Do people really try to aim for specific birth dates? Sometimes they do. CNN is reporting that Febuary 18 (give or take a couple of days) is the target date to get pregnant for those people trying for a birth date of 11/11/11. For those having scheduled C-sections, up to a week later will work. That will be a busy day for OB staffs around the country. We'll hear about babies born on 11/11/11 at 11:11. It might be a bit of a feat to have a birth weight of 11 lbs.
Women have used numerology and favorite numbers to plan "lucky" birth dates for as long as anyone can remember. The Chinese have that down to a science. I like twos. I was born the 2nd of March. Of course, I had no control over that. However, when my 2nd child's C-section was being planned, I purposely chose the 2nd of September. The same thing happened with my fourth child, who was born on February 2nd. My third, unknowingly, and by some strange twist of fate, had a birth and a death date of November 2nd. That wasn't planned, and I shouldn't have gone into labor that day, as it was months early, but it happened. My first born really messed it all up. He was born 2 days before the 2nd and at 2:00 p.m., but couldn't hold out another couple of days, despite being two weeks early. So the twos permeate our household. My fiance was born on the 3rd, but he always takes his time.
Because Valentine's Day is just a few days earlier than the "magic" date of February 18, it's a good bet that quite a few surprise babies will appear on or around the date of destiny. It will be interesting to see what that day brings. Stay tuned for that update.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Monday, February 14, 2011
Flying the "Unfriendly" Skies
Recently while traveling, I had the rare occasion to use an airplane restroom. I avoid that necessity whenever possible, always making a pit stop between connecting flights. People who know me well would tell you that I am tad phobic about public restrooms that are anything less than sterile (is that an oxymoron?), particularly on airplanes. But, regrettably, with my plane landing late and greeted by a "now boarding" sign on the monitor upon checking my next flight, there was no time to stop. I barely made my flight even at a full sprint. For those who have never changed planes in Phoenix, you can't know the terror of having to get from a "C" gate to a "D" gate in a short period of time. If you have ever trained for a half-marathon, then you may be prepared. For those of us who haven't, it feels like miles anyway.
I digress...after getting settled into my "back of the bus" seat because of my late arrival, I realized that it would be better to use the lavatory early in the flight. You ladies all understand. So, with a sense of dread, I made my way to the back to the lavatory. When using an airline restroom, it's a good idea to position yourself before entering the lavatory because once the door is closed, there's no turning around -- literally -- at least without touching all four walls. And that's the absolute last thing you want to do. It's a balancing act to be sure and, judging by the condition of the floor, others have not balanced so well. It occurred to me, in that moment, how unfriendly the skies really are -- most notably for children.
Take a look around. Literally everyone you see anywhere you go is either a child or was a child at some point in time. There are a couple of issues here. Anyone who is already a parent (or is female) can tell you that it's difficult to maneuver with children in public toilets anyway. Never mind not having enough room for one adult to function well. If your child is young enough to need assistance, good luck -- and make sure you have a packet of sanitary wipes on hand.
If you are the parent of an infant and you are flying four or five hours (or more), chances are that a diaper change will be in order. Oh, you do have options! You can change your child on your lap -- risking a mess and offending your neighbors. The tray tables are too flimsy to support the weight of an infant, and who wants to eat on a changing table anyway? Then you have the floor. The only floor space is in the aisle, which is just wide enough for your carry-on (not your hips unless you move sideways), unless you are in the front row, where you are not allowed to stow your belongings, so you won't have access to your diaper bag. Privacy is pretty much out the window in either of those two venues. That leaves the bathroom.
I challenge anyone (and some of us truly are expert diaper changers, even in a pinch) to find a way to balance a wiggly baby either on top of the closed toilet (yuck!), or on the 3 square inches of wet counter space provided. Of course, you do have privacy, even if you can't turn a full 360 degrees. But just how can you bend over in a closet not even hospitable to turning around? Here's hoping you can change a baby in space because you'll have to hold it up in the air and, in this case, gravity is not your friend.
