What I don't understand is this view towards menopause that it is a disease. To me, that goes hand in hand with a view of pregnancy and childbirth that has been medicalized beyond recognition in many cases. These are natural life events that have occured for as long as there have been women (or so we guess). Even the bible refers to Abraham's wife, Sarah, being beyond childbearing. So what on earth did women do before there was HRT???
I understand that there are many factors involved today that haven't always been present. Our exposure to cancer causing agents has increased dramatically over the years, our diets are lacking- even those who eat well cant replace the microbes that are essential for our digestive systems that have been stripped from our soil. We dont exercise enough or eat enough green leafys to get that calcium. Our air quality has declined horrifyingly over the recent years as well.
All that said, I get why perhaps there are problems now that weren't always such an issue. However, again I wonder what did women do before there was HRT? I am a good 18-20 years away from full blown menopause myself and I realize that my opinions may change when I am confronted with my own symptoms. As for now, I feel that certainly there must be treatments and lifestyle adjustments that can be applied to go through this change naturally and gracefully. From my perspective, this is a beautiful time of life. My children will be grown, I will be established as a woman despite whatever challenges come between now and then. I will hopefully be growing old with my husband and family, and I will be well finished with my periods.
It seems to me that HRT should be reserved for those women who go through the change prematurely due to hysterectomies. For those who do have a condition which must be treated medically. The rest of us should be offered other kinds of support from our health care providers. Care that embraces the change as a natural part of life and a beautiful progression of ageing. Yes, we should look into natural remedies and helps for symptoms as we adjust, but are we unwilling to suffer a bit to grow old? or are we so adverse to any difficulty that we run for potentially harmful medical interferance at the first sign of change? Doesn't that seem odd to anyone else?
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Blog #7
Many people equate STD's with immorality, promiscuous behavior and low social status. While I am hesitant to say so, I agree with this statement in part. Immorality has become a word that is without an absolute definition. Those who are religious (not just Christian, but Mormon, Muslim, Jewish, and others) define immorality by the tenants of their religion. Those without these guidelines make their own definitions of what is moral behavior. The phrase promiscuous behavior has rather loose definitions as well. Low social status is the only topic mentioned above that has rather definite parameters.
If one believes that immorality and promiscuity are defined by having sex outside of marriage or having multiple partners close together or even having "serial relationships" or one after another, I have to agree that this type of behavior greatly increases the chances of contracting an STD. It is clear that if both partners are monogamous (hopefully this is the case within marriage) there is no chance of contracting an STD.
However, as we have seen in our readings, and in the movie (A Closer Walk) there are many cases across the globe that women who are faithful to their husband are suffering from STDs due to extra marital sex on the part of their husbands. This brings hesitation to the belief that only the "promiscuous" will contract an STD.
As pertaining to the low social status: it stands to reason that there is a higher probability for those to contract STDs for a couple of reasons. First, lower economic status often goes hand in hand with lower education, leading to more risky behavior. Those who suffer from this status are more likely to be those trapped into the sex industry, leading to more exposure.
However, this is not the only demographic plagued with STDs. Teenagers are having sex at younger and younger ages. These kids lack education and an awareness that today's decisions can effect tomorrow. These kids are not protected by economic status.
I would add to this that parental involvement is vital to protecting kids of any social status from this situation. Ideally, education begins in the home with a healthy view of sexuality and understanding about the possibilities of contracting an STD.
Unfortunately, many parents are loathe to discuss this with their kids, leaving the responsibility to the schools and peers. I believe the schools have been forced into this position because parents have failed at preparing their children. While this education is vital and can prevent many kids from making poor decisions, it can never take the place of this education in the home from parents who love each other and their kids. Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world.
If one believes that immorality and promiscuity are defined by having sex outside of marriage or having multiple partners close together or even having "serial relationships" or one after another, I have to agree that this type of behavior greatly increases the chances of contracting an STD. It is clear that if both partners are monogamous (hopefully this is the case within marriage) there is no chance of contracting an STD.
However, as we have seen in our readings, and in the movie (A Closer Walk) there are many cases across the globe that women who are faithful to their husband are suffering from STDs due to extra marital sex on the part of their husbands. This brings hesitation to the belief that only the "promiscuous" will contract an STD.
