with all three of these roles. What I have gained is tremendous respect for single parents who have to work and raise their children alone. They probably think some of us are a bit whiney for asking for equal parenting, when they have little or no help at all. I feel extremely lucky that I have someone completely supporting me financially and anything else he does (which is a lot) is a bonus.
[Reply]
JanMary — Thanks.
Marie — I don’t know why the original article didn’t even consider that a man (in the traditional role) working to support his family should be considered one aspect of “parenting.” In the author’s eyes, working seems to be the self-fulfilling realization of hopes and dreams, not the putting-the-food-on-the-table that it is for most people.
Brock — I hear you. As I said, when I first heard about UC, I was aghast. But now I learn that many countries (including Britain) are much more supportive of homebirths and midwives than the U.S., and that a big part of the U.S.’s reticence is not a desire to make the birth the best possible experience for mother and baby. Instead, money and litigation play a huge role.
I cannot recommend Rixa’s blog highly enough. One thing that stays with me (even after my own highly medicated birth experiences) is that too often when someone says “I would have died” or “My wife/sister/daughter/mother” would have died without medical intervention, there was a first medical intervention, usually an induction, which got the whole process rolling, so it’s impossible to determine causality.
No one, not even the staunchest of UC’ers would say that hospitals and well-trained doctors are not necessary in some cases, and that all women should be aware of when/what those cases are. The point is that birth could be much better, much more natural than it usually is. Thirty+% of births should not be resulting in major abdominal surgery.
I gave birth as I did because I didn’t approach it as I have almost every other experience in my life. In no other area have I so blindly acceded to the dictates of a third party. Why did I do so when it came to one of the most defining moments of womanhood, and how could that secession of maternal choice and deliberation make me a good modern lady?
Also, I think “selfish” is a very poor choice of words. The UC’ers I have met (mostly online) are just as concerned about the health and good experience of their babies as are the women who schedule inductions for someone’s (their own, their doctor’s, their parents who have tickets already to fly back home and the stubborn baby has not come yet (See Sally)) convenience.
Beth — I’m excited to see what you have to say.
Tracey — Sometimes I think I will regret these years. I regret the time spent agonizing over not doing enough or not somehow doing it all. But I would rather regret that than regret a lifetime of meetings. I get my fill of that on The Office.
Andrea — What you say about single parents is so, so true. I have no idea how they do it, and my heart and brain are in awe.
[Reply]
I agree that feminism should be all about choices, but I won’t agree that feminism is always good. “Choice” is too often used as a justification for bad decisions (elective abortion being the obvious example, though others abound).
Jane, I struggle with your statement, “Thirty+% of births should not be resulting in major abdominal surgery.” That’s like saying, “Extreme atomspheric temperature differences should not be resulting in major storms.” In other words, I don’t think that doctors in general are pushing (nor engendering the need) for surgery. In general, if 30% of births result in major surgery, then surgery SHOULD have been done. Doctors (at least in western medicine) are indoctrinated to do as little as possible, while always doing what’s best for the patient. Western medicine in the U.S. is the best evidence-based system in the entire world (and all of history as well!). I strongly agree with Brock that boycotting available medical treatment is a selfish act. I would question the parents’ motives; do these UC promoters really believe that what they are doing is really best for their child? From my point of view, western medicine is the best advantage we can give to children (and parents), from both a logical and an emotional point of view.
[Reply]
Brad — Aaack — I probably shouldn’t have used the UC example. It’s just too polarizing, though I thought it was a very fitting analogy.
I cannot agree that every c-section is medically necessary (which is not to say that a woman should not be allowed an elective one, if that is her choice).
If that is what they teach you at medical school, that “if a doctor did it, then it SHOULD have been done,” then I think your education is a tad one-sided. Not to mention riddled with logical fallacies.
Also, I don’t know how you can say “doctors are indoctrinated to do as little as possible” with a straight face. What about elective cosmetic surgery?
Also, I (and UC’ers) never said anything about boycotting available medical treatment. UC is about avoiding unnecessary medical intervention. Not the same thing. Of course it would be selfish for someone to not have surgery if that were needed to ensure safety. No one is advocating that. (that I know of, anyway).