That got me thinking -- When you hear about a plane being stuck on a tarmac for a couple of hours (or in a few cases many hours) due to weather or circumstances, what is a mother (or father) to do? Can you imagine either babies not being changed at all or being changed in a packed (think Southwest) plane? Bring on a problem with the ventilation or air conditioning and this is the stuff that nightmares are made of.
Adoptive parents are particularly vulnerable to these problems. More often than not, they must fly home with their newborn child. They may have several connections or may have to travel long hours internationally. There is no choice of whether to leave the baby at home with grandma. They're trying to get home. We can send astronauts to the space station, but we can't manage a kid-friendly bathroom on a plane? Women did not design these aircraft!
So here is my proposition. Are you a parent? Do you want to become a parent? Were you ever next to a child on a flight? Do you have a mother? That pretty much covers everyone. If so, write a letter. Copy it to as every airline you can find an e-mail or snail mail address for. Ask that they start taking everyone's comfort into consideration, as this affects everyone on the plane! Ask that there be a real changing table on every airline. Ask that they allow enough room for a parent and child to maneuver comfortably -- never mind that a handicapped person has no chance of being able to use the facilities as is (how do they get away with that?). Mention that you intend to fly only "family friendly" airlines. And while you're at it, make a pitch for seats that don't involve sharing your neighbor's personal space (okay, so that request has already fallen on deaf ears so never mind that). I want us to inundate the airlines with requests so that they will take it seriously. Post it on face book, share with friends, pass out a form letter or petition with multiple signatures. After all, it's a revolution.
I digress...after getting settled into my "back of the bus" seat because of my late arrival, I realized that it would be better to use the lavatory early in the flight. You ladies all understand. So, with a sense of dread, I made my way to the back to the lavatory. When using an airline restroom, it's a good idea to position yourself before entering the lavatory because once the door is closed, there's no turning around -- literally -- at least without touching all four walls. And that's the absolute last thing you want to do. It's a balancing act to be sure and, judging by the condition of the floor, others have not balanced so well. It occurred to me, in that moment, how unfriendly the skies really are -- most notably for children.
Take a look around. Literally everyone you see anywhere you go is either a child or was a child at some point in time. There are a couple of issues here. Anyone who is already a parent (or is female) can tell you that it's difficult to maneuver with children in public toilets anyway. Never mind not having enough room for one adult to function well. If your child is young enough to need assistance, good luck -- and make sure you have a packet of sanitary wipes on hand.
If you are the parent of an infant and you are flying four or five hours (or more), chances are that a diaper change will be in order. Oh, you do have options! You can change your child on your lap -- risking a mess and offending your neighbors. The tray tables are too flimsy to support the weight of an infant, and who wants to eat on a changing table anyway? Then you have the floor. The only floor space is in the aisle, which is just wide enough for your carry-on (not your hips unless you move sideways), unless you are in the front row, where you are not allowed to stow your belongings, so you won't have access to your diaper bag. Privacy is pretty much out the window in either of those two venues. That leaves the bathroom.
I challenge anyone (and some of us truly are expert diaper changers, even in a pinch) to find a way to balance a wiggly baby either on top of the closed toilet (yuck!), or on the 3 square inches of wet counter space provided. Of course, you do have privacy, even if you can't turn a full 360 degrees. But just how can you bend over in a closet not even hospitable to turning around? Here's hoping you can change a baby in space because you'll have to hold it up in the air and, in this case, gravity is not your friend.
That got me thinking -- When you hear about a plane being stuck on a tarmac for a couple of hours (or in a few cases many hours) due to weather or circumstances, what is a mother (or father) to do? Can you imagine either babies not being changed at all or being changed in a packed (think Southwest) plane? Bring on a problem with the ventilation or air conditioning and this is the stuff that nightmares are made of.
Adoptive parents are particularly vulnerable to these problems. More often than not, they must fly home with their newborn child. They may have several connections or may have to travel long hours internationally. There is no choice of whether to leave the baby at home with grandma. They're trying to get home. We can send astronauts to the space station, but we can't manage a kid-friendly bathroom on a plane? Women did not design these aircraft!
