It’s my quick and not so well thought out Holiday Post! Happy Holidays!!

A story of Solsti-Chanu-Mas in photos…Happy Holidays, all! I offer this tiny slice as we are close to embarking on a mini-trip to the gorgeous Orcas Island with a group of friends to celebrate the New Year – 8 adults, three children and three dogs livin’ in a house together for 3 days…lalalalalala…

Wishing you all a new year filled with love, light, play and passion as we continue to the good fight for freedom and justice and equality for all. LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE,

Amie

Merry Happy Solstice Chris-makah!!!

“Laboring Under An Illusion”: An RH Reality Check Interview

An interview I did for RH Reality Check!

(and thanks to Amy Romano, at Lamaze, Intl’s blog Science & Sensibility for linking to it in her excellent post, “Childbirth Literacy: What We’re Up Against”. Her post examines why trustworthy, accurate childbirth education is so critical even in, or maybe because of, this “information age”).

Childbirth educator and documentary filmmaker Vicki Elson likes to say, aside from the typical hospital birth, there are essentially three kinds of births on television:

“One type is a pioneer woman or early Native American just pushing her baby out, no problem. Another type is an accidental birth on an airplane, in a tree, or during a hostage situation.  The third type is a planned out-of-hospital birth. These look pretty flaky on TV, like what they call “extreme birth” with dolphins or in remote lagoons, although in reality planned home birth with good midwifery care is as safe as hospital birth.”

After viewing Elson’s new documentary, “Laboring Under An Illusion: Mass Media Childbirth vs. The Real Thing”, you realize she’s absolutely right. It would be hilarious (and it sometimes is) if not for the absurd reality that we’re talking about society’s visual storytelling of the single most connecting link between human beings in the history of all that is and ever was: birth.  Why are we presenting childbirth in ways that repel, scare and misrepresent women (and our someday partners) and our birth experiences? By ceding the representation of childbirth to the “oh, it’s just television” mode of thinking we surrender some of the wisdom of our own bodies, the knowledge about birth we can pass onto other women, the wonder of the beauty and the remembrance of the pain in a way, as well.  Elson is determined to take it back.

It is a growing problem. Elson reminds us in the video “two-thirds of pregnant women watch reality television shows on childbirth but only one-quarter of these women actually attend childbirth education classes.” What kind of “education” about birth are women getting? First off, babies can be beamed out, as one was from Deanna Troi on “Star Trek: Next Generation.” Or, cesarean sections are becoming “the norm” as vaginal birth is being presented as ‘the other’ option on reality television shows about pregnancy and birth (view her video to learn more). And, finally, should you find yourself pregnant, on a beach sunbathing? Elson tells me that one of the weirdest television scenes about birth she’s witnessed was from the old TV show, Baywatch, where one of the characters gives birth without taking off her one-piece bathing suit.

I spoke with Vicki Elson about her video documentary: the “panicky fathers” and “mothers screaming for drugs” on one end of the media-representation spectrum. And the “orgasmic” and “unassisted” births on the other. Because Elson has been working with women and their partners for many years, her answers to my questions and her perspective seem wonderfully balanced, rooted in a crystal clear concern for what is best for women, preparing women to have the healthiest birth experience they are able.

You’ve been educating pregnant women for 25 years! What made you originally decide to get into this line of work and what was the impetus for making this documentary?

VE: When I had my first baby, I was young and clueless and I considered myself a wimp.  It was the hardest work I ever did, but it was a life-changing joy.  Afterward I felt like I could do anything – which was great, because what I had to do next was raise a baby.  I think it really set the stage for my daughter’s entire life – and mine.  There were certain elements that contributed to having such a positive experience – my care providers, childbirth classes, and support team especially.  I wanted to share that with other families, and all these years later, teaching classes and watching new parents get born is still fun!

The impetus for the film was this: I was doing a workshop for nurse-midwives at a local hospital when a particularly ghastly and unrealistic (and Emmy-winning) episode of “E.R.” came out.  The midwives said their phones were ringing off the hooks because moms were scared that they could die like the lady on TV.  Meanwhile, Murphy Brown was America’s liberated TV mom who could anchor the news and stand up to Dan Quayle.  But in labor, she was wilted and powerless, except when she was strangling men by their neckties.  I wanted my kids and their friends to grow up with realistic, nourishing imagery about the power of their bodies to do normal things like have babies.  I was working with midwives Rahima Baldwin Dancy and Catherine Stone on a workshop called “Empowering Women in the Childbearing Year,” and we started collecting clips to show childbirth educators what they were up against from the culture.  It’s still a struggle to compete with compelling but unrealistic imagery that sticks in people’s minds.  I expanded on that project to write my master’s thesis 10 years ago, and when the kids grew up I finally got around to updating the project and putting it on DVD so it’s more useful and accessible.