[Reply]
I’ve been sitting here asking the quintessential cyber-Shakespearean question: to post or not to post? Here goes.
I actually loved the recent NYT article, “When Mom and Dad Share it All.” I love the concept of equal parenting. I don’t know that the author would have defined it quite the way you seem to, though. I don’t think the author was advocating that parents work equal number of hours outside of the home and work equal number of hours as caregivers (even though the first couple described did just that). Rather, the article suggested that parental duties (and rights?) should not be divided merely along gender stereotypical lines and for no other reason. Many of the couples described in the article were striving for equal time and equal duties (that was their desire), but stereotypes and outside expectations got in the way. I think that was what the author was highlighting. There are some (I would say very few) biologically mandated duty/right divisions–pregnancy, breastfeeding, etc. But there are many that are not. Cooking for the children, bathing the children, finding play-dates for the children, taking the children to the doctor, rocking children, being “in charge” of the children (without a need to resort to a list), etc., are not biologically mandated (in my very humble but nonetheless outspoken opinion).
I am so grateful that women have all the opportunities and choices that they do–I feel a deep sense of gratitude for the sacrifices that many women have made to ensure that I would have opportunities. In fact, I often fight feelings of obligation and pressure–I have to constantly remind myself that I need to do what is best for me and my family, not what is best for the feminist movement (if there is such a thing these days–are we on the third wave?), which is a type of stereotype pressure of its own, which I think the author would shake her head at. But I am very disappointed in the fact that little has changed for men. Men still have very little of the parenting duties/rights, even if both parents are working. Men simply have not been able break into what has historically been woman’s work. The statistical trend that formed the basis of book The Second Shift still largely holds true today. (I’m so impressed by your friends who manage to share equally when the income earner gets home from work).
But let’s assume that “equal parenting” really does mean equal time and equal duties. I think it’s a worthwhile goal where feasible. I really do. In our society, it often makes sense for one person to work full-time. That way, the person is more likely to advance more quickly in his/her career, thereby creating more opportunities for greater income. Also, the family enjoys from certain benefits that are usually only accorded to full-time employees. Because the average full-time job requires that the income-earner be away from home during the day, the other spouse is the primary caregiver. The resulting full-time salary is just enough to support the family. Fine. It works. I have no argument. But what if both spouses are lucky (or planned it from the very beginning) and can find jobs that are temporally flexible enough, highly-paid enough, desirable enough, etc., that they both can (and want to) work outside the home? Wouldn’t it be great that neither spouse would have to feel the burden of being sole provider? And wouldn’t it be great if both spouses could equally make the sacrifices and enjoy the pleasures of parenting their children?
I take issue with calling working outside of the home parenting and equating it to what the primary care-giver does. I think you suggest that because many parents work in less-than-desirable jobs to put food on the table for their children, it is parenting. This line of thought suggests that working for any reason other than to put food on the table wouldn’t be parenting. In fact, it might be neglectful parenting. This undermines and undervalues the myriad of reasons someone might work outside of the home (whether for money or not), including humanitarian reasons, obligation to pass on a rare and necessary skill, personal fulfillment, personal recreation, desire to effect change in society, etc. I know many men and women that work outside of the home (some without pay) for these other reasons. I don’t think they view their work as parenting, even if it is a sacrifice. But neither are they completely abandoning their role as parents.
A parent is always a parent, regardless of where he/she is or what he/she does. However, while a parent is away from home, he/she is not responsible for the day-to-day care of and raising of children. The reality is that a stay-at-home mom generally does the vast majority of this. As a consequence, and lamentably, I believe (my only proof is from my own observations) that mothers are often more attached to their children and more in-tune with their children’s needs than are the fathers. I think this is a real loss to our society and to our familial well-being. A lot of family-focused programs (church and otherwise) help compensate for this inequality of attachment and parenting duties/rights. But we still have a long way to go.
Lest anyone think that I am secretly staging an offensive against working mothers, please note that I work full time, as does my husband. I just don’t view my work or my husband’s work outside of the home as “parenting.” (Oh, and neither am I saying that all families need to be set up like mine. In fact, I expect that my family’s structure will change and ebb and flow as we raise our children, depending on the work opportunities available, etc.)
