I don’t know if we happen to live somewhere that is right out of the south in the 1970’s, but I witness racism, religionism (okay I’ve never heard that word, but it should exist), and basic ethnocentrism all the time. I consider myself pretty worldly especially for someone who was raised in Missouri. I’m fairly well traveled, bilingual, oh yeah, and I happen to wear a turban. The turban isn’t something that you can tell from my profile picture, since that was taken before I made the commitment to wear it, but in my everyday life, it is one of the first things people notice about me.

I think that I have a really accepting attitude about all different types of people, but I guess I kind of thought that if nothing else the turban would send the message of “bigotry not accepted here”. However, the other day I was running through all the hustle and bustle that would be the rest of the afternoon. As I got my daughter in her car seat to pick my husband up from work, our next door neighbor happened to be outside wearing his baseball cap, cut off shorts, and enjoying a brewsky (I only bring this up because of what he then said).

Neighbor: “Hey, I’ve noticed all the Mexicans and blacks coming by to look at your house…have any white people come to look?”

Me: Blank stare

Neighbor: “It’s not that I have anything against them or anything, but ya know sometimes you get the Mexicans in there and before you know it there are twelve cars out front and they have moved their whole families in there…but I’ve known some good Mexicans though.”

Me: “Ummm…I think that the only criteria that the landlord has is a decent credit score…”

At this point we were interrupted by a (white) couple who had just pulled up and were asking about whether or not they could see the place.

Neighbor: “The landlord wants someone with good credit. Please have good credit.”

I was done talking now. Part of me wanted to tell him about the absolutely lovely people that had already been in to see the place (a sweet African American couple who looked like they were just starting out, and a very nice hispanic woman with a young son) I had had pleasant conversation with both sets of people, and couldn’t imagine NOT wanting them as neighbors. I’m still kicking myself for not standing up to my neighbor. I wish I had said or done something that let him know that I don’t agree with or condone those types of comments or attitudes…and whether or not that changed the way he thought, at least it would set a boundary letting him know that he couldn’t expect a sympathetic ear when it came to that. This is not the only time that I have dealt with this sort of stuff, but it’s the most recent. I think I really need to get better at having an answer. Afterall, it is my job to pass my values on to my kids, and I would like to set a stronger example.

How do you react when you notice racism? What would you have done in my place?

I just read an article from the April issue of Mothering Magazine that got me a little tickled. It’s no secret that I’m a huge supporter of breastfeeding, even though I think breastfeeding supporters get a bad rap sometimes. Just read the comments on this post if you don’t believe me.

Anyway, I very much enjoyed Leah’s coverage of the Atlantic article last month entitled “The Case Against Breast-feeding”, and I think that the Mothering Magazine is in some part in answer to the “breastfeeding and working is impossible” tone that it took.

“Nursing by Numbers: How Breastfeeding Boosts the National Economy” was definitely an encouraging read after the Atlantic artcle, that touts breastfeeding as a shackle to the days before parenting was a partnership. The focus was not on whether or not breastfeeding and working are an easy combination (I don’t think anyone would argue that it is), but that, economically speaking,  it’s well worth the effort for both employees and employers to make breastfeeding a priority in the workplace, and on top of all of that, it could actually boost the national economy.

This is one of the parts of the article that really had a wow factor for me. “The AAP says each formula-fed infant costs the healthcare system between $331 and $475 more than a breastfed baby in its first year of life. The cost of treating respiratory viruses resulting from not breastfeeding is $225 million a year.” And that’s just one type of illness.

The article states that choosing to feed formula to babies is costing literally billions of dollars every year, and that this is only using data from three of the many illnesses that feeding infants formula contributes to. I happen to be on a breastfeeding mailing list, and the email that was sent around last month about the Atlantic article went something like this…”It’s really too bad that the author came to the conclusion that breastfeeding while working is impossible, when it obviously benefits so many families and society as a whole. However, it does highlight an important issue, namely that many work places do not meet the needs of a nursing mother.”