What’s the film like?

VE: It’s 100 birth scenes — TV and movie comedies, dramas, real births — plus narration. Birth films tend to be very romantic or absolutely terrifying.  I wanted to juxtapose real and fake births and let people make up their own minds, and I wanted to make it funny, because the subject can be so intense.  And I have to say that it is pretty entertaining.  It can be really fun to examine cultural hopes and fears in a new way, and a lot of the clips are hilarious.

Do the pregnant women in your classes (and/or partners) ever come in to class with visions about childbirth that they got from the media, that are just so bizarre or unrealistic that is noteworthy for you?

VE: I wish I had some hilarious anecdote to tell you – but really what’s striking is that women who are otherwise smart and capable come to class feeling very scared of a normal physiological process.  It’s getting worse over time, too, as people are exposed to more and more media, and more people are watching birth “reality” shows than coming to childbirth classes.  The reality shows often take footage of a nice normal birth and then re-contextualize it with a terrifying voiceover: “The most DANGEROUS journey of the baby’s life…the four-inch trip…DOWN…the birth…canal.”

READ THE REST ON RH REALITY CHECK

Pretending: My Love for Michel Gondry

Sooner or later it happens to most of us.

The imagination, the straight shots of creativity from the land -of -wherever-the-hell-it-doesn’t-matter-it’s-all-in-your-heart-and-mind, shrink bit by bit. The songs you made up as a kid about: how going clothes shopping with your mother and brother is booooring; or your only doll named Soup needs a haircut; or how much you love swinging on the metal-seated swings with your friends – all of these songs become relegated to the “god, I was so silly” part of your brain. The stories you meticulously committed to lined paper with long, involved descriptions of each character are buried under piles of files. The crayola-d pictures of slant-roofed houses, always with the sun shining, always with little flowers fencing the walkways and suddenly a big, giant, blue monster added off to the side, don’t seem as “important”.

These beautiful creations of childhood are important though. And they are equally as important as adults. An art journal with pastel drawings of our over-grown blackberry bushes clawing at the white-washed fence. My fiction writing in fits and starts. Made-up songs sung with the kids about tushies and the sun and brushing your teeth. This is the stuff of imagination and it keeps our hearts open. Our souls alive. Our minds on fire.

Michel Gondry immortalizes the beauty of adult imagination on film. And it’s so inspiring to join him on the journey as you watch his movies. We watched his most recent movie, Be Kind, Rewind, on Friday night with the kids. We’ve got a standing Friday night movie night with the kids. It’s becoming more difficult to find films we can all watch together. If it isn’t wildly inappropriate, doesn’t star Will Ferrell, Andy Samberg, Seth Rogen, or Steve Carrell, or isn’t based on a Stephen King novel, Elijah throws it in the “that’s sooooo boring. And for little kids like Aliyah. Or old people like you” pile. Yep.

Because of this, Aliyah has spent most of her life watching films that fall way out of the scope of what normal families would allow their kids to watch. Seriously. Who lets their two year old watch Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band starring the Bee Gees and Peter Frampton getting caught up in a rock-star’s life of sex, drugs and money?! Let alone have her sing and dance endlessly to the movie’s songs? We do. So, anyway, Aliyah sort of craves, at this point, the good ole’ puppy/rainbows/American Girl movie genres.

What’s a parent to do?

We excavate. We uncover. We research. We dig deep. Come on. I was a film minor at NYU. I have the qualifications people. It’s ridiculous how much time and energy I put into finding the perfect movies for them to watch. It’s an ongoing filmic educational experience. Miazaki films. Hitchcock films. Woody Allen (well, not so much just yet. But it’s coming).

This week, as I mentioned, I found Be Kind, Rewind; a film by Michel Gondry:

Gondry is the man behind Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and The Science of Sleep - two beautifully creative, melt-your-mind imaginative movies.  We hadn’t had much interest in seeing the film when it first was released. Previews made it seem as if it was a movie about two mildly idiotic guys who, by accident, erase all of the films in a video store and decide to remake them all themselves. Well, that’s true. Technically. But what surrounds that story and how he visually moves you is just true Gondry magic.

