The phrase “childbearing hips”, besides being extremely cringey in any context, is a misnomer. It’s a byproduct of the kind of thinking that went into the Obstetrical Dilemma: in order to give birth women traded in bipedal efficiency for wider hips. It’s a hypothesis that was and is widely assumed to be true. But you know what they say about making assumptions? … As it turns out, pelvic width has nothing to do with bipedal efficiency, nor is it a constraint for fetal head growth or childbirth. Continue reading
In western culture, there is a long tradition of women suffering through labor… something about an apple? Throughout the history of obstetrics, theories have been tossed about to explain humanity’s apparently unique difficulties in childbirth. One of the more recent is the Obstetrical Dilemma which posits that the female pelvis is too narrow to give birth to human babies (without a lot of professional, technical intervention, and even then… ) but too wide (wider, on average, than a male pelvis) to be efficient.
Racist Roots with a side of Misogyny
The OD hypothesis came into being around the same time that hospital birth was becoming the norm in the United States. In 1949, Aldoph H. Schultz, from the John Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland published a paper titled Sex Differences in the Pelves of Primates about the pelvic measurements of a variety male and female cadavers from a selection of primate species. Among these non-human primate species are chimpanzees, gorillas, and negroes.
Yes, you read that correctly. And if you aren’t horrified, I am not sure I want you reading my blog.
Schultz believed that black people represented a different species of primate, describing their pelvic measurements as more animalistic than whites, as a means of explaining why they had easier births. His research was used to justify the lack of medical care available to pregnant black women across the U.S. but even more so in the Jim Crow south. Continue reading
In 1986, a study was published concluding that three hours of “supplemental” carrying reduced crying in newborns. The results sound impressive: infants in the supplemental carrying group cried 43% less overall and 51% less during the evening hours than infants who were not given supplemental carrying. Contemporary babywearers often share these statistics to encourage people to try using infant carriers.
But is that really accurate? What does the article really say? What has subsequent research shown? Why is crying such a big deal? If babywearing doesn’t reduce crying, is it worth it to try it? Continue reading
This post includes excerpts from my post on the Iowa City Babywearers website in Feb. 2018. In the full post, I describe a specific case and how ICBW assisted a mother who wanted to safely “wear” her CP toddler, click here to read.
About Cerebral Palsy
There is no cure for cerebral palsy. While symptoms become more noticeable with age the disease is not progressive. Preterm births, twins, and infants who experience difficult births, or head trauma during or after birth are most likely to have cerebral palsy. In some cases, it is caused by infection or environmental toxins during pregnancy and in very rare (2%) of cases, the cause is genetic. Nearly 80% of people with cerebral palsy have structural problems in the area of the brain that control movement, balance, and posture; and some will experience seizures. Continue reading
Are you curious about how life evolved on planet Earth? Well, grab a snack and a beverage and settle in for a few billion years. Here in part one, I am going to cover earth’s history from the start of life to the evolution of our hominin ancestors, from 4.6 billion years ago to around six million years ago. For some, this will be all new information and for others a bit of a refresher; for everyone, if you have questions, please don’t hesitate to ask. Continue reading
The Pope has been handing out a photo called “the fruits of war” taken in 1945 after the bombing of Nagasaki by Joe O’Donnell, a photographer for the U.S. Marines. The story is that the boy was standing in line at a crematorium with his dead baby brother on his back. Combined with the backstory it is an incredibly poignant testament to the destruction of war. And I hate to interfere with efforts to warn against war…
I don’t think that baby is dead. Continue reading