My take on the whole thing pretty much mirrors that of the breastfeeding mailing list. There is so much information out there about how important breastfeeding is as a public health issue, as a way for employers to keep their work force healthy (and not off taking care of sick kids), and now as a way to help our national economy. And that’s all well and good, but I do start to wonder how this information will and should get out to the public. I can only imagine that the audience for the “Nursing by Numbers” article is mostly one who already supports breastfeeding, and sees it as a part of daily life for the early months/years of parenting. So I wonder how does the information get out. I would tend to think by word of mouth, but I know I’m a chicken when it comes to this sort of thing. I don’t want my friends or acquaintances to think that I’m judging them for their decisions. Plus, parenting is very personal, and it seems intrusive to extrecate myself into someone else’s business. However, if someone asks me about breastfeeding…that’s a different story altogether.

A little proof of my chickenhood is in this little anecdote. One of the illnesses that the article cites as more common for formula fed infants is ear infections. A good friend of mine chose not to breastfeed her child, and several times she has talked to me about how she regrets the decision. Most recently, the pediatrician told her that her baby has ears that are prone to infection. I didn’t have the heart to tell her that breastfeeding lowers the risk, and might have saved her baby from a couple of those infections. She isn’t planning to have more kids, and it would feel like I was saying “I told you so” or some mean-mommy equivalent.  On the other hand, I sometimes wonder if I should just find a nonjudgmental way to let her know. Who knows, it could be info that she passes on to another friend or relative.

Do you have a parenting issue that you are especially passionate about? Do you talk about it with others? And where do you draw the line about when and where to talk about it? Also, feel free to weigh in about either article.

I have to admit that I jumped for joy when I found out that the Iowa supreme court ruled that the law banning gay marriage was unconstitutional. In case you haven’t heard about this, here is a timeline of what took place. It isn’t only because I know the soon to be Varnums (Hi Kate and Trish, if you’re reading this) of the Varnum v. Brien case, but because I’ve come to realize that marriage really is a civil right. It isn’t that I was ever against gay marriage. I just didn’t understand what the big deal was.

I can’t imagine not being allowed to be with the love of my life if they lay dying in the hospital, or not being able to take advantage of my dependent benefits at work because the daughter that I raised with my partner is not biologically mine, and I can’t be considered a guardian because my partner is a woman. These are just a couple of the instances that I have had friends and family tell me about.

I was really pleased that the supreme court of Iowa ruled unanimously, but I was even more pleased to hear that the opinion that the court published was very well written. I’ve never actually read a court opinion before, but my husband wanted to print it off and read it. So I got to hear a lot of it, and it really is a well crafted statement showing that marriage is a civil right and that excluding someone from it based on their sexual orientation is discrimination.

It is enthralling hearing the details of the judges’ opinions weaved and crafted so skillfully into the law. I really think it’s worth at least perusing, for everyone, but here are a couple of the points that really stood out to me. The defendants argued that because marriage was traditionally between man and woman that it should continue to be so. The court ruled that that idea cannot be upheld because it would open up a precedent for all kinds of discriminatory behavior to continue just because it has always been so. The defendants also asserted that the law was put into place because it was in the best interests of children to live in a home with their mother and their father. The court ruled that if this were the purpose of this law, then the law was flawed in several respects. First of all, not all same sex couples wish to have children, so the law casts too broad a shadow. Second of all, it does not include others who are not likely not good caretakers of children (like child molesters) from marrying. Third, it begs the question of whether it truly is not in the best interest of children to have same sex parents, and the defense could not provide such evidence (whereas the prosecution showed numerous studies that suggest that growing up in a family with loving same sex parents is not a detriment, and actually has not shown a difference).  Okay, I could go on and on about the tit for tat, but there is just one other point that I wanted to share. The judges ruled that there was an underlying (and unstated) reason for not allowing same sex marriage, and that reason was religious. The court ruled that religion absolutely cannot have a bearing on whether or not to allow civil marriage.

In addition to hearing this news on Friday, my husband and I ended up watching MILK this weekend. I really enjoyed the film, but one thing that I was surprised about was that in many ways the argument against gay rights hasn’t changed, and the fight for them seems to be generally in the same place that it was thirty years ago.

On the other hand, I’m living in the midwest, and the state just to the north of us just legalized gay marriage…so maybe we’re growing here, too. I was surprised and glad when a good friend who was openly gay won the mayoral seat in the rural town where my husband and I used to live. But then again, a couple of months ago, there was a big hoopla in that same town because people were fighting over whether or not to add sexual orientation to the city’s anti-discrimination document (protecting minorities from housing discrimination). One of the councilman voted against it and on camera says he would not rent to a gay person.