Carolinas last blog post..To My Cousins in Mongolia
[Reply]
I’m embarrassed it turned out so long. I’m sorry.
Carolinas last blog post..To My Cousins in Mongolia
[Reply]
(I’m posting Nancy’s comment here because I like the story about Sandra Day O’Connor. I didn’t know that about her.)
I’m not having any luck responding there on your blog, but it’s just as well–I get so worked up on those two topics (working mothers and natural births) that my unsent comments would be way, way too long. So, the short and sweet of it is–Amen and Amen.
Sandra Day O’Connor could be the patron saint of stay-at-home mothers, since she stayed at home ’til her 3 children were in school. Somehow I don’t think her career suffered any (and think about what it would cost to hire a lawyer like that to babysit your preschoolers)! She’s my hero(ine).
From one who is way too soon old and way too late smart, remember that the young years will be over in an eyeblink. What a waste of time to be anywhere but home (keeping body and soul together is necessary, I know, so we won’t argue necessary exceptions).
[Reply]
Carolina — Thanks for your thoughts. I do agree with what you describe the author advocating, that anything not biologically mandated can (and should) be shared ‘equally’ between parents, without allowing bias or tradition to dictate otherwise.
However, I do feel that she did imply (I thought it was pretty explicit) that that boils down to working inside and outside of the home as close to the same number of hours as possible.
Also, I didn’t call working outside the home parenting, I said “providing monetarily” for children is an aspect of parenting, and I think it is.
One part of this that I ended up cutting was about where Marc (the husband in the first couple) described stay-at-home dads as being “as vulnerable as stay-at-home moms.” This also relates to the very real problem you address about men being slouches.
They might be unknowing slouches, or trapped-by-gender-bias slouches, but basically slouches when it comes to contributing equally, and probably this does come from some sense of “I put the food on the table, you do the rest,” which I would not put up with for 5 seconds.
My advice on that whole thing: don’t marry a jerk like that. A man who will not work with a woman to make their family life as good and fulfilling for all involved as possible is not worth the time of day. (And if he has no idea how to do this, maybe some counseling is called for).
If a woman has a man that she is not willing (eager) to feel vulnerable to: emotionally, physically, financially, he’s probably not a good match for her.
I’m glad that you and your husband have structured your family in such a way that works well for you. I have to admit that when both parents work full-time, I am in awe that anyone has time and energy for parenting.
Sometimes I really think it is energy, more than intelligence/opportunity/raw talent that divides the Do’ers and the Couch-sitters. Maybe if I upped from Mountain Dew to Red Bull or something . . .
[Reply]
Well, I never said that my family structure works well for us, but we’re doing the best we can. Some days I feel like our arrangement is perfect, and other days I feel like drafting a letter of resignation (either from my work responsibilities or my home responsibilities, depending on the day.) It’s an ongoing experiment.
Carolinas last blog post..To My Cousins in Mongolia
[Reply]
thanks for the linky – this is such an interesting discussion and great to read your and your commenter’s thoughts!
TechMamas last blog post..Sarah Lacy, AuthorChat about her new book "Once You’re Lucky, Twice You’re Good"
[Reply]
Great post. Our dynamic changed a lot when I chose to go to work part time after my kids were in school. My husband teaches school and is home during a good part of the summer when the kids are off (it’s not three months in case anyone is wondering–more like 8 weeks). It’s been interested, but I am happy to report that every year we are progressing to a better sharing of household responsibilities.
I too get irritated when people who call for choice only really support choices that are the same as their own, especially when they intimate that people who choose paths other than theirs are less intelligent.
Dalenes last blog post..…or watch as the clouds go by?
[Reply]
I’m compelled to comment again. I’ve done the full time working mom thing. I’ve done the stay at home mom thing and I’ve done the part-time working thing. FOR ME the best has been the part-time work. That 15 hours that I’m not at home allows me to recharge and I come back as a more patient and enthusiastic mother. I don’t feel like I’m missing out on my kids because I’m only absent 15 hours a week and in the end I think they get a better mother – but that is MY CHOICE for MY KIDS and I am not you and you are not me.
