You might be pleased to know that Jamie Lynn Spears had a natural birth, contrary to the rumours swirling around that she had a caesar. In fact, Spears sent a special message from her iPhone to her MySpace account confirming this and with a picture (surely Ok! will be happy about this given their exclusive deal with her for the first baby photos):
Date: Jun 20, 2008 8:28 PMSubject: hey guys its Jamie… im on my iPhoneBody: lol thank you all guys for the comments and messages…i love you all guys some of u are surprised about the name… but casey didnt actually like the other names. Maddie Briann OMG now i really understand my mom lol… sometimes she was overprotective but now i understand why. now Maddie is sleeping like an angel and im still in hospital… i had a natural birth and yeah thank u guys for the pic comment… it really means alot to me!!!
Source: http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2008/06/jamie-lynn-spears-baby-pictures-maddy-briann-myspace/
Nicole Kidman for Vogue
Well, here it is..the long awaited Nicole Kidman pregnancy cover for the July edition of American Vogue. I wonder when she took the photo because she does not look very pregnant!Here is a tidbit from the interview:
“When I first saw the baby on the ultrasound, I started crying. I didn’t think I’d get to experience that in my lifetime. I like the unpredictable nature of it. To feel life growing with you is something very, very special, and I’m going to embrace that completely. I don’t believe in flittering around the edges of things. You’re either going to walk through life and experience it fully or you’re going to be a voyeur. And I’m not a voyeur.”
You can read the full article here:
http://www.style.com/vogue/feature/061708/page2.html
Source: http://justjared.buzznet.com/2008/06/17/nicole-kidman-vogue-july-2008/
Breast is best in public?
Headline: Mothers win the right to breastfeed in all public places
It's a pretty sad day when a 'victory' for mothers in the UK is that they can breastfeed in public without being charged with public indecency. The move comes in response to data showing Britain has the lowest rate of breastfeeding in Europe.
Interesting that this happy development comes at exactly the same time as UK mother, Stella Onions is castigated for breastfeeding her 5 and 3 yr old children. Stella has been making the news around the world for advocating extended breastfeeding but responses, especially in Australia, tend to be that this poor woman is a 'freak' and her kids are going to have identity issues for the rest of their lives.
Sources: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026604/Mothers-win-right-breastfeed-public-places.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2110506/Mother-defends-breastfeeding-her-five-year-old.html
It's a pretty sad day when a 'victory' for mothers in the UK is that they can breastfeed in public without being charged with public indecency. The move comes in response to data showing Britain has the lowest rate of breastfeeding in Europe.
Interesting that this happy development comes at exactly the same time as UK mother, Stella Onions is castigated for breastfeeding her 5 and 3 yr old children. Stella has been making the news around the world for advocating extended breastfeeding but responses, especially in Australia, tend to be that this poor woman is a 'freak' and her kids are going to have identity issues for the rest of their lives.
Sources: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026604/Mothers-win-right-breastfeed-public-places.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2110506/Mother-defends-breastfeeding-her-five-year-old.html
The end of homebirth in America?
Well, it seems despite all of the momentum for homebirth generated by Ricki Lake is on the out in the US. The American Medical Association (AMA) adopted a resolution last weekend at their annual meeting to OUTLAW homebirth. In effect, the resolution would force American women to give birth in hospitals, again suggesting that midwives just aren't good enough compared to doctors. It's not yet clear how women would be penalised (or how anyone would find out?) if they have homebirths, however, this aggressive move is a sign of clear and present danger for the maternity system in America. As one of the largest profit generating sectors of American hospitals, ob/gyns are not willing to give up any of their cash. Similarly, the AMA is pushing for midwives to only be able to practice in hospitals under direct supervision of a doctor.
So much for constitutional rights.
Source: http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/06/16/bad-medicine-ama-seeks-to-outlaw-home-births
So much for constitutional rights.
Source: http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/06/16/bad-medicine-ama-seeks-to-outlaw-home-births
Another pregnant cover
More rumours abound.. Nicole Kidman set to appear on the cover of Vogue preggers in July?
Insurance companies are evil
Again, sorry. I'm not normally this slack with my blogging. I do feel like I'm heavily pregnant with this damn thesis. I'm about 7 weeks from my due date and it's getting pretty hard to do anything these days without thinking about the birth. My head, hands and feet are swollen with visions of edited chapters, all of the typos still to correct and the insane amount of formatting still left to do.
Anyway, I've been wanting to write about this for awhile but couldn't find the time until now.
Apparently, the push (to not push) for caesarean births has finally come to a head. As impatient obstetricians continue to corral pregnant women into operating theatres, it seems that some American insurance companies are actually refusing to cover women with a history of caesarean births. As we all know, insurance companies will not come near anyone with anything remotely recognisable as a 'preexisting condition', it seems that given the impressive list of health risks associated with caesareans, insurance companies are keeping their hands off.
Women who had had caesars are being charged higher premiums or being denied insurance altogther. This covers both elective and emergency caesars. Given that the caesar rate is at an all time high--31% (eek!)---it is women who are suffering now. That doctors overuse the surgery and often do not allow women who have had previous caesareans to deliver vaginally (VBAC), women are now being labelled as undesirable insurance candidates by no fault of their own.
Some insurance companies have not excluded the procedure from coverage completely: One insurance company, Golden Rule, said they would pay for a caesar only if they would not have to cover another one for at least three years. Similarly, Blue Cross Blue Shield said they would cover caesars but only at the cost of a 25% increase in premiums for the next 5 years.
Nevertheless, in being denied medical insurance women and their babies are being placed at enormous danger. After all, it is only recently that the rates of maternal and infant mortality have increased since 2005 and the US has the second worst rate for newborn deaths of industrialised nations.
Does anyone have any experience with this? Have you been denied insurance?
Sources: http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=11061
Anyway, I've been wanting to write about this for awhile but couldn't find the time until now.
Apparently, the push (to not push) for caesarean births has finally come to a head. As impatient obstetricians continue to corral pregnant women into operating theatres, it seems that some American insurance companies are actually refusing to cover women with a history of caesarean births. As we all know, insurance companies will not come near anyone with anything remotely recognisable as a 'preexisting condition', it seems that given the impressive list of health risks associated with caesareans, insurance companies are keeping their hands off.
Women who had had caesars are being charged higher premiums or being denied insurance altogther. This covers both elective and emergency caesars. Given that the caesar rate is at an all time high--31% (eek!)---it is women who are suffering now. That doctors overuse the surgery and often do not allow women who have had previous caesareans to deliver vaginally (VBAC), women are now being labelled as undesirable insurance candidates by no fault of their own.
Some insurance companies have not excluded the procedure from coverage completely: One insurance company, Golden Rule, said they would pay for a caesar only if they would not have to cover another one for at least three years. Similarly, Blue Cross Blue Shield said they would cover caesars but only at the cost of a 25% increase in premiums for the next 5 years.
Nevertheless, in being denied medical insurance women and their babies are being placed at enormous danger. After all, it is only recently that the rates of maternal and infant mortality have increased since 2005 and the US has the second worst rate for newborn deaths of industrialised nations.
Does anyone have any experience with this? Have you been denied insurance?
Sources: http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=11061
Welcome to the baby bidding war
And so we have it. The hotly anticipated photos of the Angie/Brad twin spawn is rumoured to be at $15 million and rising. According to TMZ, People and Ok! are the only mags left standing.
Seriously.
Source: http://www.tmz.com/2008/06/02/brangy-baby-pics-will-fetch-fortune/
Seriously.
Source: http://www.tmz.com/2008/06/02/brangy-baby-pics-will-fetch-fortune/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)