Gwyn Paltrow: off the list!
Posh's post-baby belly
Poor Posh (no, seriously!). celebrity adoption
What I find really disturbing now is that all these Hollywood celebrities are jumping on the procreative bandwagon and embarking on a gestational journey to countries where poverty is rife and the children are ripe for the picking. Have you noticed how no one ever talks about Shiloh (Angelina's 'biological' child) anymore because her 'rainbow children' are so much more 'exotic'? Even Jessica Simpson is saying that she wants to adopt a child in the spirit of Madonna and Angelina. I just read the other day that Daryl Hannah wants to adopt a child from the US (because apparently American babies need saving).
Then I saw this interview in USA Today with Katherine Heigl who plays Izzy on Grey's Anatomy. Starring in a new movie called Knocked Up, Heigl had this to say about becoming a mother:
Q: Your Knocked Up character has a truly gruesome birthing scene. And you were in the delivery room with your older sister, Meg. That at all impact your decision to have kids of your own?
A: Oh, yeah. I've always planned to adopt anyway, but that definitely reinforced my want to. I'm done with the whole idea of having my own children. (It) doesn't seem like any fun. I don't think it's necessary to go through all of that.
Now, I am absolutely not judging anyone by implying that if you dont actually birth a child somehow that makes you less of a woman or the child is not really your own or that women should want to have children in general. Heigl's statement bothers me because it is so symptomatic of our culture that positions pregnancy and birth as disgusting or grotesque or awful. For celebrities, it's alot easier to just adopt because then they dont have to go through the anxiety of 'losing their bodies' like every other woman in the world who becomes a mother.
For full interview see:
http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2007-05-20-katherine-heigl_N.htm
Karen, 13 weeks
Now I am pregnant with my third child. My weight before falling pregnant this time was 50kg, so yes, this time I am a little worried that I will weigh quite a bit more than I did with my other two children. I have been quite sick again with this pregnancy so far, and so have not been able to eat as much as I normally would. So far I have only gained 1kg. Also, I'm not as young as I was when I had Chloe and Shannon, being over 30 now, and have definately slackened off in the exercise department. I have been trying to go for a 30 minute walk at least three times a week. I didn't get any stretch marks with the last two children and am hoping it will be the same with this pregnancy - I have been religously applying Palmer's Cocoa Butter over my breasts, stomach, bum and thighs everyday!
But even though these thoughts do run through my head quite a bit, at the end of the day, all we really want is to have a healthy, happy baby. If this means putting up with a bit of weight gain, or a few stretch marks here and there, it's really all worth it in the end isn't it? I wouldn't say the same about the morning sickness (or afternoon, or evening, or even all bloody day sickness!!!) though. That is one thing I can really do without!
welcome!

Feel free to include any handy hints for coping with the pressure (body or otherwise). Make sure to include images of your bump or your body during pregnancy or postbaby so we can all share in how everyday mums look and feel. If you have a Flickr account, join our group The Baby Bump Project and post yourself in the Bump Gallery (otherwise send me your images and I can post them for you).
new elective caesar policy
However, I have strong feelings about taking women's responsibility for their own bodies away from them and giving control over to the government to decide what is best for birth. Clearly, major abdominal surgery is a significant leap from vaginal delivery but is it really fair to insist that women must not have a technologised or interventionist birth if that is what they really want? Sure, some of you might say 'Well, how does she know what she wants if she doesn't know the risks?' That goes without saying but adult decision making is kind of like that. We make decisions about lots of things without knowing all of the associated risks. With birth, it seems like everyone seems to know what's best for pregnant women except women themselves.
We dont have to agree with the choices other women make but I think we need to respect them. I might not choose to have an elective caesar but I don't think my choice not to have one should prevent another woman from having one if that is what she feels comfortable doing. I think it would be a completely different story if for instance, the NSW government decided to ban women from having pain-reducing drugs during labour because pain relief is non-surgical. All of the most common pain killing drugs have side effects and there is plenty of research to support that. Hell, epidurals are injected into the spine. That's a major risk; but women who want to have less pain in labour should never be forced to 'suffer' needlessly and many women are willing to take a risk to be comfortable. I think this is the same issue. Maybe it seems a little strange to some of us that a woman would rather have surgery than give birth vaginally but in my own work, I have interviewed a number of women who have had elective caesars for various reasons. Fear of pain is a primary reason and who can really fault them for that? It's not my place to do so and it's not the government's place either. Women need to make up their own minds about how they have their babies. Caesareans should remain an 'option' because women should have every opportunity available to them to have a comfortable birth and if that means being cut open, who am I to judge?
