Sunday, February 22, 2009

Baby,Baby,Baby


So this is what's on my mind today. I'm wondering what the whole "pregnancy/childbirth" process was like 500 years ago? I'm wondering if it was just as nerveracking and tedious as modern science has made it these days.


As if there wasn't enough to worry about, enough to be insecure about, enough to feel guilty about, the new age of obstetrics gives you a whole other level of "issues" to balance. You have to make sure the mom-to-be eats right (naturally), she has to sleep on her left side, she has to excercise but not too much, she has to drink lots of water and the number of doctors' appointments is staggering.


So what I'm figuring out is this; having a baby today is vastly different from having a baby 300 years ago...oops, I mean 30 years ago. Some of the stuff I tell my mom about probably sounds like I'm speaking a foreign language. Our parents clearly didn't go through this much rigamoroe(that's probably not the correct spelling) and they probably didn't have nearly as much information as we get today. But my question is, who gets the better end of that deal?


Is it better for us to have numbers and charts that mathematically explain our kid's development or lack thereof leaving us open to worry and concern every time one number is too high or too low? Or were our parents better off measuring the status of their pregnancy by kicks and appetite?


I know who gets my vote, afterall, I turned out alright. Right?


And at the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist I wonder aloud to you, what is the point of having so much information? Who really benefits the most from all of the tests and measurements, the patients or the moneymakers (oops, I mean doctors, etc.) Especially in most cases when the end result is a happy healthy baby that may be a little too big or a little too small?


I haven't figured that answer out just yet, but what I have figured out is that when people are shoving numbers and big words at you to describe what MIGHT be wrong with your kid, the best remedy is faith.


Works every time.
Cp

5 comments:

citizen of the world said...

Okay, my last baby was born 12 years ago, but I'm assuming thngs haven't changed that much in that span of time. The tests are partly for the doctor's protection in this litigation-happy society. But they are also for yours. They give you the information you need to make choices (about continuing a pregnancy in dire circumstances, about hooking up with support if need be, about possible early interventions such as intrauterine surgeries, and on and on.) Yes, many babies were born healthy before we had the tests, but many weren't. Even things like gestational diabetes can be treated to improve the baby's chances of survival. Why wouldn't you want the mom to eat healthy foods and abstain from alcohol and take her prenatal vitamins? I could go on an on, but all this to say I'm profoundly grateful for the medical advances. Like the last-minute ultrasound that showed my son was breech and saved an emergency intervention later in the labor. Because women and babies still die in childbirth. Give me those tests over superstitious guesses based on kicks and appetite. A baby being a litle too big or a little too small are the least of your worries, my friend - be glad the medical profession is there for you.

Anne said...

I say take the tests, but take them with a grain of salt. Quacks ...er, I mean doctors are only human, and are wrong a lot more often than they would like you to think.

Kiyotoe said...

I know that the tests serve a purpose (a healthy baby) but i can't help but feel like a lot of the info is used as "scare tactics" that anybody with good sense is going to give in to for the sake of their unborn kid. Kinda like the way we pay insurance every month "just in case" something happens.

Robin said...

I love coming here.... seeing this picture... though I know it's fraught with angst.

I see Hope, somehow.

Thanks, Lav.

~R

Kiyotoe said...

glad i could help Spark ;-)