So here is my proposition. Are you a parent? Do you want to become a parent? Were you ever next to a child on a flight? Do you have a mother? That pretty much covers everyone. If so, write a letter. Copy it to as every airline you can find an e-mail or snail mail address for. Ask that they start taking everyone's comfort into consideration, as this affects everyone on the plane! Ask that there be a real changing table on every airline. Ask that they allow enough room for a parent and child to maneuver comfortably -- never mind that a handicapped person has no chance of being able to use the facilities as is (how do they get away with that?). Mention that you intend to fly only "family friendly" airlines. And while you're at it, make a pitch for seats that don't involve sharing your neighbor's personal space (okay, so that request has already fallen on deaf ears so never mind that). I want us to inundate the airlines with requests so that they will take it seriously. Post it on face book, share with friends, pass out a form letter or petition with multiple signatures. After all, it's a revolution.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Teen Pregnancy, Birth, and Motherhood
With the popularity of the newer reality shows on teen motherhood like MTV's 16 & Pregnant and Teen Mom, some people believe that teen motherhood is being glamorized and that more teens will become pregnant. Only time will tell if these programs will have an impact on teen pregnancy, but most states, including California, are reporting a reduction in teen births in their latest statistics (from 2009). In California, the birth rate dropped to a new low, falling from 35.2 for every 1,000 teens in 2008 to 32.1 in 2009. That is mirroring the national birth rate, which has continued to decline over the past two years, presumably due to the economy. Our national birth rate is the lowest since the Great Depression, which is a significant statistic. In addition, abortions are up. With fewer pregnancies and more abortions, it necessarily follows that there are fewer adoptions.
Interestingly, while the birth rate among Latino teens dropped more than other groups, the Latino birth rate is still the highest among all ethnicities in California. At 50.8 per 1,000 Latino teens, Latino girls are at high risk for becoming pregnant as teens.
Teen motherhood is anything but glamorous. There is a higher rate of abuse among teen mothers and there are many negative consequences to the children of young moms. Typically fathers disappear or were never involved from the beginning. Financial resources are few, and teen moms rarely get a chance to continue their education and go on to college. Their own childhood cut short, they don't get to experience some of the rites of passage that their peers do -- from prom to date nights to sorority parties and meeting new and interesting friends at college.
Why then, do more teens not consider adoption? I think peer pressure is the answer. I have worked with teen moms who knew that they couldn't parent properly and wanted to go to college or into the military and they were harangued by their peers. "What kind of mother are you?" or "How could you give your baby away?" are some of the things said to young ladies I know who had made the best decision for their children. "It's hard enough to give up your child without having to defend that decision", said Rachel, one of our former birth moms. She was right. If that was the right decision for her and she wasn't hurting anyone and her baby was going to a good home, why should anyone try to make her feel guilty for opting to give herself and her child a better future? Teens can be vicious and judgmental. The fact is, they don't see the big picture. Not until they have tried to parent will they understand how difficult such an undertaking can be as a teen with no foundation or resources. When a young mom opts to place her child for adoption, rather than aborting that child, she is taking a big risk that her peers will condemn her and she will be ostracized. Why, then, is killing a child more acceptable? Teens empathize with their peers who have undergone an abortion and they support them. Yet, when adoption is discussed, they present a whole new attitude. It's as if, once you have decided to give birth, you are expected to deal with the consequences. It's almost a punishment. If you choose adoption over abortion, you are somehow the bad guy.
Teens need to start supporting their peers and there needs to be more mentorship by others who have gone through adoption, parenting, and abortion. I can tell you from counseling abortion survivors that it's no picnic. There is guilt and remorse, and fear of retribution (by a higher power). It is revisited once they have children later on and realize with full clarity just what has happened and that they can not bring that life back. It's tragic when our society has become more tolerant of abortion than adoption. There are unplanned pregnancies, but there are no unwanted children. I have homes for them all.
Interestingly, while the birth rate among Latino teens dropped more than other groups, the Latino birth rate is still the highest among all ethnicities in California. At 50.8 per 1,000 Latino teens, Latino girls are at high risk for becoming pregnant as teens.
Teen motherhood is anything but glamorous. There is a higher rate of abuse among teen mothers and there are many negative consequences to the children of young moms. Typically fathers disappear or were never involved from the beginning. Financial resources are few, and teen moms rarely get a chance to continue their education and go on to college. Their own childhood cut short, they don't get to experience some of the rites of passage that their peers do -- from prom to date nights to sorority parties and meeting new and interesting friends at college.
