Sad story

Are there any posters here who have ignored every qualified midwife in their
province and had a breach birth at home which led to the death of their
baby? Because according to Isle Witch, there are many here who have.

Also, she seems to think that it's OK to call others "****ing Bitches"

So, if I call you "nosy kunt licking whore", that's ok right? Because
that's my opinion?? Let's all call everybody in this newsgroup names,
because that's the mature thing to do.

How can I possibly respond to "you ****ing bicth"??
"WOW... thank-you so much for clearing that up, I'm a changed woman now"

If you're ****ed at me, call me opinionated, call me insensitive or
unsympathetic but for God's sake be more imaginative than "you ****ing
bitch" because the only thing that leads to is:

"you ass wipe"
"you dickhead"
"you dumb ass"
"you stinkin' snatch"

yaddi yaddi ya. Y'see where this is going?





"Ilse Witch" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:10:50 -0400, Jenny D wrote:

You can disagree with me but please try to use a few more brain cells
while
composing your rebuttal.

Only if you use a few more to compose your response to the OP. If you
would be familiar with some of the posters here, you'd understand her
reply. She's as entitled to her opinion as you are to yours.

--
-- I
mommy to DS (July '02)
mommy to three tiny angels (28 Oct'03, 17 Feb'04 & 20 May'04)
guardian of DH (33)

Donna wrote:

"Chotii" wrote in message
.. .

I like to think my feelings mattered.

Emotionally, of course they matter. But from a research standpoint...
there isn't a whole lot that can be done with anecdotal data.

Do not confuse qualitative data with anecdote.
While Angela's experience and feelings by themselves are
anecdotal, a well done qualitative study examining women
who've had relevant experiences can be *very* valid and
useful exercise.

Your
experience was negative for reasons X, Y and Z, mine was positve for reasons
Q, R and S, but the two can't be compared in a manner that would give any
kind of useful scientific evidence.

Are you kidding me? That's what qualitative
research is all about. There are hundreds of ways to
rigorously compare such qualitative data and end up with
very meaningful results. Just because you can't do a
chi square doesn't mean it's not valid.

Best wishes,
Ericka

Normally I don't announce this but

"PLONK"

"Jenny D" wrote in message
...
Are there any posters here who have ignored every qualified midwife in
their
province and had a breach birth at home which led to the death of their
baby? Because according to Isle Witch, there are many here who have.

Also, she seems to think that it's OK to call others "****ing Bitches"

So, if I call you "nosy kunt licking whore", that's ok right? Because
that's my opinion?? Let's all call everybody in this newsgroup names,
because that's the mature thing to do.

How can I possibly respond to "you ****ing bicth"??
"WOW... thank-you so much for clearing that up, I'm a changed woman now"

If you're ****ed at me, call me opinionated, call me insensitive or
unsympathetic but for God's sake be more imaginative than "you ****ing
bitch" because the only thing that leads to is:

"you ass wipe"
"you dickhead"
"you dumb ass"
"you stinkin' snatch"

yaddi yaddi ya. Y'see where this is going?





"Ilse Witch" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:10:50 -0400, Jenny D wrote:

You can disagree with me but please try to use a few more brain cells
while
composing your rebuttal.

Only if you use a few more to compose your response to the OP. If you
would be familiar with some of the posters here, you'd understand her
reply. She's as entitled to her opinion as you are to yours.

--
-- I
mommy to DS (July '02)
mommy to three tiny angels (28 Oct'03, 17 Feb'04 & 20 May'04)
guardian of DH (33)

Ericka Kammerer wrote:
Donna wrote:
"Chotii" wrote in message
.. .

I like to think my feelings mattered.

Emotionally, of course they matter. But from a research
standpoint... there isn't a whole lot that can be done with
anecdotal data.

Do not confuse qualitative data with anecdote.
While Angela's experience and feelings by themselves are
anecdotal, a well done qualitative study examining women
who've had relevant experiences can be *very* valid and
useful exercise.

Your
experience was negative for reasons X, Y and Z, mine was positve
for reasons Q, R and S, but the two can't be compared in a manner
that would give any kind of useful scientific evidence.

Are you kidding me? That's what qualitative
research is all about. There are hundreds of ways to
rigorously compare such qualitative data and end up with
very meaningful results. Just because you can't do a
chi square doesn't mean it's not valid.

