Dec
22
2008
0

Hello world!

pictures2008-187

Owen And Liam 11/08

PureMom.Com was born on Mother’s Day 1999. We are converting to wordpress today in anticipation of our third home birth which should be happening in the very near future.

Andy & Abbie

Written by admin in: Uncategorized |
Mar
08
2009
0

Reflections on public breast-feeding - by Janice Carmac

I don’t know if I agree with Crystal Everitt, the N.C. woman who allegedly was asked to leave a Denny’s restaurant in Asheville for breast-feeding her 1-year-old.

But, boy, do I admire her nerve.

If I understand the story correctly, Everitt was nursing her energetic toddler without the aid of a concealing shawl or blanket. Even if she had a coverup in her possession, Everitt maintained that her child was too old to remain obscured in docile compliance.

So the Sunday crowd counting on a post-church meal that included nothing more controversial than heart clogging bacon and sausage, saw something more intriguing, a woman’s breast.

One of the patrons hinted to Everitt that the restaurant did have bathrooms. Other diners left, disgusted by the peep show.

When Everitt refused to cover up or move somewhere more private, the manager made what he thought was the most economically sound decision. He asked Everitt to leave.

The incident reminded me of a situation I experienced a few years ago.

I was at a seafood restaurant with some extended family members when it became obvious that my squalling baby, Harmony, was hungry. It was winter, not a good time to nurse in a motor vehicle.

So I hauled myself out of the squeaky vinyl booth and took the infant to the tiny, two-stall bathroom. There I sat on the lidless toilet and breast-fed Harmony. I would have sat on the floor, leaving the toilet available, but it was filthy.

Meanwhile, impatient women noted with wonder that only one toilet was available. A small child peeked under the stall door at us. Harmony nursed, oblivious to the sounds and scents that usually discourage an adult’s appetite.

When I returned to my seat, a family member thanked me for not feeding Harmony at the table. Others chimed in, citing how revolting it is to see women breast-feed in public.

I could have used a little of Everitt’s bravery then.

But instead, I swallowed my hurt, said nothing and gnawed on cold fried shrimp. Yum.

Later, seeking solace from the like-minded, I posted the incident to my mommy e-mail group. Infuriated replies from women angry that something as basic as feeding a child could be construed as inappropriate or distasteful filled my Inbox for days.

I only lasted three months breast-feeding Harmony and about five months breast-feeding my older child, Zoe. I had little support from either side of my family and too flimsy a backbone to do what I knew was right.

Shortly after I weaned Harmony, Zoe was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes. There’s a good chance that one day Harmony may develop the disease as well. And I’ll always wonder just what a full year of breast milk could have meant for my children’s health.

Everitt may be indiscreet or uncouth, but she is a mother who makes a stand.

Maybe she’s more of a woman than me.

Janice Carmac is an editorial assistant for the News & Record and can be reached at janice.carmac@news-record.com.

Written by mamagail in: Uncategorized |
Jan
31
2009
0

Experts: ‘Co-sleeping’ with baby never OK

- Associated Press Writer

ST. LOUIS — Unsafe sleep practices are causing otherwise healthy babies to die in the city of St. Louis, city police and medical experts said Friday.

They said preventing such deaths is as easy as ABC - a baby should sleep Alone, on its Back and in a Crib.

The St. Louis city medical examiner’s office listed unsafe sleeping practices as the cause of 19 baby deaths last year, 14 in 2007, and eight in 2006. Already this year, a 2-month-old boy was found lifeless at home while sleeping with his parent.

Dr. Shalini Paruthi, director of the pediatric sleep center at Cardinal Glennon Children’s Medical Center, said some believe it is “natural, protective and beautiful” to bring a baby to bed with the parent, also known as “co-sleeping.”

But the “tragic truth,” she said at a news conference with health and law enforcement officials, “is that the baby can die while in bed when its breathing becomes obstructed.”

Paruthi said the safest alternative is placing a child in a crib next to the parents’ bed.

Sharing an adult bed with the baby didn’t account for all the deaths of otherwise healthy St. Louis babies in 2006-08.

Some deaths were due to suffocation from fluffy bedding, toys, or crib bumpers, or being placed face down on a bed or couch - all considered unsafe sleep practices.

A minority of deaths was attributed to SIDS - Sudden Infant Death Syndrome - which is defined as an unexplained death of an otherwise healthy child.

St. Louis Police Sgt. Latricia Allen, who investigates baby deaths, said many moms are too tired to get out of bed to place the baby in a crib. “They fall asleep cradling the child,” she said. “They are absolutely, totally devastated.”

Some mothers opt not to use a crib, believing that sleeping with the baby will strengthen the mother-child bond. However, the child is at risk of being smothered or suffocated by the adult’s body, said Dr. Robert Paschall, a child safety specialist at St. Louis Children’s Hospital.

But anthropologist James McKenna, a University of Notre Dame researcher and expert on infant co-sleeping, said even in the face of these deaths, society must respect the often legitimate reasons why mothers sleep with their babies, especially when they are breastfeeding.

