This and that!

OMG. You are probably so cross with me for disappearing for a week without warning. Well, let me tell you, it's been one busy week for me and pretty slow week for pregnancy news. I'll save the details for another day and get on with what I do best. Here is a smattering of things on my radar:

So, I'm amused to see the US News and World Report's 7 Strategies for a Successful Maternity Leave. What I find particularly funny (or perhaps ironic?) is that strategising about your maternity leave is really only necessary when you actually have maternity leave. Even more amusing is the tip to 'Find Good Child Care' while you are on maternity leave. If any woman here in Melbourne actually waited until her baby was actually born to work on childcare, no one would have care until the kid was three. Ladies here get on the waiting lists at the first whiff of pregnancy.

And if this isn't a cautionary tale, I don't know what is, in spite of the researcher's warning that the research should not be used to prevent women from choosing to terminate their pregnancies. I can just see the pro-life lobby falling over themselves to find a way to use this new 'risk' to challenge choice.

Australian obs are pissed off with Health Minister Nicola Roxon after accusations that they have been raising their fees as much as 20% by taking advantage of the existing Medicare safety net. Come January, however, Roxon is cutting them off when Medicare refunds are capped. According to new reports, the increase in charges helped turn obstetricians into millionaires with the highest earning 10 per cent of obstetricians now earning $1.8 million a year - $1.1 million of which comes from Medicare. Perhaps another reason to go with a midwife!

And finally, while I'm happy that Kim Clijsters made such a spectacular 'comeback' to tennis this week winning the US Open, I'm annoyed (again) that the fact that she is a mother somehow makes this astonishing victory more astonishing. Clijsters is a great player; why are our expectations so low for women when they rebound from motherhood?

Mothers on the run: Paula Radcliffe proves herself

Paula Radcliffe has confirmed after a marathon break of 2 years since the birth of her first child, she will compete in the New York Marathon on 4 Nov. As I've posted before extensively, female athletes constantly have to prove themselves upon having children that they can be mothers and elite sportswomen without having to compromise. Only yesterday Lisa Leslie, the great American female basketballer returned to the court after a relatively short hiatus since birth and is back on track to play this season. Paula Radcliffe has been scrutinised with an eagle eye by sports commentators who argue that the woman who has recorded the five fastest marathon times in history with six victories from seven marathon starts, including the 2004 New York race will have an unremarkable 'comeback'.

I find it bizarre that so many people (men mostly) think women are disabled when they have children. If anything, pregnancy makes female athletes stronger because their bodies have time to rest for nine whole months as a result of significantly tapering training. Paula Radcliffe is one of the most remarkable female athletes of this generation. She probably places enough pressure on herself and she is no idiot; if she didn't think she was in peak physical condition to compete at one of the most competitive marathons in the world, she wouldn't be there.

The Guardian has a great article today featuring interviews with famous female runners talking about how their bodies changed for the better after baby. Finally, women athletes are allowed to speak and are not being spoken for: http://sport.guardian.co.uk/athletics/story/0,,2203931,00.html