research reveals mistrust and hostility btw drs & midwives,unwed mothers

http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sciencedaily/~3/7wCVtrWA398/090511151616.htm

well , duh! but worth a read....and kudos to the researchers for looking at the subject!

national womens health week was last week but its not too late to take charge of your own health. the theme this year was "it's your time" and the focus was mental health. heres a brochure put out by the us dept of health and human services office on womens health http://download.ncadi.samhsa.gov/ken/pdf/OWH09-CONSUMER/womenmentalhealth.pdf lotsa good tips in there

this is not really news. i think it was reported as part of the most recent report on childbirth numbers which i'm totally blanking on the name of but last week the washington post reported that the number of babies born to unwed mothers is on the rise http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/13/AR2009051301628.html?hpid=sec-health
i do'nt really know wha tt to think about the tone of the article... while i believe marrige is a great thing and i'm very happy that this, my 3rd child was concieved and will be born and raised in wedlock, i sure wouldn't marry the father of my first child. (my second is obviously being raised in wedlock as i married his dad but he was neither concieved nor born in it) i don't think marriage is the most important factor contributing to a kids future sucess... now a stable 2 parent home has been shown to lead to bettter outcomes for kids, i don't think many people would argue that thats better for kids BUT does that necesssarily require marrige?

what about kids who live with mom and dad, but mom and dad are not married? what about kids who live with mom and mom? or dad and dad? the preceding two examples of a stable 2 parent home CANNOT get married except in certain states...

i have heard of hetero couples who are rejecting marrige in solidarity with their homo friends and family who do not have the right to get married. also people who reject marrige by the state b/c of deeply held beliefs regarding state interference in what for them is either a private or a religious matter, or both. what of them?

additionally many women who are single parents are not single by choice (though some arre) ... some were abandoned by their boyfriends, some are pregnant because of rape or incest, some have left abusive relationships because having a child was the impetus they needed to get out of an unhealthy situation.

what of married mothers whos husbands are out of the home for extended periods of time such as soldiers on deployment or similar?

i just don't get all the hand-wringing that is going on over this!

vit d, response to the case against breastfeeding, call for public comments on breastfeeding

so now they're linking vitamin d deficiency with the increased rate of cesarean....

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/585864?src=mp&spon=16&uac=89759SZ

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/science/30baby.html heres a post from amy at birthing with confidence that gives some additional critique to the study.

http://www.givingbirthwithconfidence.org/?p=246 (i loved everything i read on this blog btw....it was a new one to me but now on my favorites list) i'm no expert at reading or critiquing scientific studies, but it seems to me that good nutrition during pregnancy is common sense. http://www.jhsph.edu/wchpc/publications/MCH-Summ.-6.pdf

are women more likely to be d deficient now? maybe since we're supposed to wear sunblock all the time.....i learned in my lactation class that 20 minutes in the sun was good for, well i don't remember the exact figure but quite a lot of vit d. and whats more it can be split up over the course of a day.

heres a reply to the case against breastfeeding that i really liked

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-bd-triage-breastfeeding-05-apr05,0,1912282.story obviously i'm pro breastfeeding. actually like i said to my dad (in reference to nursing in public ) " no body is really against breastfeeding are they?" and i think rosin really should have written a different article......maybe the case against promoting breastfeeding without also protecting and supporting it?

but i do agree that breastfeeding doesn't have to be an all or nothing thing....at least after a while. once you get a good supply established, good latch, all the basics....if it will really make that much difference to your own health and well being to use an alternate feeding method sometimes, well mama's health and happiness is directly realted to her babies health and hapiness. thats why its called the mother baby dyad.

speaking of breastfeeding health and human services has issued a call for public comments http://www.blsmeetings.net/owh_call_to_action_on_breastfeeding/

heres some unsurprising news related to women and health insurance

http://www.mercurynews.com/topstories/ci_12159324 i was just talking with a customer at work about basically this very subject. she paid $60 out of pocket for bcp....not coincidentally her company does not offer paid maternity leave either....

and heres a new study about birth control pills http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-04/aps-oci041509.php

it shows that bcps reduce muscle mass gain. interesting stuff considering how common use of oral contraceptives is. http://www.infoforhealth.org/pr/a9/a9chap2.shtml