Why then, do more teens not consider adoption? I think peer pressure is the answer. I have worked with teen moms who knew that they couldn't parent properly and wanted to go to college or into the military and they were harangued by their peers. "What kind of mother are you?" or "How could you give your baby away?" are some of the things said to young ladies I know who had made the best decision for their children. "It's hard enough to give up your child without having to defend that decision", said Rachel, one of our former birth moms. She was right. If that was the right decision for her and she wasn't hurting anyone and her baby was going to a good home, why should anyone try to make her feel guilty for opting to give herself and her child a better future? Teens can be vicious and judgmental. The fact is, they don't see the big picture. Not until they have tried to parent will they understand how difficult such an undertaking can be as a teen with no foundation or resources. When a young mom opts to place her child for adoption, rather than aborting that child, she is taking a big risk that her peers will condemn her and she will be ostracized. Why, then, is killing a child more acceptable? Teens empathize with their peers who have undergone an abortion and they support them. Yet, when adoption is discussed, they present a whole new attitude. It's as if, once you have decided to give birth, you are expected to deal with the consequences. It's almost a punishment. If you choose adoption over abortion, you are somehow the bad guy.
Teens need to start supporting their peers and there needs to be more mentorship by others who have gone through adoption, parenting, and abortion. I can tell you from counseling abortion survivors that it's no picnic. There is guilt and remorse, and fear of retribution (by a higher power). It is revisited once they have children later on and realize with full clarity just what has happened and that they can not bring that life back. It's tragic when our society has become more tolerant of abortion than adoption. There are unplanned pregnancies, but there are no unwanted children. I have homes for them all.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Adoption Now and Then
It's been a while since I blogged. I guess between the holidays, end of year, and the new year, I have been more busy than ever. I'm going to get back into the swing of things.
Years ago, adoption was a dirty word. You only said it in a whisper when you were talking about someone who had gotten pregnant out of wedlock. It was a shameful thing because it meant someone was in trouble. Girls who got pregnant were sent off to maternity homes or an aunt or grandma half way across the country -- the further the better. When they came back six months later, everyone pretended that they believed whatever story was concocted to cover it up. Women placing their babies had horrible experiences, many times not even being allowed to see the baby they had just given birth to. Some were never even told the gender. The baby was taken away -- spirited from the room, nurses and doctors talking in hushed tones.
In the nursery, instead of putting a last name on the card, it would say Baby Girl BUFA or Baby Boy BUFA, meaning "baby up for adoption". I cringe at the fact that this is still used today in some hospitals. It seems ignorant to me. There are no illegitimate babies. They are all legitimate. They didn't get to determine the circumstances under which they were born and they are born without fault.
Years ago, I attended an American Adoption Congress meeting in Nashville and attended lectures given by various adoption professionals and adoptees. I will never forget some of the stories told there. I was moved by one woman who, without her consent, had her child taken from her as soon as she gave birth. It was involuntary, but her father insisted, and she was a minor and so it was done. She was never allowed to grieve, never allowed to talk about the baby or make reference to her. I remember her saying "My father took my child away from me then, but he couldn't keep her away from me forever"....she managed to find her after 40 years. She thought about that child every day, and she never forgave her father.
This all came back to me as I listened today as Oprah described how she recently found out something she had never known. Her mother gave up a baby for adoption secretly. As was the case at the time, she told no one and Oprah, living with her father, never knew she had another sister. She was divorced and couldn't afford another child, and so this was the choice she made. Oprah has clearly been stunned by the revelation. You can imagine how she must feel deceived by her mother. Her younger sister is named Patricia, the same name as another sister who has since died. Patricia was able to piece together information that eventually lead her to believe that she had the same mother as Oprah. It turned out to be true. She tried for a while to get into contact and finally spoke with Oprah's aunt. After DNA testing, she knew she was Oprah's half-sister.