It’s “a part of our humanity and cannot altogether be ignored or canceled out,” McKenna, director of the university’s Mother-Baby Behavioral Sleep Laboratory, said in an e-mail.

Separate but attached sleeping beds may be a safer alternative, said McKenna, who recommends “educating parents what to avoid if they choose to bedshare.”

Kristin Dow, 38, of Liberty, a bed-sharing parent of three, including a 5-week-old son, has two strategies. Sometimes, she places her son in a small crib designed to be pushed up against the mattress of her bed. That allows her to reach over and breast feed.

Other times, the baby sleeps with her and her husband.

She believes it enhances emotional bonding, but also makes breast-feeding easier.

“The No. 1 reason I co-sleep is because babies have tiny tummies and this perfect food (breast milk) is metabolized quickly,” Dow said. “I don’t want to be getting out of bed sitting in a cold room nursing my babies every 20 minutes.”

She follows certain safety rules, such as not taking sedating medicines and being careful about bedding.

“If I was afraid, I wouldn’t do it,” she said. “I’ve taken time to be educated.”

Velma Harris Walker, of the St. Louis-based nonprofit group SIDS Resources, works with parents of newborns. She says babies should be placed in cribs free of toys, stuffed animals, bumpers, pillows, even blankets.

All those items are for the benefit of adults, who find them cute, she said.

“What makes it cute is the baby inside,” she said.

Now we can add co-sleeping to the list of offensive practices of  attachment style parenting.  When I had Liam 9 years ago, sleeping with baby was more accepted than it is today.  Sleeping with an infant seems to be the most natural and beneficial practice for the baby, with a little common sense thrown in.

So who are these experts, and how do we explain that the majority of the world’s cultures practice some sort of co-sleeping without dire results?  Why are Americans so anxious to put their babies in cribs, strollers, high chairs etc?  I see moms lugging around their babies in car seats.  This can’t be more comfortable that wearing your baby.  We can’t wait to push this independence and separation from our infants, is it really all about safety?  And when did staying close to our infants become harmful and cause for concern?  Is our society so preoccupied with consuming products that is is necessary for the media to scare parents into running to buy a crib?

Statistics are very sketchy and number games can be played with studies.  But there are 7,000 SIDS death documented each year; an otherwise healthy baby is found dead in its crib.  There are 60 deaths reported each year that were the result of babies sleeping in their parents beds.  If we are very conservative and estimate that only 5% of Americans practice co-sleeping, then a baby in a crib is four times more likely to die of SIDS than they are likely to die sleeping in their parents bed.

Back in the 1940’s and 50’s the so-called “experts” had American moms brainwashed that formula was every bit as healthy as breast milk.  And the vast majority of moms bottle fed their infants on the experts sage advice.  Today the percentages still favor bottle feeding after the first couple of months, our culture has not recovered, and breastfeeding moms and babies do not receive the support they deserve.

If we choose to educate ourselves and follow some simple guidelines, sleeping with our babies can be beneficial and safe .



Written by mamagail in: Uncategorized |
Jan
28
2009
0

The Big Thumbs-up

A second camera running to capture the boys as they watched the birth of their sister, failed us. So I was grateful for this moment on video (it is at 7:48 into Anabel Part-1).

All systems go

All systems go

During their Mom’s labor, I had occasionally given the boys quiet reassurance with hand signals or gently rubbing their backs. So Liam’s nine year-old thumb is sweet to see.

After all this was my third home birth and their very first. I wanted them to feel secure about how the birth was progressing. It was too bad the second camera didn’t produce any footage as they were very good attendants. It was homeschooling at its finest.

Written by Andrew in: Home School, Homebirth |
Jan
28
2009
0

Autism, Vaccines and the CDC: The Wrong Side of History

Even as the evidence connecting America’s autism epidemic to vaccines mounts, dead-enders at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) — many of whom promoted the current vaccine schedule and others with strong ties to the vaccine industry — are trying to delay the day of reckoning by creating questionable studies designed to discredit any potential vaccine-autism link and by derailing authentic studies.

On January 12, a cadre of mid-level health bureaucrats left over from the Bush administration ignored Federal requirements for advance notice in order to vote to quietly strip vaccine research studies from funding allocated by Congress in the Combating Autism Act (CAA) of 2006. Members of Congress had said that this money should be used to study the vaccine-autism connection.

These rogue bureaucrats — members of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee — held an unannounced vote to remove previously approved vaccine studies from funding under the CAA. Nearly all of the “Federal” members of the panel voted to remove the two studies, whose estimated cost was $16 million - or 1.6% of the billion dollars authorized by Congress for autism. The panel’s civilian members, in contrast, voted nearly unanimously to retain the funding. (more…)

Written by mamagail in: Uncategorized |

Powered by WordPress | Theme: Aeros 2.0 by TheBuckmaker.com