As pertaining to the low social status: it stands to reason that there is a higher probability for those to contract STDs for a couple of reasons. First, lower economic status often goes hand in hand with lower education, leading to more risky behavior. Those who suffer from this status are more likely to be those trapped into the sex industry, leading to more exposure.
However, this is not the only demographic plagued with STDs. Teenagers are having sex at younger and younger ages. These kids lack education and an awareness that today's decisions can effect tomorrow. These kids are not protected by economic status.
I would add to this that parental involvement is vital to protecting kids of any social status from this situation. Ideally, education begins in the home with a healthy view of sexuality and understanding about the possibilities of contracting an STD.
Unfortunately, many parents are loathe to discuss this with their kids, leaving the responsibility to the schools and peers. I believe the schools have been forced into this position because parents have failed at preparing their children. While this education is vital and can prevent many kids from making poor decisions, it can never take the place of this education in the home from parents who love each other and their kids. Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
prenatal testing
Should prenatal testing be routine for all pregnant women?
I was supprised to see my views on this blog question presented in one of our supplemental required readings. The Bad Baby Blues by Lisa Blumberg is a well worded response.
I have a serious problem with the practice of leading women towards prenatal testing when they may have no specific reason to do so. Ms. Blumberg made a clear argument that I agree with wholeheartedly. This kind of thing is a precursor to a euthanasia mindset. I would take her view further and say that if we as a society begin to routinely test for disabilities and councel mothers towards termination, what makes us different in heart from Hitler?
Yes, we can claim that our intention is to prevent suffering, but what of those with disabilities who have led full lives? What of those who cannot support themselves but everyone around them praises them for their kindness and gentleness of heart? I have several friends who have children with disabilities or learning differences. The testimony they give of how these kids have added to their families and challenged them to grow as individuals is astounding and flies in the face of those arguments for avoiding suffering. Where do we draw the line?
I do not have a personal problem with testing that is not invasive for the purpose of determining correctable issues like Rh factor problems. Some problems can be detected and corrected pre-birth. I have seen (on tv of course) a surgery where the tiny infant was removed from the womb, surgery was performed to correct a major problem from which the child would have otherwise died, and the child was placed back inside the womb to finish gestation. Wow.
I agree with the article where it specified specific reasons for testing. This option should be avaliable to women who feel it necessary. Their decisions are their own, though I do not agree with termination, they could at the very least prepare themselves for what is to come.
I suppose my personal stance is that preventative, non invasive tests should be routine but optional. Invasive testing should always be optional even where the family has a history of certain problems. These choices are not for doctors or society to make.
I fear this technology taken to its fullest potential. While many advances have their benefits, the way we take the advances can get ugly. Anybody ever seen the movie, Gattaca?
I was supprised to see my views on this blog question presented in one of our supplemental required readings. The Bad Baby Blues by Lisa Blumberg is a well worded response.
I have a serious problem with the practice of leading women towards prenatal testing when they may have no specific reason to do so. Ms. Blumberg made a clear argument that I agree with wholeheartedly. This kind of thing is a precursor to a euthanasia mindset. I would take her view further and say that if we as a society begin to routinely test for disabilities and councel mothers towards termination, what makes us different in heart from Hitler?
Yes, we can claim that our intention is to prevent suffering, but what of those with disabilities who have led full lives? What of those who cannot support themselves but everyone around them praises them for their kindness and gentleness of heart? I have several friends who have children with disabilities or learning differences. The testimony they give of how these kids have added to their families and challenged them to grow as individuals is astounding and flies in the face of those arguments for avoiding suffering. Where do we draw the line?
I do not have a personal problem with testing that is not invasive for the purpose of determining correctable issues like Rh factor problems. Some problems can be detected and corrected pre-birth. I have seen (on tv of course) a surgery where the tiny infant was removed from the womb, surgery was performed to correct a major problem from which the child would have otherwise died, and the child was placed back inside the womb to finish gestation. Wow.
I agree with the article where it specified specific reasons for testing. This option should be avaliable to women who feel it necessary. Their decisions are their own, though I do not agree with termination, they could at the very least prepare themselves for what is to come.
