feminist blogs

Watching Michelle Obama on “The View” (watch it yourself while it lasts), you see all her very admirable strengths — and you see a predictable campaign strategy emerging. As Jodi Kantor and Michael Powell over at The Caucus put it: The virtue of a show like this is clear — not only is there [...]

[This is a content summary only. Click on the headline for full links and additional content. Thanks!]

Via RH Reality Check and the Big Push for Midwives:

Steff Hedenkamp, Communications Coordinator for The Big Push for Midwives says, "Maternity care is a multi-billion dollar industry in the United States. So it's no surprise to see the AMA join the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in its ongoing fight to corner the market and ensure that the only midwives able to practice legally are hospital-based midwives forced to practice under physician control. I will say, though, that I'm shocked to learn that the AMA is taking this turf battle to the next level by setting the stage for outlawing home birth itself-a direct attack on those families who choose home birth, who could be subject to criminal prosecution if the AMA has its way."

Apparently Ricki Lake and her new hit documentary the Business of Being Born might be partially to blame. With the soaring costs of maternity care, the further increasing c-section rate and our not-so-great maternal mortality rate, it's no surprise that birth activists and mothers are up in arms about this.

UPDATE: You can read the text of the resolution here.

I am so deeply saddened by Rebecca Walker's recent expose on her childhood as Alice Walker's allegedly neglected daughter and the ways in which it scarred her. The two have been publicly nipping at one another for years, but this seems like the nail in the coffin of their doomed relationship.

I'm sad, first and foremost, for Rebecca--a third wave icon and clearly reflective and evolving leader of the movement. Whether everything she alleges (that her mother never went to her school functions, didn't spend time with her or money on her necessities etc.) is true or not, it is the emotional truth of what she experienced.

But I'm sad, on a larger scale, that she would (1) equate feminism with this experience and (2) not see the gray areas in between her mother's relationship to mothering and her own.

In terms of the former, she acts like our feminist legacy is explicitly anti-mothering. She writes: "Feminism has betrayed an entire generation of women into childlessness. It is devastating." This is so NOT my experience in the world or at home, where I was raised by a prototypical feminist mother (though not a famous one). Many, many of the second-wavers that I know and love are passionate about being mothers, while they recognize that there are dangers in it and many issues that arise from its all-consuming nature. Any biological confusion that women have is not a direct product of feminism; it's a complicated biproduct of the time we are living in, feminist successes included.

In terms of the latter, Rebecca seems to have swung the pendulum so violently in the other direction that she won't even acknowledge the ways in which mothering is problematic for independent women in a sexist world. She writes, "I am my own woman and I have discovered what really matters - a happy family. "I, for one, am freaked out to be a mom (though I know I want to), not because I think it is impossible not to lose myself, but because I think it is easy to. I want to find a middle ground between helicopter parent and can't be bothered, between stay-at-home and workaholic, between mother as identity and mother as irrelevant role.

Isn't that what so many of us are striving for? Isn't that what Amy Richards' new book is about? Why isn't this acknowledged in Rebecca's vicious take down of her own mother?

Your thoughts?

I am so deeply saddened by Rebecca Walker's recent expose on her childhood as Alice Walker's allegedly neglected daughter and the ways in which it scarred her. The two have been publicly nipping at one another for years, but this seems like the nail in the coffin of their doomed relationship.

I'm sad, first and foremost, for Rebecca--a third wave icon and clearly reflective and evolving leader of the movement. Whether everything she alleges (that her mother never went to her school functions, didn't spend time with her or money on her necessities etc.) is true or not, it is the emotional truth of what she experienced.

But I'm sad, on a larger scale, that she would (1) equate feminism with this experience and (2) not see the gray areas in between her mother's relationship to mothering and her own.

In terms of the former, she acts like our feminist legacy is explicitly anti-mothering. She writes: "Feminism has betrayed an entire generation of women into childlessness. It is devastating." This is so NOT my experience in the world or at home, where I was raised by a prototypical feminist mother (though not a famous one). Many, many of the second-wavers that I know and love are passionate about being mothers, while they recognize that there dangers in it and many issues that arise from its all-consuming nature. Any biological confusion that women have is not a direct product of feminism; it's a complicated biproduct of the time we are living in, feminist successes included.

In terms of the latter, Rebecca seems to have swung the pendulum so violently in the other direction that she won't even acknowledge the ways in which mothering is problematic for independent women in a sexist world. She writes, "I am my own woman and I have discovered what really matters - a happy family. "I, for one, am freaked out to be a mom (though I know I want to), not because I think it is impossible not to lost myself, but because I think it is easy to. I want to find a middle ground between helicopter parent and can't be bothered, between stay-at-home and workaholic, between mother as identity and mother as irrelevant role.

Isn't that what so many of us are striving for? Isn't that what Amy Richards' new book is about? Why isn't this acknowledged in Rebecca's vicious take down of her own mother?

Your thoughts?

A UK-wide survey finds that 76 percent of employers said that they would not hire a woman if they knew she were going to become pregnant within six months of starting her employment. More findings:

52 per cent will weigh up the chances of a candidate getting pregnant, taking into account age and whether they have just got married (although asking that direct question to an interviewee is not allowed).

68 per cent of employers would like more rights to quiz candidates about their plans for a family.

Depressing and infuriating. Check out NAPW's Guide to Pregnancy Discrimination in Employment for more information on pregnancy discrimination at work.

According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, complaints of pregnancy discrimination hiked up by 14% between 2006 and 2007. There has been a 40% increase over the last decade, reports the National Partnership for Women and Families.

The Wall Street Journal suggests that this is party because women are increasingly working later into their pregnancies, including new advocacy being created for pregnant women and women with children.