Everyone should know where they came from. Everyone deserves that. That's why open adoption is so much more healthy than the closed adoptions of the past. Adoption needs to come out of the closet. It's not shameful and it's not something to be hidden. Virtually all of us have been touched by adoption. I'm happy that Patricia was able to find her birth family and happy that Oprah has been able to connect with the sister who she never knew about. Congratulations to all of them.
Years ago, adoption was a dirty word. You only said it in a whisper when you were talking about someone who had gotten pregnant out of wedlock. It was a shameful thing because it meant someone was in trouble. Girls who got pregnant were sent off to maternity homes or an aunt or grandma half way across the country -- the further the better. When they came back six months later, everyone pretended that they believed whatever story was concocted to cover it up. Women placing their babies had horrible experiences, many times not even being allowed to see the baby they had just given birth to. Some were never even told the gender. The baby was taken away -- spirited from the room, nurses and doctors talking in hushed tones.
In the nursery, instead of putting a last name on the card, it would say Baby Girl BUFA or Baby Boy BUFA, meaning "baby up for adoption". I cringe at the fact that this is still used today in some hospitals. It seems ignorant to me. There are no illegitimate babies. They are all legitimate. They didn't get to determine the circumstances under which they were born and they are born without fault.
Years ago, I attended an American Adoption Congress meeting in Nashville and attended lectures given by various adoption professionals and adoptees. I will never forget some of the stories told there. I was moved by one woman who, without her consent, had her child taken from her as soon as she gave birth. It was involuntary, but her father insisted, and she was a minor and so it was done. She was never allowed to grieve, never allowed to talk about the baby or make reference to her. I remember her saying "My father took my child away from me then, but he couldn't keep her away from me forever"....she managed to find her after 40 years. She thought about that child every day, and she never forgave her father.
This all came back to me as I listened today as Oprah described how she recently found out something she had never known. Her mother gave up a baby for adoption secretly. As was the case at the time, she told no one and Oprah, living with her father, never knew she had another sister. She was divorced and couldn't afford another child, and so this was the choice she made. Oprah has clearly been stunned by the revelation. You can imagine how she must feel deceived by her mother. Her younger sister is named Patricia, the same name as another sister who has since died. Patricia was able to piece together information that eventually lead her to believe that she had the same mother as Oprah. It turned out to be true. She tried for a while to get into contact and finally spoke with Oprah's aunt. After DNA testing, she knew she was Oprah's half-sister.
Everyone should know where they came from. Everyone deserves that. That's why open adoption is so much more healthy than the closed adoptions of the past. Adoption needs to come out of the closet. It's not shameful and it's not something to be hidden. Virtually all of us have been touched by adoption. I'm happy that Patricia was able to find her birth family and happy that Oprah has been able to connect with the sister who she never knew about. Congratulations to all of them.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Angels Among Us
For those who wonder, I can tell you with full certainty that there are angels living among us. I've seen many things that point to this, but none more convincing than those responding to a recent e-mail I had sent out to special needs agencies, adoptive parents, and contacts within my adoption circle. It has always been our mission to find a home for every baby who needs one, no matter the situation. And, thankfully, we have always found willing families, no matter the situation. Every once in a while, a special needs situation comes up and it can be a challenge to locate the perfect family. But, somehow, some way, there is always that special family that is the right match for the baby. Last week, we went in search of a family for a baby who was born with severe hydrocephalus and limited brain function. The response has been surprising. This baby will need a lifetime of care, special attention, and will not have much potential. Still, there are families who want this baby to be in their family. Many families. There are, indeed, angels among us.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Teens and Oral Contraceptives: Putting it all in Perspective
The following article was written by a guest blogger, Matt Phillips. Matt is a young professional who has found his voice in advocating for Women's health. He has shared some good points. I would add that in terms of contraceptives, I have serious concerns about Depo Provera. I jokingly refer to it as a "fertility drug," as a good number of our birth mothers report having been on Depo at the time they conceived. Whether it is being allowed to expire or it's actually failing is unknown. I would caution all women when using this form of birth control to also use a condom as well, as it seems to be unreliable and condoms allow for further protection from sexually-transmitted diseases.