I suppose my personal stance is that preventative, non invasive tests should be routine but optional. Invasive testing should always be optional even where the family has a history of certain problems. These choices are not for doctors or society to make.
I fear this technology taken to its fullest potential. While many advances have their benefits, the way we take the advances can get ugly. Anybody ever seen the movie, Gattaca?
Friday, February 16, 2007
contraception
I was going to do a handout on Natural Family Planning for Assignment 4 but some family situations came up this week and seriously delayed my homework process. But here's some personal info anyway.
My husband and I use Natural Family Planning and condoms during the fertile time. I just wanted to add some info that some may not be aware of. This method is presented in the book as Fertility Awareness methods. Calendar method, basal body temperature, and cervical mucos method. In Natural Family Planning, these three are combined along with additional information regarding cervical positioning and it's reflection on fertility. The methods listed by themselves are more likely to fail. HOWEVER, when you combine all of the methods, which Natural Family Planning does, you have a very low failure rate.
We have practiced this method for 9 years. YES! we do have 3 children. But having planned for 4 we are actually right on track. I agree that this method of birth control is not for everyone. In general, those who use this method are those couples who are more open to unplanned pregnancies. Advance planning and self control is involved which isn't very popular.
In our case, with our first one, we knew we were in the "danger zone". With our second one, we threw caution to the wind. With our third, we had a condom failure. With all the other months of our marriage that we weren't pregnant or in breastfeeding amenorrhea we have sucessfully postponed pregnancy. Our children are 22 months and 35 months apart. We certainly were not "pumping them out uncontrollably". After we reach capacity, we plan for my husband to have a vasectomy.
The charting of information and checking the fertility signals really becomes second nature after a short time. I have the benefit of knowing why I cramp in the middle of the month (with ovulation) I know why my hormones are crazy before my period, I know my body well and the reasons it does what it does. While this method is not for everyone and definately not for protecting against STI's, I believe all women should understand their bodies in this way.
My husband and I use Natural Family Planning and condoms during the fertile time. I just wanted to add some info that some may not be aware of. This method is presented in the book as Fertility Awareness methods. Calendar method, basal body temperature, and cervical mucos method. In Natural Family Planning, these three are combined along with additional information regarding cervical positioning and it's reflection on fertility. The methods listed by themselves are more likely to fail. HOWEVER, when you combine all of the methods, which Natural Family Planning does, you have a very low failure rate.
We have practiced this method for 9 years. YES! we do have 3 children. But having planned for 4 we are actually right on track. I agree that this method of birth control is not for everyone. In general, those who use this method are those couples who are more open to unplanned pregnancies. Advance planning and self control is involved which isn't very popular.
In our case, with our first one, we knew we were in the "danger zone". With our second one, we threw caution to the wind. With our third, we had a condom failure. With all the other months of our marriage that we weren't pregnant or in breastfeeding amenorrhea we have sucessfully postponed pregnancy. Our children are 22 months and 35 months apart. We certainly were not "pumping them out uncontrollably". After we reach capacity, we plan for my husband to have a vasectomy.
The charting of information and checking the fertility signals really becomes second nature after a short time. I have the benefit of knowing why I cramp in the middle of the month (with ovulation) I know why my hormones are crazy before my period, I know my body well and the reasons it does what it does. While this method is not for everyone and definately not for protecting against STI's, I believe all women should understand their bodies in this way.
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
blog #4
I remember menarche for me being a generally positive experience.
There was the horror at starting my period while at church camp in Florida. We stayed in a hotel on the beach with daily free time in the hotel pool and in the ocean. I was glad that my mom was there as a camp counsellor. She reacted with calm and encouragement that made it less horrible for me. I was also rooming with a dear friend who helped me figure out tampons.
The horror was not shame related but more in relation to the unknown and lack of experience. I knew enough to know that it would happen, but since my mom had a hysterectomy shortly after I was born, I had no memory of seeing her deal with menses or really talking about it much.
I remember my mom telling me that I was becoming a woman and I remember her support and love. I had forgotten this... thanks for the opportunity to remember.
There was the horror at starting my period while at church camp in Florida. We stayed in a hotel on the beach with daily free time in the hotel pool and in the ocean. I was glad that my mom was there as a camp counsellor. She reacted with calm and encouragement that made it less horrible for me. I was also rooming with a dear friend who helped me figure out tampons.