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act can't straight up protect women from being fired or not hired, but if they're singled out based on their pregnancy, they're liable to take action. And unfortunately, the Family and Medical Leave Act poses a problem: while unpaid maternity leave is required, it doesn't doesn't require paid maternity leave. (California and Washington are exceptions.)

Regardless, it's good to see women taking more action on pregnancy discrimination; we're getting closer to accurate numbers on how prevalent it really is in the U.S. and maybe, just maybe, our family-friendly policies will someday get friendlier. Check out MomsRising and the National Advocates for Pregnant Women has a great list of more resources about pregnant women and mother's rights at work.

A Republican California assemblyman proposed a bill that would deem pregnant women "temporarily disabled" in the third trimester of their pregnancy and allow them access to handicapped parking. The bill failed, but I think this is really interesting.

The classification of differently-abled people is usually pretty stigmatizing. Disability rights activists have talked about the problem with being overly protective of differently-abled people while overlooking systemic problems in the care of people with disabilities and the lack of appropriate legislation to protect their individual rights.

People with disabilities are constantly fighting against a misinformed public, discrimination and the often erroneous belief that differently-abled people are helpless and can't make decisions for themselves. It is not OK, but we can agree that these assumptions are prevalent. So if that is the case, and we have politicians that want to classify pregnant women as "disabled" these same misconceptions apply on some level. There is then the belief that pregnant women are unable to take care of themselves, make choices for themselves, etc. Is the answer for society's mistreatment of both differently-abled people and pregnant women legislation that will classify women as "temporarily disabled?"

I don't think so. But then you think about what is possible, given the current laws with regard to differently-abled people and it is true that pregnant women sometimes have special needs and those needs should be protected by the government.

I just have a problem with calling people "disabled" and to extend that category to pregnant women. It is infantilizing, something the legal system loves to do to "vulnerable" populations through demoralizing and poorly phrased legislation. Isn't there a way to protect people's rights and allow them fair access depending on their abilities without saying they are disabled? And I am not overly concerned with the terms alone-but the meanings and assumptions that are attached to them.

For midwives that is.

The good news: Missouri just passed a law that would decriminalize midwifery and allow for the licensing and regulation of Certified Professional Midwives. From today's press release:

Midwives advocates across Missouri and the nation today celebrated the passage of Senator John Loudon’s (R, Chesterfield) midwifery licensure bill, SB 1021, from the Missouri Senate Committee on Pensions, General Laws and Veteran’s Affairs. The long-anticipated legislation would decriminalize the practice of midwifery in Missouri and establish a board to license and regulate Certified Professional Midwives (CPMs).

Awesome.

The bad news: last week the American College of Obstretics and Gynecology came out against home birth once again.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) reiterates its long-standing opposition to home births. While childbirth is a normal physiologic process that most women experience without problems, monitoring of both the woman and the fetus during labor and delivery in a hospital or accredited birthing center is essential because complications can arise with little or no warning even among women with low-risk pregnancies.

They also came out against the type of midwives (certified professional midwives) the MO bill supports. I still think this is very much about childbirth as a business, and a fear that OBs will lose the current monopoly they have on the practice. The history of the move from midwives to obstetricians is connected to this same logic.

From a press release by the Big Push for Midwives:

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), a trade union representing the financial and professional interests of obstetricians, has issued the latest in a series of statements condemning families who choose home birth and calling on policy makers to deny them access to Certified Professional Midwives. The Big Push for Midwives calls on ACOG to abandon these outdated policies and work with CPMs to reduce the cesarean rate and to take meaningful steps towards reducing racial and ethnic disparities in birth outcomes in all regions of the United States. CPMs play a critical role in both cesarean prevention and in the reduction of low-birth weight and pre-term births, the two most preventable causes of neonatal mortality.

Want to know more about home birth? Watch the Business of Being Born.

Full disclosure: I'm a doula and a big supporter of midwives as well as out-of-hospital birth options.

With hospitals charging as much as $12,000 to $15,000 to deliver babies, home births cost $3,000 to $4,000. And now, New Hampshire may require insurance companies to pay for babes delivered at home by midwives.

While the federal government reimburses women for home delivery under Medicaid, a woman with health insurance that includes maternity benefits has to pay out of her own pocket if she decides to deliver at home.

On a related note, it's not news that Rick Lake recently made a documentary which argues that the medical industry has turned childbirth not only into a business, but pregnancy into a medical condition that needs to be "treated." Check out the trailer after the jump.

Has anyone seen the movie? Thoughts? Experiences?

Who said teens need role models when they can be their own? This week, high school students are our hero.

Pregnant teens at East High School in Denver are requesting maternity leave due to the school giving unexcused absences if school days are missed immediately after giving birth. Unfortunately, it's not atypical for a high school to make being pregnant or teen mother difficult to stay in high school; aside from the general struggles of being a teen parent, another Colorado school rejected the suggestion from one student that a day care center be created within the school because the principal felt it would encourage teen pregnancy.

Let's hope East High won't have a similar sentiment. (You know, because a month off and some day care makes having a kid at 16 SO appealing.) Only a third of teen moms receive their high-school diplomas and 1.5 percent get college degrees before they turn 30, according to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.

Back east in New York City, high school students have testified before the City Council to make sex education in Bronx high schools mandatory. While the NYC Department of Ed approved sex ed curricula to be disseminated to all high schools, it's at the principal's discretion as to whether the curriculum is used or not.

But that wasn't enough for concerned teenagers from P.S. 218 in the South Bronx, who have been advocating for the right to sex education in all Bronx high schools, a borough where the rate of teen pregnancies is nearly 14% as opposed to 10% throughout all of New York City.

If that's not some serious inspiration, I don't know what is. Here's to the teen activists of Denver, New York, and beyond.