Moreover, I think it is very important to quantify what makes a c-section
experience positive versus negative (or *any* birth experience, for that
matter). Caregivers need to remember that they are treating the WHOLE
person, not just the part that produces babies. We need MORE of this sort of
research, not less.
--
Be well, Barbara
Mom to Sin (Vernon, 2), Misery (Aurora, 4), and the Rising Son (Julian, 6)

This week's suggested Bush/Cheney campaign bumper sticker:
"Four More Wars!"

All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful.
Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its
other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a
fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:10:50 -0400, "Jenny D"
snuck out of the ether to utter:

This is a newsgroup. Everyone here is entitled to their opinion.

Indeed.

plonk

Nan

--
"when the sun goes down we'll be groovin'
when the sun goes down we'll be feelin' alright,
when the sun sinks down over the water
everything gets hotter when the sun goes down"
~Kenny Chesney

"And as there is a strong correlation between between poverty and poor
health care outcomes, does that mean that poor women who's babies die
should be charged with murder - because they 'should have known' that
being poor made it much more likely their baby would die?"

~ I don't know where you're from but here, rich or poor we all have the same
health care. There is a difference between a poor woman conceiving a child
(where there is no public health care) and then finding out that her child
is breach and not having any money for the care that she needs. That's not
her fault.

"While Jenny D seems to be getting quite the thrill out of imagining the
depravity that led to the death of this poor child, she doesn't really
seem too committed to the ideas she is espousing. I mean, really, after
all, it's 'ok to disagree' about whether someone's a murder or not?
It's not like calling someone a child killer is an important issue or
anything, right?"

~ I am gettings thrills by this?? God, you're sadistic! I am SICKENED by
this woman... she makes me want to PUKE! What do you mean by "she doesn't
really seem too committed to the ideas she is espousing." It's a non
sequetial remark. If I was not commited, then I would not respond. What
will you have me do, go to BC and cause an uproar?

"If I really and genuinely thought that someone had murdered a child,
there is no way I could just shrug my shoulders about it and say
'whatever' and move on to discuss the bitchin' new layette I saw in
Babies R Us on Saturday, or whatever. Why is it that the people who are
so fast to express their moral outrage also seem to be the ones who
have a very limited attention span when it comes to inspecting the
morality of their own arguments?"

~ It's not a moral outrage if you have to inspect the morality is it?
Your going around in cirlces. It's like telling the Canadian Marajoana party
not to smoke marajoana. You're trying to tell me that it's immoral to call
her a murderer, I'm telling you the only immorality here was the decision of
that woman. Morality is subjective to the individual.

"I see nothing offensive in the decisions made by the woman in the original
article"

~ Holy crap! I can't believe my eyes! You see nothing offensive in her
decision?! You're a sick... ahhh forget it, I'm not even going to bother
responding to that awful comment.

"but I see plenty offensive in the way that Jenny D has rushed in to condem
a woman while she suffers the loss of her child."

~ You're darned right I've condemed her. Until I find further evidence that
she was held at gun point while giving birth or that she was mentally
disabled, the loss of her child was, well... her choice.

What's plonk ??

Jenny D wrote:

What's plonk ??

It's a USENET euphimism for "Killfiling" or filtering out a person's
posts so they are no longer visible to them.

--
Brigitte aa #2145
http://ca.geocities.com/bironmonger/
Please excuse the quality. It is under construction and I am still
learning. :-)

"To repeat what others have said, requires education; to challenge it,
requires brains."
~ Mary Pettibone Poole

"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message

I think your situation is a perfect example of
how there aren't any guarantees, no matter what form of
care or birth location that you choose. I just disagree
about any assumption that a different form of care or
different birth location would have made a different outcome
more likely. Thank goodness it worked out okay regardless!


Thanks Ericka, your feedback is well thought out and I do agree with you. In
my circumstance, which I admit is not the same as the original issue of this
thread, my instincts came first. Instincts can work or not work to tragic
results (the mother at the heart of this thread did not seem to have been
going by instinct; her mental facility seemed compromised in some respect).