Secondly, childbirth options are VERY personal. My first child was born a month premature and unable to breath. Nothing is more frightening than seeing your newborn angel come out blue. If I had not been in a hospital I think she would have died, or had some serious brain damage. After that experience I could not be comfortable in any other environment. Not to mention that I started having children at 36 – when the chances of there being problems is greater. If I were 25, healthy, with no signs of pre-term labor I might feel differently about it, but for me there is no choice. BUT that is ME – and my choice is not necessarily the choice for others.
There is no RIGHT or WRONG choice. It makes me sad that I feel this enormous pressure to have to justify to everybody and anyone why I chose to have my kids born in a hospital, why I choose to vaccinate them and why I didn’t breastfeed. I have VERY valid and VERY personal reasons for all of those choices and frankly I shouldn’t have to defend them.
Beths last blog post..A Mom By Any Other Name
[Reply]
Wow. What an interesting discussion.
I love that “feminism” gets mixed up with whether you decide to work or not and whether you decide to make your husband change a few diapers or not. (I know that is a simple way of putting it, but some discussions I’ve seen get down to the nitty gritty…if you wash your husband’s laundry you are so obviously not a feminist)
I think you are a right on about choice. It all comes down to choice and if a woman (or man) is free to make the decision that they want and feel good about then I feel like you are embracing your feminism and not succumbing to the world of the dominating evil man.
I “choose” to work in some ways because I like to get out of the house and I like what I do. I would love to be at home with my boy, but we really do need the money right now and with my situation, we are set up. Am I a bad mom? Yes. Am I living in the 1800s because I would like to stay home? probably…Is it anyone else’s business what I do? Nope.
Julias last blog post..I Am Not an Anti-Dentite
[Reply]
Jane,
You are a very good writer. I am especially appreciating your counter points to the comments left by Brad & Brock.
Great debate, particularly from someone who’d likely not uc herself. Your open-mindedness and ability to support others in their choices is laudable.
I have an IRL friend who supports homebirth even though she would NEVER choose that for herself. She even joined me in calling the governor of our state to encourage him to pass a bill in support of direct entry midwives.
It is almost funny that your mere mention of uc sparked a debate of sorts. While at church, I once mentioned that I had felt guided by God to give birth at home. Even though I was merely sharing my own experience, a woman got all fired-up and declared that she would have died at home.
She even went so far as to say that no unnecessary cesareans have ever been performed as doctors are guided by God and that women don’t even need to study about childbirth because their doctors have their best interest at heart. (I thought she was about the only person in the world who felt this way. Brad’s comment has proven that she ’s not.)
As a woman who has birthed at home 5 times, 4 times unassisted, I have learned that childbirth is indeed polarizing!
As for the rest of your post… It is so nice for me to meet another mother who admits she isn’t a saint, who’s been known to throw a tantrum and who realizes that even though she may not be the best mom, being home with her children is still the best thing for them.
Nice to meet you.
Susana Baig
(P.S. I am trying not to envy your ability to earn some income through feelance writing. I was just checking out Elance the other night, wondering if I could ever get work that way. Do you have a degree?)
[Reply]
[...] often. Sometimes he says really nice things about my writing, like what he twittered about my Equal Parenting post: “Jane’s eloquence and intellect humbles me.” And then sometimes he says things [...]
I can see we disagree here. i don’t think the baby gives a crap one way or another which way it comes out. About C-sections, i agree, there probably are too many of those procedures, just as there are too many episiotomies. But with that argument there are too few accidents to bother wearing my seatbelt. I haven’t been in a car accident in my whole life, i drive defensively, i check my blind spot. whoop-de-do. Does that mean that i’m not going to wear my seatbelt? absolutely not. Doctors are doing these procedures to prevent catastrophic damage, permanent brain damage, and death to both mother and child. We (doctors) prefer to play it safe and we try to only do those procedures that are necessary, but push come to shove I’d rather have a doctor who has delivered thousands of babies, who is intimately knowledgeable about what can go wrong and who is willing to play it a little safe (even if that means a C-section) to reduce the mortality/morbidity (brain damage, etc) of the birthing process. There are only a handful of UCers in our ward but they all seem vastly, grossly, incredibly, underprepared and uninformed about what home birth entails and the possible dangers of it. I realize there are some UCers who are very well informed about it and for their own transcendental child-birthing experience are willing to take that risk with their baby, but i’m not and still think selfish is the absolutely correct word for it. UC isn’t for the baby.
