Cowardly Little Me

I received a really lovely message from a friend the other day, asking for my advice in relation to a verbal attack she had received from another woman. What do you do when you're blindsided by someone who knows it all, and is convinced you know nothing? 

Sadly, I had to explain to this friend that despite how it seems that I have managed to construct my online personae, when it comes to face-to-face debate or (god forbid) confrontation, I am utterly hopeless, cowardly and quite pathetic. (Unless I'm fighting with Lee or anyone else in my family--hey guys! It's because I love you!--uh, yeah).I do fare better online, and in writing. I'm a good writer, I know that, and ultimately, I'm not shy. Nor do I have any self-esteem issues. Wait. I totally do have self- esteem issues. Do I? ugh. Nevermind.  I'm fine. 

But I do have a delayed reaction to most things, especially to statements or assertions from other people that I passionately disagree with. Being able to respond in writing gives me those few seconds of...space. This, of course, is also why social networking sites (and blogs) are so rife with flames and rudeness and outrageousness. Oh dear. 

Ultimately, I am passionate about standing up for the rights of mothers and babies. And fathers and people. But the waters get muddied so easily, don't they? In the past couple of days, I have ended up debating the nature and appropriateness of risk in the lives of children, (yo says: risk is ok! and highly subjective!) as well as the legislation of midwifery in Canada (yo says: down with legislation).;The really hard part is that the people I'm arguing with are friends or acquaintances, who, like me, Love and adore their children, and want the best for them.  In any case, the following is a bit of what I have said online lately, on the subject of risk, first, and then Midwifery.  Here  you go:

Oh dear. I do manage to offend someone every single time I open my mouth (or laptop), don't I. We all have different life experiences that lead us to different conclusions about the world. And for the record, I refuse to write *anyone* off, for any reason. There is hope for us all. That said, I do think that children are often underestimated in our society, and I have observed that many kids seem to be overprotected in certain ways, while at the same time, neglected in other areas. This is a *massive* generalization, and really just comes down to my opinion. My real motivation for posting the little photo & caption above [this entire debate was prompted by a photograph I shared featuring a little girl standing in front of a campfire, roasting a hot dog, with a caption that read: DANGER...is natural, and ok --essentially] is that I have been criticized, called a fool and a nincompoop and *much* worse, for allowing my kids to...Practise climbing the stairs! Pick themselves up after a fall! Walk in the rain! As parents, we all make choices based on our experience, and our estimation of risk. I consider myself to be a very careful and protective parent. As far as I'm concerned, it is *too* risky, to allow my kids to eat conventional hotdogs or refined sugar. I consider it too risky to allow my kids to watch television. I consider it too risky to have video games in my home. But does my 3 year old stoke a 1300 degree wood kiln? heck yeah. And I'm right there cheering him on. Everyone's median point is different. I don't have my children vaccinated, for example. I consider the risk of injecting my kids with the substances contained in vaccines as greater than the risk of the diseases that vaccines may potentially protect against. Other people feel differently. That's ok. But I do get sick and tired of having to deal with other parents telling me that I shouldn't let my child climb the monkey bars on his own, because he's too young, for instance. Our assessment of risk is personal, and also cultural. And I simply happen to believe that the general sway in our culture, is towards attempting to legislate risk out of our lives, and especially our children's lives. We all know someone who knows someone whose kid lost an eye or a nose. There is no way, ever, to extinguish risk. And in the meantime, I want my children to live, fall, and learn.

(The conversation then migrated into the land of vaccinations.  Oh dear x 3.  Here is my response:)

The definition of what is or isn't "sensible" is personal, subjective, and to a great extent cultural and constructed. I think the insistence on vaccination comes from the misconception that we can control life, death, risk and outcomes--to a greater extent than possible. Denial of the ever-presence of death is a denial of nature. The rather specific idea of rationality or sensibility [presented in the argument from the other side, in favour of certain vaccinations] is highly subjective. I am sure that a wide swath of scientists and medical professionals might disagree with this particular assessment of that which is sensible: some might dismiss many alternative therapies as pure quackery, and there are many doctors for whom the suggestion of omitting or postponing ANY vaccinations is the height of irresponsibility. Others--many highly qualified scientists and physicisans among them--view any or all vaccinations as a dangerous poison whose past successes have been greatly exaggerated through misleading angled studies that have been manipulated in order to portray the vaccine and vaccine industry favourably. The main point of this discussion, I hope, is to illustrate that we all do have a highly personal interpretation of risk. I have to say, though, that there does seem to be a shared view among those who have strong pro-vaccination views, that parents who choose not to vaccinate are somehow acting out of willful ignorance, or a knee-jerk reactionary gesture against the medical establishment or corporate pharmaceutical insanity--in orther words, that those who don't vaccinate can simply be dismissed as misinformed, poorly educated radicals, who refuse to see "reality", and are willing to put their children at unreasonable risk. Every parent with whom I have spoken who has chosen not to vaccinate their children, has done so after extensive thought, discussion and research, and has made a highly informed choice entirely based on what they feel is best for their children. Unfortunately, whether or not we vaccinate, feed our children garbage, let them run around in the streets, or play with matches...or keep them at home under watchful eyes...no matter what we do, as parents, to keep our children safe (and I do believe that all parents--the grand majority--love their children and would do *anything* for them)...no matter what we do, children DO die, and they DO, sometimes, end up terribly maimed, and this will continue to happen in the form of accidents and mistakes and tragedies, until the end of time. I hope to GOD, every single day that my children are not among these. But we are human, and we are born, and we die *constantly* and no amount of vaccine or vigilance can mitigate the inherent risks of being alive. In the meantime, I encourage every parent to thoroughly investigate all the choices, medical and otherwise, they may make for their children, and I am so grateful to live in a society in which my choice to not vaccinate is respected and upheld as my right.