"The advent and subsequent popularity of certain birth control methods have led to a welcome decline in teen pregnancy throughout the United States. However, these methods, most notably oral contraceptives, also bring forth a host of further risks. Unfortunately, teens tend to fixate on avoiding pregnancy, arguably because it's the most visible consequence. However, with such well-established and successful adoption programs in place to bring life to a family unable to have children, these drugs deserve deeper scrutiny before young adults hastily decide to use them.
One major factor of these drugs is their potentially damaging side effects.While pregnancy rates in this country have declined, sexually transmitted disease rates continue to grow. However, these drugs do nothing to address that specific concern. Worse still, these pills might actually encourage unprotected sex, tempting naive young adults to believe they're safe against all the unwanted outcomes of sex. The legitimizing effects of these pills, followed by the accelerated spread of disease, are a serious health concern parents and young adults need to consider when considering an oral contraceptive.
Unfortunately, parents cannot rely on schools to address the dangers of these contraceptives. With U.S. government's renewal of its $50 million a year funding over five years for abstinence-focused education, teens might not receive the unbiased information needed to make the right choice regarding this contraceptive. Worse still, schools might totally refuse to discuss this contraception because it conflicts with the curriculum's assertion that abstinence should be the sole method teens use regarding sexuality. With the government's strong stance against teen sex, and by extension, contraception, parents simply can't rely on schools to thoroughly discuss this particular drug.
Even worse than schools at discussing the details of these drugs, the manufacturers of contraceptives regularly fail to mention important information regarding their safety. One producer, Bayer Health Care, was recently cited by the FDA for having misleading television advertisements about its products. Promoting their product as a total quality-of-life improvement, these ads further mislead teens into choosing these drugs based on unproven claims. Furthermore, Bayer was also cited for substandard conditions in on of the plants of its hormone-manufacturing providers.
With the charges that have been levied against this oral contraceptive maker, it's of little surprise that the extreme physical consequences of these drugs also have not been released by the manufacturer. These hormone-altering pills actually lead to permanent side effects, like the possibility of infertility. Originally introduced in the 1960's, some critics argue these oral contraceptives might also be to blame in the elevated cancer incidences for women in the U.S. Although easily dismissed by young people as harmless and a "safe alternative," these drugs literally disrupt many significant aspects of life including sexual, emotional, and physical health.
In fact, the growing number of complaints against oral contraceptives, exemplified by pending Yaz lawsuits, indicates that the short-term safety of such birth control options is far from certain. Users of this particular product have seen serious, and sometimes fatal, side effects including heart attack, stroke, blood clots, pulmonary embolisms, and gallbladder disease. However, because schools refuse to recognize anything but abstinence as a legitimate lifestyle, these facts are rarely discussed with teens.
With such a strong adoption system in place and so many options to mothers, it's unfortunate so many women continue to utilize such a dangerous method to avoid pregnancy. Regrettably, a serious lack of information flow, both from schools, the media, and the manufacturer itself, is largely to blame. Worse still, young women feel they actually are protected when using this contraceptive, leading to even more undesired consequences. Like many social solutions, the use of this drug and the negative consequences it causes can only effectively be solved if teens are empowered with actual information about it limitations, side effects, and less-damaging alternatives that also protect against sexually transmitted disease. Furthermore, teaching teens that adoption is a noble act might act as further motivation for teens to take their focus of the relatively-short term effects of pregnancy and consider the serious physical consequences of oral contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases."
"The advent and subsequent popularity of certain birth control methods have led to a welcome decline in teen pregnancy throughout the United States. However, these methods, most notably oral contraceptives, also bring forth a host of further risks. Unfortunately, teens tend to fixate on avoiding pregnancy, arguably because it's the most visible consequence. However, with such well-established and successful adoption programs in place to bring life to a family unable to have children, these drugs deserve deeper scrutiny before young adults hastily decide to use them.
One major factor of these drugs is their potentially damaging side effects.While pregnancy rates in this country have declined, sexually transmitted disease rates continue to grow. However, these drugs do nothing to address that specific concern. Worse still, these pills might actually encourage unprotected sex, tempting naive young adults to believe they're safe against all the unwanted outcomes of sex. The legitimizing effects of these pills, followed by the accelerated spread of disease, are a serious health concern parents and young adults need to consider when considering an oral contraceptive.