(By the way i thought the rest of your post was really good and recommended it to Melinda)
[Reply]
Dalene — I loved it when my husband taught. I got to take classes for free, he was home A LOT (we were in Cairo, so he had 3+ months off), even if he was grading at home, that was better than him being at the office. Unfortunately, he hated it, and I finally stopped asking if maybe he didn’t want to go back.
Beth — I enjoyed both your comments. Thanks. I agree that we should make our own choices, and not have to justify them. Explaining them, on the other hand, maybe isn’t so bad, and some day, especially, I’ll want to tell my own daughters what worked about what I did, and why I felt it was so important to make the choices I did make.
Julia — I emailed you, but let me repeat: You are NOT a bad mom. Again. Together, now.
Susana — Thanks for the compliment. I like to think that my views are a little more even-handed because I’ve experienced the medicated, hospital births, and only later realized that I could have possibly made some other choices.
I really admire my UC friends because I see them taking the time to be more educated and informed about birth than I did. Which is not to say that everyone who gives birth in the hospital just goes along with the conventional wisdom, but that IS what I did, and I’m ashamed of that.
Brock — Yes, we’ll disagree. I do agree with you to a point on the baby not caring, though I think the baby might care if the pitocin or other induction technique put it in fetal distress, which can happen. Again, causality impossible to assign when a medical intervention is what begins birth.
Your analogy of the seatbelt is problematic. If c-sections were like seatbelts, then you’d have to say that every woman should have a c-section at 40 weeks, just in case. Is that what you think should happen?
We could also remove all appendices at . . . what, 5? Wisdom teeth? Spleens? We could do hysterectomies or mammectomies(?) to play it safe with cancer.
I’m not sure that life should only be about risk reduction. I hear what you’re saying, and especially if you know these unprepared people, I can see that that would be incredibly trying.
But I think there are UC’ers and midwife-homebirthers, and natural birthers, etc, who truly want the best experience for themselves AND their babies.
I’ve bugged Rixa about this before, though, that I don’t have the time, interest, or inclination to get my PhD in unassisted childbirth, and that’s the kind of study I’d have to undertake before I felt comfortable doing something like that.
If I’m not willing to become an expert on childbirth, then I certainly want a third-party expert there. But I think I will always regret that I did more research and preparation for, say, what kind of car to buy than I did for how I should give birth.
And also, I believe that women can become experts on childbirth through apprenticing themselves to midwives and working as doulas and reading A LOT and attending births, etc. That’s what my friend did, and she spent four years doing it. I don’t think you could possibly call her selfish for dedicating so much time to something that is, after all, not a pathology, but rather a good, normal, natural function of the female body.
[Reply]
(Brock) Oh, and thanks for liking the rest of the post
.
[Reply]
Oh — Susana, wanted to answer your question about freelancing. I do have a BA in English, but to be honest, the freelance (which is rare, as I said) I get is more through who I know that what. I’ve heard of Elance, but I’m always a bit suspicious of that kind of thing. I don’t really know anything about that one in particular, but I’d try to see if anyone else on the web has had experience with them and can recommned/critique for you. Good luck!
[Reply]
I’m questioning the claim Sandra Day O’Conner stayed at home. Wikipedia lists a long string of jobs from 1953 – just after her marriage in 1952. I’d like to know how she stayed at home to raise three kids without ever missing a year of employment?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Day_O‘Connor
[Reply]
Very good point. It might be a bit of wish-fulfillment to imagine such a successful woman truly having it all.
Thanks for the wikipedia link. I was most struck by the stuff about her husband John.
“In November 2007, CNN reported that her family’s situation has been made more difficult as, due to memory loss, her husband has formed new personal attachments in the institution where he now lives while not fully recalling his life-long family connections.[6] On Sunday, November 18, 2007, New York Times reported in an article titled Seized by Alzheimer’s, Then Love,[7] that she is relieved to see her husband of 55 years so content.”
How difficult that must be!
[Reply]