So yeah.  That's what I think about that.

On to the Legislation and Licensure of Midwives.  Here is a bit of back story:  

Eleven years ago, when my first son, Cedar was born, midwifery had just been regulated in British Columbia, my home province.  Now, as I am pregnant with my fifth child, midwifery is being regulated in New Brunswick.  In the meantime, the same thing is happening throughout the US, and in Australia.  And the whole thing is a bloody mess. I posted a fantastic article by Gloria Lemay, my friend, teacher and mentor (with whom I studied to become a doula in Vancouver) to my fb page, and lo and behold, another ruckus!

Here is my response to some of the criticisms of Gloria's article and my own objection to the legislation of midwifery.  Please do read Gloria's original article, and the many eloquent responses she has received on her blog.

Many women feel that birth is emphatically NOT a medical event, but rather a "NORMAL biological process". It is only extremely recently that medicalized, hospital birth has become a "standard". And this shift away from women attending women during birth occurred NOT because so many babies and mothers were dying during childbirth (yes, of course this did happen, and continues to happen in the hospital and at home, and will continue to happen until the end of time) but because the medical community saw an untapped opportunity for income and control. The word midwifery means, simply "with woman". Unregulated midwifery is the world's oldest profession, and we, as a species, have successfully replicated without medical help for orders of magnitude longer than the North America hospital birth model has been standard. While regulation is a great idea when it comes to banks, Traditional Midwifery has an inherently successful internal regulatory system: Women talk to one another. I have lived in BC and New Brunswick, and within the natural birthing communities, there is a high degree of detailed commnication between women (and now thanks to the internet and social networking, this is even more the case). Any traditional midwife who is lacking skills, knowledge, or integrity will quickly find herself without clients. I cannot imagine why anyone would find the implications of Gloria Lemay 's article insulting. I find registration and legislation of midwifery *highly* insulting for the following reason: forced regulation, by criminalizing lay midwifery, implies that women are not intelligent or knowledgeable or responsible enough to choose the birth attendant of their choice. Every pregnant woman cares *deeply* about her unborn child: this is part of our biological makeup as mammals. Most pregnant women, however, decide to go to the hospital to give birth, and may not give the issue much more thought than this (despite the fact that much of what happens to birthing women and babies in the hospital is dangerous and risky and harmful). On the other hand, women who choose to give birth at home with an alternative care provider, *agonize* over the decsion of whom to hire to attend their births, in order to make sure that they have chosen someone who will be able to offer them the kind of care that they want and need. That said, in my own case, I would *never* assume that anyone--no doctor, no nurse, no midwife, registered, or not--bears the responsibility for my life, or the life of my baby. This is my job, as a mother. Eleven years ago, when I was pregnant with my first child, regulated midwifery, in BC, had just been passed. I had decided before that, that I definitely did NOT want to be in the hospital to give birth, so I thought, "fantastic! the medical system will pay for my midwife! fabulous!" and I hired a registered midwife. It quickly became clear to me however, that this midwife did NOT work for me, but rather for the BC college of physicians and surgeons. Because of the detailed stipulations around how she had to practice if she wanted to retain her license, she was forced to push the same diagnostic testing procedures on her clients, that are used at the hospital. Finally, after she attempted on several occasions to bully me into having an ultrasound, and to agreeing to an induction if my pregnancy continued beyond 41 weeks, I fired her, and hired a non-registered traditional midwife. I paid this wonderful woman (guess who!?) what amounted to a lot of money (to me), and it was the best decision I ever made. I ended up giving birth in a pool of warm water at 42 weeks of pregnancy, after a 20 hour birth process, and it was absolutely perfect, peaceful, wonderful and enlightening in every way. I believe strongly that every woman should have the right to give birth where and with whom she feels most comfortable. For those women who want a medical birth, there are ample resources and opportunities for them to achieve that. For women who want an intervention-free homebirth, hiring a registered midwife may end up being highly disappointing.

Anyway.  I hope it isn't irritating, having me post my fb comments.  But after Lee pointed out the drastic amount of time that I use to argue online, I figured I should at least post my brilliant (ha) repartee here, which is, at least, my space, rather than the nebulous ether of fb history...

xo 

yo