Unfortunately, parents cannot rely on schools to address the dangers of these contraceptives. With U.S. government's renewal of its $50 million a year funding over five years for abstinence-focused education, teens might not receive the unbiased information needed to make the right choice regarding this contraceptive. Worse still, schools might totally refuse to discuss this contraception because it conflicts with the curriculum's assertion that abstinence should be the sole method teens use regarding sexuality. With the government's strong stance against teen sex, and by extension, contraception, parents simply can't rely on schools to thoroughly discuss this particular drug.
Even worse than schools at discussing the details of these drugs, the manufacturers of contraceptives regularly fail to mention important information regarding their safety. One producer, Bayer Health Care, was recently cited by the FDA for having misleading television advertisements about its products. Promoting their product as a total quality-of-life improvement, these ads further mislead teens into choosing these drugs based on unproven claims. Furthermore, Bayer was also cited for substandard conditions in on of the plants of its hormone-manufacturing providers.
With the charges that have been levied against this oral contraceptive maker, it's of little surprise that the extreme physical consequences of these drugs also have not been released by the manufacturer. These hormone-altering pills actually lead to permanent side effects, like the possibility of infertility. Originally introduced in the 1960's, some critics argue these oral contraceptives might also be to blame in the elevated cancer incidences for women in the U.S. Although easily dismissed by young people as harmless and a "safe alternative," these drugs literally disrupt many significant aspects of life including sexual, emotional, and physical health.
In fact, the growing number of complaints against oral contraceptives, exemplified by pending Yaz lawsuits, indicates that the short-term safety of such birth control options is far from certain. Users of this particular product have seen serious, and sometimes fatal, side effects including heart attack, stroke, blood clots, pulmonary embolisms, and gallbladder disease. However, because schools refuse to recognize anything but abstinence as a legitimate lifestyle, these facts are rarely discussed with teens.
With such a strong adoption system in place and so many options to mothers, it's unfortunate so many women continue to utilize such a dangerous method to avoid pregnancy. Regrettably, a serious lack of information flow, both from schools, the media, and the manufacturer itself, is largely to blame. Worse still, young women feel they actually are protected when using this contraceptive, leading to even more undesired consequences. Like many social solutions, the use of this drug and the negative consequences it causes can only effectively be solved if teens are empowered with actual information about it limitations, side effects, and less-damaging alternatives that also protect against sexually transmitted disease. Furthermore, teaching teens that adoption is a noble act might act as further motivation for teens to take their focus of the relatively-short term effects of pregnancy and consider the serious physical consequences of oral contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases."
Monday, November 1, 2010
Halloween Traditions - Is It Time To Change?
Halloween has come and gone once again and the kids will be in a sugar coma for the next week. I have mixed feelings about Halloween. My parents were actually married on Halloween. Can you imagine your anniversary being spent giving out candy to goblins and witches every year? Back in the day, Halloween was a big deal. I remember literally hundreds of trick or treaters coming to our door each year. My mother always counted and proudly gave us the grand total at the end of the evening (I tried last night and I don't know how she kept count!). The Halloween parties were always something to remember. We actually had bobbing for apples and some really fun haunted houses and haunted barns. It was great fun. As a college student, I worked at Knott's Berry Farm and participated in Halloween Haunt, or Knott's Scary Farm as it is known now. It was great fun (what teen doesn't love scaring children?!).
But nothing stays the same. Halloween is not the holiday it once was. One local city, Murrieta, sent out letters to all of the registered sex offenders in the city, discouraging them from handing out candy to children. This seems like a no-brainer and should be part of their parole/probation, but apparently it's not a law...but rather a suggestion. This comes just days after a local sex offender drove into the parking lot of our local sheriff's station and flagged down an officer to let him know that he had a body in the truck of his car. It turned out to be a 48 year old woman who had recently become involved with him. It's not clear if she knew about his past. Either way, he was a danger to society and we should know that. The recidivism rate with sex offenders is off the charts. Most of them repeatedly offend. The only difference is that they learn that if they leave a victim to testify, they will go to jail, so their crimes become more advanced and more sinister, if that is possible. As I write this, our local school district has reported that a man has been trying to abduct girls walking to school in the morning. What better time to do that than around Halloween, when a person can wear a costume and get away with it?