It’s hard to put to words how Michel Gondry uses film. Have you ever felt like you wished you had some magical vacuum device that attached to your brain, sucking out all of the crazy, amazing, imaginative thoughts you’ve had over the years and spewed them out directly onto the page, into a film, onto a canvas, into a recording device?! I mean I’ve dreamt entire songs only to awaken and not remember a single note. I’ve imagined the most bizarre of paintings only to face a blank canvas and think, well, I guess I’ll be painting another ‘abstract’ one this time! But, Gondry? His got that pure, unfiltered pathway from his imagination and creativity to the “outside” world – and it’s so cool.

It’s like Aliyah and her “imaginary friends” (Chedo, Bubbles and Memo):

…or the worlds she creates for her dolls and stuffed animals in her room. Cardboard boxes become landscapes. Old fabric scraps are turned into bedspreads and blankets. Yarn is finger-knitted for a dog’s leash. This isn’t “pretend” – it’s another layer of “real.” It’s what Gondry does on film. What’s real?What’s imagination? What are dreams – either as we go about our day or as we lay sleeping at night? Imagination blends and bleeds into reality and reality becomes tainted with imagination…

A still from 'The Science of Sleep'

So, today, here’s to just knowing that ones’ thoughts are always creative and always “real.” Creative derives from the word creation and what can be more real than creation? Literally, bringing something into this world, right? We are carrying a thought, a feeling, an energy, an emotion into this realm. Don’t push something aside because you think it’s “just your imagination” and doesn’t deserve life outside your brain or heart. Blur the lines between pretend and existent; it’s a false line anyway, as far as I’m concerned.

Paint a picture. Write a poem. Make a video with your kids. And when you’re done go watch a Gondry film. It’ll all be worth it, I promise!

Elijah is “Back in Binis”!

Hey folks,

Elijah is blogging again! Check out his most recent “favs” list for his favorite books, series, and movies…It’s worth it; especially if you’re looking for some gift ideas for those 10 or 11 year old boys you know.

I have a whole lotta love for this boy. I really do:

This One Goes to 11

http://moopy.wordpress.com/

Sincerely,

A Proud Mama

This is A Diatribe On Women’s Health, Abortion and Politics

/Long-Ass Rant Follows*Beware*

This is a diatribe. It’s possibly an indictment of how inept I am  at educating those around me on the issues about which I research and write every day. It’s a teensy-tiny angry finger-pointing at the progressive or non-traditional media outlets that cover current news. And, finally, it’s an honest exploration of how exactly women’s organizations, reproductive rights and health advocates, women’s rights activists, bloggers and others can immerse themselves so thoroughly in an issue only to come up for air and discover that not many people know what the hell we are talking about.

Health care reform is on a *lot* of Americans’ minds these days, right? Over the holiday long weekend it came up any number of times with friends and family. How bad is the Senate health care reform bill, really? Will health care reform actually be a boon for the insurance companies? Is the elimination of pre-existing conditions going to cost Americans more for health care? Who wins? Who loses?

What rarely comes up (okay, really, it never came up without my prodding) was what abortion coverage in both the House and Senate bills looked like. No one debated the merits of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment. No one asked what the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) was doing inserting anti-choice language into a health care reform bill that should remain “abortion neutral” because why should health reform address something that is already legal and legislated?  No one discussed the reasons for or against, under any circumstances, the passage of health care reform by sacrificing women’s rights and health.

First, a little background: I am a 40 year old (okay I’m actually moments away from turning 41, now are you happy?), middle-class woman, heterosexual, married with two children, living in Seattle.  My friends and family, strong progressive-minded, politically active people, fall in the low-income to middle-income range – some with young children and absolutely no health insurance, some with the barest of health insurance coverage. I have family members who are extremely grateful bearers of excellent health insurance coverage, squeezing every last drop out of their coverage because of chronic, ongoing or debilitating health conditions. I have others in my life who could accidentally cut themselves, bleed for hours and, in their health care coverage void, research Mayan prayers for healing on the internet  in order to avoid paying outrageous sums of money (which they cannot afford) for emergency care. What we all do seem to have in common is an interest in and a fairly strong grasp on what health care reform looks like or should look like in general, what the current issues encompass, what the political landscape looks like at any given time, and what it all might mean for “the people.”

But unless I, the lone voice on “women’s issues”, bring up what exactly women’s health access might look like if we were to pass Stupak-Pitts in the final bill (or some incarnation of it), or what maternity care coverage might look like, for example, the issues never arose.