The horror was not shame related but more in relation to the unknown and lack of experience. I knew enough to know that it would happen, but since my mom had a hysterectomy shortly after I was born, I had no memory of seeing her deal with menses or really talking about it much.
I remember my mom telling me that I was becoming a woman and I remember her support and love. I had forgotten this... thanks for the opportunity to remember.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
rate my health
Rate my health. I scored 6 out of 10 yes, and one "mostly".
The mostly was the diet area. My family's diet is notoriously lacking in vegetables. We take multi-vitamins and eat lots of fresh fruit. The veggies we consume are mostly frozen corn or broccoli and canned green beans. My ideal would be to have salads and fresh veggies daily. It's been an easy habit to loose and it's proving more difficult to re-establish than I thought. I was just shy of a vegetarian when I met my "meat and potatoes" husband. Though I've had significant influence on him, I'm afraid he's won out on the meat. I did get him drinking water which is something his mother never did. HA!
I believe that for the most part I'm on the right track health wise. I could definitely improve in the areas of diet, sleep, and more consistent exercise. With three kids it's very difficult to maintain in all of those areas, and it's all the more important that I do, for their sake!
The mostly was the diet area. My family's diet is notoriously lacking in vegetables. We take multi-vitamins and eat lots of fresh fruit. The veggies we consume are mostly frozen corn or broccoli and canned green beans. My ideal would be to have salads and fresh veggies daily. It's been an easy habit to loose and it's proving more difficult to re-establish than I thought. I was just shy of a vegetarian when I met my "meat and potatoes" husband. Though I've had significant influence on him, I'm afraid he's won out on the meat. I did get him drinking water which is something his mother never did. HA!
I believe that for the most part I'm on the right track health wise. I could definitely improve in the areas of diet, sleep, and more consistent exercise. With three kids it's very difficult to maintain in all of those areas, and it's all the more important that I do, for their sake!
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Do I believe access to health care is a right or a privilege?
Wow. This is such a deep question for me. Being uninsured myself, but receiving coverage for my kids through the government, I have mixed feelings. I feel so thankful for the insurance for my kids. I don't feel that this is something I deserve.
In our country, health care is such a mess, costs are so high, and so many are benefiting from the health hardships of others (ie. insurance, doctors, pharmaceutical companies). Perhaps it is because of this climate that I feel it is a privilege for my kids to be covered. On the other hand, also because of this climate, and knowing that other countries handle health care so differently, I feel that it COULD be a right. Perhaps it SHOULD be a right.
I was disturbed by the timeline in our book that in the 1940's there was a national health plan proposed by Truman and that the House subcommittee called it a Communist plot. Interestingly, the AMA also denounced it... those who certainly benefit from capitalized medicine.
Perhaps there is a streak of communist in me too. But maybe the company there isn't all that bad. The goal is for all to be cared for and none left cold.
So how do we accomplish this in a capitalistic society? Where opportunity exsists for all but there are such definate class divisions and disparities of coverage between them. I'm so glad the decision doesn't fall on my shoulders. It is seriously complex.
Wow. This is such a deep question for me. Being uninsured myself, but receiving coverage for my kids through the government, I have mixed feelings. I feel so thankful for the insurance for my kids. I don't feel that this is something I deserve.
In our country, health care is such a mess, costs are so high, and so many are benefiting from the health hardships of others (ie. insurance, doctors, pharmaceutical companies). Perhaps it is because of this climate that I feel it is a privilege for my kids to be covered. On the other hand, also because of this climate, and knowing that other countries handle health care so differently, I feel that it COULD be a right. Perhaps it SHOULD be a right.
I was disturbed by the timeline in our book that in the 1940's there was a national health plan proposed by Truman and that the House subcommittee called it a Communist plot. Interestingly, the AMA also denounced it... those who certainly benefit from capitalized medicine.
Perhaps there is a streak of communist in me too. But maybe the company there isn't all that bad. The goal is for all to be cared for and none left cold.
So how do we accomplish this in a capitalistic society? Where opportunity exsists for all but there are such definate class divisions and disparities of coverage between them. I'm so glad the decision doesn't fall on my shoulders. It is seriously complex.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)