Each year on Halloween, I cringe when I turn on the news and hear what has been given out to children. Candy with razor blades, LSD dots, and rat poison in candy corn balls comes to mind. This year, I heard two bizarre stories. Marijuana legalization proponents were giving out marijuana-laced brownies (another reason not to eat anything that isn't professionally packaged). Half the time, older kids and teens were eating this stuff before they got home and mom had a chance to check out the candy. Some kids got flavored condoms in their Halloween goody bags. Not sure what this world is coming to, but maybe it's time to reconsider how we celebrate this holiday. Hmmmm...there's an oxymoron for you. Holiday = Holy day = All Hallows Eve?
Most of us wouldn't even consider sending our children door to door for other reasons, so why for candy? I know it's about the tradition, the "experience", and the fun of it, but wouldn't it be more reasonable for families with kids to get together to provide an old-fashioned costume party? If each family contributed what they would give out for Halloween, there would be no shortage of candy. With the stranger-danger that our kids face every day (and it seems like it's so much more prevalent now than it was years ago), I think it's time to reassess the Halloween traditions we all grew up with. It was either safer when we were children, or we were just all naive to the danger. Knowing it's out there, we have to protect our children. I'm sure Halloween lovers may call me a witch or something similar for saying this, but perhaps we should change Halloween traditions and ban the door to door trick or treating. It's unfortunate, but for the safety of children, we should think up a better alternative and not dangle the carrot to those who would hurt them. "Safe and sane" is a concept that should be able to be applied to any holiday, not just the fourth of July.
But nothing stays the same. Halloween is not the holiday it once was. One local city, Murrieta, sent out letters to all of the registered sex offenders in the city, discouraging them from handing out candy to children. This seems like a no-brainer and should be part of their parole/probation, but apparently it's not a law...but rather a suggestion. This comes just days after a local sex offender drove into the parking lot of our local sheriff's station and flagged down an officer to let him know that he had a body in the truck of his car. It turned out to be a 48 year old woman who had recently become involved with him. It's not clear if she knew about his past. Either way, he was a danger to society and we should know that. The recidivism rate with sex offenders is off the charts. Most of them repeatedly offend. The only difference is that they learn that if they leave a victim to testify, they will go to jail, so their crimes become more advanced and more sinister, if that is possible. As I write this, our local school district has reported that a man has been trying to abduct girls walking to school in the morning. What better time to do that than around Halloween, when a person can wear a costume and get away with it?
Each year on Halloween, I cringe when I turn on the news and hear what has been given out to children. Candy with razor blades, LSD dots, and rat poison in candy corn balls comes to mind. This year, I heard two bizarre stories. Marijuana legalization proponents were giving out marijuana-laced brownies (another reason not to eat anything that isn't professionally packaged). Half the time, older kids and teens were eating this stuff before they got home and mom had a chance to check out the candy. Some kids got flavored condoms in their Halloween goody bags. Not sure what this world is coming to, but maybe it's time to reconsider how we celebrate this holiday. Hmmmm...there's an oxymoron for you. Holiday = Holy day = All Hallows Eve?
Most of us wouldn't even consider sending our children door to door for other reasons, so why for candy? I know it's about the tradition, the "experience", and the fun of it, but wouldn't it be more reasonable for families with kids to get together to provide an old-fashioned costume party? If each family contributed what they would give out for Halloween, there would be no shortage of candy. With the stranger-danger that our kids face every day (and it seems like it's so much more prevalent now than it was years ago), I think it's time to reassess the Halloween traditions we all grew up with. It was either safer when we were children, or we were just all naive to the danger. Knowing it's out there, we have to protect our children. I'm sure Halloween lovers may call me a witch or something similar for saying this, but perhaps we should change Halloween traditions and ban the door to door trick or treating. It's unfortunate, but for the safety of children, we should think up a better alternative and not dangle the carrot to those who would hurt them. "Safe and sane" is a concept that should be able to be applied to any holiday, not just the fourth of July.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)