One of my favorite lines in MILK was a bit of actual footage where a woman stood up and asked an audience how they would teach their children to love those who were different than them, if they couldn’t get along with the gay rights group. I think it’s a good point. I’m all for teaching my kids that some people fall in love with people who are the opposite sex and some people fall in love with those of the same sex.

At the risk of opening up a can of worms, how do you intend to deal with the subject of homosexuality with your children? And any comments on the Iowa ruling?

Ahem,

May I please ask everyone who has been following the Nadya Suleman, the octuplets’ mom, saga to please come forward and show their face? Come on, I know I’m not the only one!

Okay, well even if I’m going to be the only one admitting to it these days, I get glued to the TV whenever something new about this woman comes out. When the babies were first born and the stuff about her being a single mother with six children already came out, I was outraged with the rest of the world. I don’t think it was responsible on her part to try for a seventh when she couldn’t take care of six on her own, but the babies are here, and so that’s pretty much a moot point.

I watched every minute of all of the Dr. Phil episodes about her (I know, I need to get a life). Like I said, my first feelings about this woman were disgust, and I was being pretty darn judgmental. She seemed like the kind of welfare mother that even liberals like myself could beat up on. I had some pretty strong words for the doctor that performed the invetro too. Did I hear someone just quack?

Anyway, I’m pretty much over all of that stuff. The babies are here, and they need care, and I’m definitely not one for advocating putting the kids in foster care. That sounds like a lose-lose for everybody…and plus, I’m not qualified to say that anyway.

Well, yesterday (okay and the day before, if I’m being honest) I watched the latest installment of this drama on Dr. Phil. It was all about Nadya firing the wrap around nursing care that donations were paying for. She’s been highly criticized in the media for this and I thought, when I first heard about it, for good reason.

Then I started really listening to this mother’s reasoning for firing these women. She had other care lined up, that she says is doing a better job. She felt uncomfortable with the original nursing staff. She felt that they were judging her and keeping her from spending time with her babies.

The nursing staff said that Nadya was very hands off with the children. That she was often doing other things…they mentioned shopping, and reading mail. They said that she was allowing sick people around the babies, etc.

I really started to feel for Nadya Suleman when I saw the nurses, and how much they disliked her personally. Maybe what they say about her is true and she doesn’t care about her kids, and she only wants fame, and she only talks to them and holds them when cameras are around. That’s very possible.

On the other hand, she could be a mom who made a bad decision to get pregnant again, and now she is trying her best to take care of 14 kids. I know one kid runs me ragged sometimes. I can’t even imagine the strain and stress that go along with having 14…by yourself.

I started thinking to myself all about different things that I do, that if the media wanted to spin, could possibly look really really awful. This week, my daughter was throwing tantrums and to the mix she added peeing on the carpet (on purpose) to her repertoire. All the parenting books say not to punish your kids for having accidents while they are potty training, but I definitely put her on time out for doing it purposefully.  If a tabloid heard this, they might scream child abuse, or whatever. All of this could be blown way out of proportion.

I’m one of those people that thinks that, in general, parents make pretty darn good decisions, and they really are the best ones to speak on behalf of a child’s best interests. So, if Nadya says she felt uncomfortable with those nurses, I don’t blame her for getting rid of them. I know that these particular nurses are trained specially to care for premature babies. I also know that I had a similar experience with these type of nurses, who cared for my daughter in the hospital following her birth. They did things that I consider to be unethical like suggesting that I not breastfeed, and limiting my time with my daughter.

Either way, I’m not judging this woman anymore. As far as I know, she is trying to figure out a way to keep their family afloat financially (which could explain her reasoning for all of the publicity), as well as through nurturing. I’m not part of their life, and I’m certainly not close enough to the situation to know if she made the right choice in getting those women out of her house. Although, I suspect that it isn’t in the best interest of children to be cared for by people that feel such strongly negative feelings about the only mother that they have in the world.

I basically only touched on the issues that the Dr. Phil stuff hit on, but if you want a more in depth look (and a much more heated response) I suggest you check out the Nadya Suleman post over at Thought for Food. I love the author’s point about “Total Transparency”…and I totally agree.

Do you have strong feelings about the “octomom”? Do you think there are implications for society at large if the public gets too involved with this family?