Caesars can either serve or impair women's agency not so much by the inherent character of the procedure (in terms of obvious physical risks), but in how the politics surrounding elective caesareans coalesces with the needs of variously situated women (economically and politically and also varying by race, class, and sexuality). What is 'good' for some women is not necessarily appropriate for all women.
NSW hospitals move to block caesarean option
7 April 2007, The Age
WOMEN will not be allowed to insist on caesarean deliveries in NSW public hospitals without a medical reason, under a new health department policy. Under the new rules, women must be told in detail about "the benefits and risks of caesarean section compared with vaginal birth specific to the woman and her pregnancy". The policy cites a US study of more than 5 million births, which found that babies born by medically unnecessary caesarean were three times as likely to die in the newborn period as those born vaginally.The new policy also obliges health professionals to advise women about the implications for subsequent pregnancies. A 2005 study of 136,000 second pregnancies across NSW found those women who had had a caesarean first delivery were at much greater danger of a ruptured uterus, hysterectomy orinfection, while their babies were more likely to be premature, have serious breathing problems or need intensive care. Elective caesareans have increased by 25 per cent since 2001, and now account for one in six births. Many of these are for medical reasons, but doctors say more women are opting for caesareans from preference. Andrew Child, a member of the NSW Health Maternal and Perinatal Committee,which drafted the directive, said that while first caesareans were generally safe, dangers escalated steeply with subsequent births. Hannah Dahlen, secretary of the NSW Midwives Association, said: "People are... thinking of it as just another option for birth, rather than major abdominal surgery."JULIE ROBOTHAM
skinny jean/skinny pregnancy
This is a great view from Liz Lange maternity wear. I posted about LL back in December when I was doing some research in New York. It just so happened that as I was flicking through the channels, I came upon a show about famous American business people and Liz was one of the panelists, revealing the secrets of her multi million dollar maternity fashion house. Now Liz Lange is bringing high fashion to the masses by dressing pregnant women across America in Target stores in a sort of democratisation of maternity wear. Now people that buy LL maternity wear from her stores know that high style does not come cheaply...until now. The pieces produced for Target stores (as you can see in the video) are beautifully presented, clean cut and sold at a much lower price point than in typical LL retail stores. However, in watching the video, I got the sense that although Lange is now dressing a wide range of American women, she still has the middle-upper class mother in mind. I mean Lange says 'Every baby needs to have these cashmere blankets...Hello? I can't afford cashmere for myself. How many women out there are actually splurging on luxury items for babies outside of NYC??
Also, in her ode to the 'skinny jean' at the start of the program, I kept thinking to myself, 'How many women do you see at Target buying skinny jeans even when they are not pregnant?' Surely, it's a good look for a pregnant model and if your legs don't change size because all of your weight gain is concentrated in one area. This just contributes to my theory about the cult of the skinny pregnancy (and this is especially prominent in NY and LA) where women can still be a size 0 even when they're pregnant.* Lange actually mentioned in the TV show I was watching in NY that they had to start making smaller sizes to cater to the 'petite' woman. I've actually been told of similar trends happening here in Melbourne by a few popular designers (such that certain high fashion, high fitness preggos are requiring their size 0s even during the pregnancy and are being forced to have certain items of clothing custom made as a result). Am I crazy? Does anyone think skinny jeans are just the slighest bit ridiculous when you are trying to grow another human being? Who wants to shove their body into denim (that is already uncomfortable when you're not pregnant) albeit 'skinny' leg denim after consistently putting on weight for 9 months?
It's like imprisonment for your bump. Women's bodies are forced to be contained enough just in normal life. Why corral the pregnant body into more restrictive clothing just because the rest of our culture is so freaked out by women taking up space (and that goes for overweight women as well)?
*In saying this, I'm not trying to say that all women need to gain heaps of weight in pregnancy in order to be 'real' pregnant women or to have an 'authentic' experience. Sure, there are women out there who don't gain much weight, are naturally a size 0 and have nothing to be ashamed of. That's fine, more power to them. I'm making a statement about the majority of the women in the world who are on average a size 12-14 even before they are pregnant and who haven't worn skinny jeans since the 7th grade (and even then, it wasn't really a good look).