So when my brother told me that, after talking with my mother, she was under the mistaken idea that the Stupak-Pitts Amendment would simply ensure that the federal government be barred (as it is now, a la the Hyde Amendment) from funding abortion services for low-income women (except in “extreme” circumstances), I was shocked. My own mother didn’t really know what the Stupak Amendment codified, why it was introduced or who was behind it (not just Rep. Bart Stupak, and anti-choice Democrat but the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops – the men behind the men). I clearly am not doing nearly as thorough a job as I thought I was.

It’s a problem.

It’s not that my mother and other progressives aren’t fuming at the lack of a public option, frustrated about what this “reform” bill has turned into: something Obama’s Clinton-era staffers pooped out in fear (We don’t want to offend anyone, do we? We don’t want to seem (gasp!) like socialist radicals. My god, we wouldn’t want the government running health care! That’s socialist. Just like that socialist Medicare system, or Medicaid, or public transit, or our roads system, or, oh, police officers, the fire department…okay, well, those are different somehow, right?). My family and friends are angry at the fact that it certainly seems, despite some modest gains for some, insurance companies still stand to make a profit, without much change for the average American.

But their anger is not about abortion access or coverage or the ways in which Rep. Stupak, and his cohort of Democratic anti-choice lawmakers have leveraged this as a wedge issue to stymie reform efforts. They do not know that the Stupak Amendment doesn’t simply re-codify the Hyde Amendment. The Stupak Amendment goes much, much farther by restricting private insurance companies from covering abortion if anyone in their pool is also a member of the health exchange – the federally funded insurance program.

The thing is, there is so much more behind this absurdity. Most people don’t know that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (UCSSB) stands to make a LOT of money if health care reform passes. We know that with reform will come millions more Americans with some kind of insurance coverage – whether it be through private insurance, a subsidized plan or a combination of both. There will be lots more money flowing through private insurance companies, undoubtedly. But what about the UCSSB?

The USCCB runs hundreds of hospitals, medical centers and health facilities around the country from which they make billions of dollars. My colleague at RH Reality Check, Wendy Norris, is an investigative reporter. She breaks it down:

One in six patients are cared for in 624 Catholic hospitals scattered throughout the U.S. in 2006, according to the Catholic Health Association. The church also operates more than 800 post-acute care, senior living and skilled nursing centers across the nation. All told, $84.6 billion was spent on Catholic church-affiliated care…

…consider that there are 60 some Catholic-affiliated hospital systems in all 50 states — representing 13 percent of the nation’s entire in-patient health care system. That’s easily tens of billions of dollars flowing through the business arm of the Catholic church that continues to grow through mergers with private and other religiously-affiliated hospitals.

Tens. of billions. of dollars. flowing through the Catholic church. And you thought this was about religion?! Or even ideology?We know the truth. It’s about power and money. This is not a theorem, it’s an easily solvable equation.

So, the Catholic church stands to profit tremendously with health care reform as is. But, of course, they are the ones behind the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, the amendment that may have a partner in the Senate, that threatens to derail health care reform efforts. So why would USCCB put considerable power behind this amendment when their very business, their ability to reap billions more in profit, is at stake if health care reform doesn’t happen?

Norris theorizes it’s simply a “brazen attempt” to “kneecap their competitors” while still taking advantage of what health care reform efforts will bring for the USCCB.

Whether or not this is true, this is still a critical time for women’s health care advocacy. The Mikulski Amendment passed today (I wrote about it here) which is great news for women who already have insurance. The Senate bill does not, as of yet, have a Stupak-like amendment, though Sen. Ben Nelson (R-NE) is reported to be brewing something in his evil laboratory. Even if he comes up with nothing but a steaming, bubbling beaker filled with benign liquid, we’ll still need to rally efforts behind the combined Senate/House health care reform bill and make sure reform does not pass on the backs of women in this country.

I am not a political poker chip. Except that Stupak-Pitts does exactly that – makes women’s lives another part of this game. And it is a game. If it weren’t, there’d be no need to simply “re-codify” the Hyde Amendment. This is about using women’s lives as pawns – pardon the boring metaphor – by seeing how far one can get on our backs. Keep going, I’ve almost made the Catholic hospitals one hundred million dollars, now one billion. Keep going – I’ve almost lined my own legislative pockets with the political good will to get re-elected.

So, while this is my own little diatribe – frustration, sadness, confusion, and passion shaken, stirred and boiling over – When I take a breath, clear my mind and listen to my thoughts here’s what I’ve got:

I’m not bitter. I’m just alive and energized and willing to stand up for all women in this country. Because as long as I’m breathing, and as long as I have my two beautiful children’s eyes to look into each and every day, I know that there are fights worth fighting. Energies worth emanating. Journeys worth following. This is one of them.