*deep breath* I probably was, and *still am* afraid to admit that it might
have been possible for me to have gone into natural labor/delivered without
any potential harm to my baby, or thinking perhaps the induction caused much
of the stress on my baby. Or the other way around, that stress on the baby
was already beginning b/c blood/oxygen was no longer getting through the
knot. Anything could have happened regardless of instinct, intervention,
reasoning, etc. It is scary to see there are no guarantees. Perhaps it is
just easier to give a answer of "this" or "that"... when we really have no
answers for what happens sometimes.

Regardless of what you can assume about the woman, in either direction
(she's completely irresponsible for chosing home birth, or she was educated
and well meaning), the fact of the matter is that her baby died, and for
that, she deserves sympathy. That is the only fact we know, and whether or
not she wanted the child, whether or not she made a bad decision, or an
educated choice, whether or not the midwife was at fault or it was a fluke
of nature, her baby is dead, and she deserves our sympathy for her grief.
That isn't unwarranted pity. Her child is dead, that warrants pity,
regardless of the circumstances.

If you are going to make any assumptions about her, why not assume the more
positive ones, that she was educated and it was bad luck, rather than she is
a terrible irresponsible person?
--

Jamie & Taylor
Earth Angel, 1/3/03

Check out Taylor Marlys -- www.MyFamily.com, User ID: Clarkguest1,
Password: Guest
Become a member for free - go to Add Member to set up your own User ID and
Password

Check out our Adoption Page at http://home.earthlink.net/~jamielee6


"Jenny D" wrote in message
...
"Now, that you could not have. You called that woman a murderer, without
even having all the facts at hand (see later, the newspaper article on the
story mentions she was fooled by a woman who misrepresented herself as a
real midwife). My point on the religious issue was that no, there is no
excuse for murder, but I want it made clear that *I do not agree with your
condemnation of this woman as a murderer".

~ You're just as guilty. Everyone assumes just as much as I do. You
assume
that she is a smart, educated woman who was mislead by an unregistered
midwife. (Despite the fact that she spoke to God knows how many other
misdwives who clearly did not want her as a patient due to the risk of her
pregnancy) You're assuming that she was mistreated or traumatized in the
hospital with her first birth which is the great excuse you all use for
her
rediculus decision. I do not agree with your unwaranted pity for this
woman.
All our opinions of her are based on assumptions.



"We don't know what there was to do or not, again, and I've heard of
deaths
in hospitals, where not everything was done for a baby. Lack of personnel,
malpractice, etc."

~ You can't use the statement " I've heard of deaths in hospitals, where"
such and such a baby died. The ratio of babies born in the hospital
compared to the amount of deaths due to the reasons you described; is
miniscule. If you wish to blame lack of personnel or malpractice, then I
must remind you that this type of tragety is not due to a bad decision
from
the parent.



"You never accept any advice from anyone else? What if her entourage was
very pro-home birth? What of the people who recommended that false
midwife?
The list could go on... Choices are made from what we know, from what we
are
told, from what we accept or reject. Nothing is ever that black and
white."

~ All these "what if's, what if's, what if's" again, you're assuming all
these things about her. Perhaps I can assume even more like, what if she
did not really want this baby and was looking for an excuse for it to die?
The pendulum swings both ways.



"It would have been your bad choice to hold 5 bags in one hand and a silly
nephew in the other."

~ If half a dozen registered midwives told me not to hold 5 bags and a
toddler because my son might die, then I certainy would NEVER do that.
You
gotta put things in perspective a little!



"You don't have to be mentally retarded to get confused with all the
contradictory information going around about pregnancy. Doctors don't
always
hold the truth. You can see that, re pregnancy, with all the controversies
over epidural injection (does it or doesn't it hurt the baby?), about
gestational diabetes (is it a real fliction? can it be treated with the
proper diet?), about inducing (when? how? no doctor agree), and in
general,
they are finding more and more that you have more chances
of catching bacterial viruses at the hospital than by staying at home...
Where do you stop? How can you be sure you are making a right decision?"

~ These are all valid points and of course, decisions that effect all of
us
however, the fact remains that it is too dangerous to give birth to a
breach
baby at home. She did not have to decide about gestational diebetes, she
did not have to decide whether or not to have an epidural and she did not
have to decide about induction, all she had to decide was wether to risk
her
unborn child's life or not.



"You're very lucky your world is that clear. Mine isn't."

My world is not any clearer than yours. Tell me, having read the original
post from "Plissken" and without assuming ANYTHING. What would you have
"chosen" to do if you were that women?