The Big Three Series: 3 Things I Wanted to Share If You Choose to Vaccinate

I have been thinking about publishing a three part series focusing on specific vaccines for a while now. I envisioned calling it "The Big Three" since there were already two sets of three vaccines that I knew I wanted to talk about. But I could not figure out what to do for the last set of Big Three.  Well the last set has turned into the first set, since the other two are not even close to finished.  And this set is not about any specific vaccines at all.

One of my sisters has told me that she is at least partially vaccinating, and I respect her decision.  When I say I believe in parental rights, I don't just mean in theory.  One of the many reasons parental rights are so very important is the fact that every parent, every child, and every family are so different and unique that it is often genuinely the case that what is right for one at one time will not be right for another or at a different time. Once again, the gift of the Holy Ghost is such a phenomenal blessing. I feel in many ways that my appreciation for the breadth and scope and individuality of this gift continues to increase the further I travel my parenting journey.

This sweet sister has inspired me to put together some information and recommendations for her and any other sisters who may decide that full or partial vaccination is right for some or all of their kids. 

Much of this information comes from the National Vaccine Information Center's page "If You Vaccinate, Ask 8!" and Dr. Stephanie Cave

Three notes for my beloved sisters who may choose to fully or partially vaccinate (in chronological order)

1. As the appointment approaches, remember that if your child is currently ill (fever, runny nose, diarrhea, constipation, etc.) or on antibiotics, or has very recently been ill or on antibiotics, your child may be at increased risk of reaction and therefore it is recommended that you reschedule the appointment. Also consider giving your child cod liver oil and sodium ascorbate (vitamin c) for three days before and on the day of the shot.

2. Keep a written record of the the shot and specifically the manufacturer name and lot numbers for any vaccines your child receives.  Also write down any reactions, or possible changes in health/behavior following a vaccine. Recognizing Vaccine Reaction Symptoms has a list of things to look out for and information on how to report vaccine reactions. 

3. Please, consider avoiding acetaminophen (Tylenol) around the time of vaccination as Routine Use of Paracetamol (Acetaminophen) After Vaccination Not Recommended for Infants, Study. Essentially, it seems to impair the detoxification systems and increase risk of vaccine injury. 
Also, there is THIS article suggesting that Acetaminophen following vaccination may have a causal connection to Asthma, Autism, and ADHD in genetically vulnerable children (there is a link to a webinar that was done by the author). And THIS is a similar article published in Alternative Medicine Review.

Videos Regarding Vaccines

This is just a list of vaccine documentaries, lectures, and interviews I have seen. I thought about trying to pick out the best one or two, but I couldn't.  Sadly, this is not because they are all too good to leave out. Mostly this is because each has different (or just better worded) info that is good, mixed in with a bunch of stuff I would not put into the New Momma Musings Vaccine documentary (which isn't going to happen, but if it did it would probably be unsuccessful since I would leave out most of the individual vaccine injury stories that tug at the heartstrings and personalize the issue, but make the films too emotionally draining and take time away from the "meat" of the issues).


-If you start watching Silent Epidemic and want to skip much of the individual injury stories (which I prefer) skip to 17:38.  It does have some really good info and some unusual footage and explanation of the vaccine manufacturing process around 43:42.

-Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D. presented a lecture titled Vaccines & Brain Development with a ton of info. Note there is brief political commentary at the beginning (and lightly scattered throughout). He also gave a different informative lecture called Vaccines and Immunoexcitotoxicity (I don't recall any political commentary in it).

-Shots in the Dark and The Greater Good (this link is for the trailer only as the full film is not available for free) are fairly mainstream films (the implied suggestion here is that they are actually too mainstream for my current views... but they were part of my road of getting to my current conclusions). Parts of both are in a patchwork youtube video called Vacciness-The truth behind vaccinations (and yes, I am aware of the spelling error, but I wanted to keep the searchable title).

-Lethal Injection: The Story Of Vaccination Documentary has some parts that really drag, so if you get too bored or disinterested (in the excavation to find the flu of 1918) to continue just skip ahead a bit and it usually picks up.  Also note that large chunks of info in this video are not read aloud, the text is displayed on screen (I note that because I sometimes "watch" informational videos by listening while I am doing something else and this is not a good one for that).

-The newest vaccine documentary is called Bought.  I have not seen it yet, but the trailer is intense. It focuses on GMOs and vaccines.  It is a Jeff Hays film (same guy who produced Doctored).  I hope to get to see it soon.

-If, after watching the lecture on polio, you decide that you enjoy Dr. Humphries' style (as I do), I have good news!  Just recently, in August of 2014, a 4-part youtube series of a full vaccine seminar Dr. Humphries gave in Sweden became available.  The links are Part One (1:08:40), Part Two (45:27), Part Three (9:05), and Part Four: Q & A (44:09) (For a grand total of 2:47:21)

-I mention in my Intro to Vaccines that I listen to Dr. Humphries' radio interviews.  Here are a few:
     -Dr. Mercola Interviews Dr. Suzanne Humphries
     -Suzanne Humphries, MD: Boosters Ineffective, Infant Immunity & Aluminum. 8-3-14 (with Shawn Siegel) in which Dr. Humphries explains how vaccines are an assault on an infant's immune system
     -Suzanne Humphries, MD: Did vaccines eliminate polio and smallpox? 8-18-13 (another with Shawn Siegel)
     -Interview with Dr Suzanne Humphries about vaccines (with Mike Adams)
     -Dr. Suzanne Humphries - Scientific proof that vaccines are harming hospital patient and more (with Dr. Mayer Eisenstein)
     -Dr Suzanne Humphries: The Truth Treatment - Truth Connections Radio - 29th November 2012 (with TruthConnections, whoever that is) NOTE: the first 4:20 are worthless (and I find creepy) intro music... and words... just skip to 4:20.

More about Circumcision

My first post about circumcision ended up focusing on the religious (non-)requirement in my faith. However, there were certainly other issues my husband and I had to assess and resolve concerning circumcision. 

There are several common concerns about circumcising or not circumcising, and some are more valid than others.  I would like to address this list of the most common ones I have encountered in my research on the topic.

• Cleanliness/The Perception of Uncleanliness: As far as I know, the United States is the only place where there is an active cultural "dissing" of the intact male anatomy. The harshest displays I have encountered were only from internet comments, but I know I tend to be relatively sheltered. Anyway, you may run into statements like "uncircumcised men stink because they can't get themselves properly clean" and "its gross" and even a desire to link intact men with a lower "class" of people (dirty, uneducated, even criminals), exists out there on the web. Even if you know those things aren't true, you can feel like you are putting your son in a difficult social situation.  I really do understand that instinctive desire to give your child the best possible start to life- including social aspects. It bothered me to think that because of an elective medical procedure that we might choose not to have performed on our brand new baby, he would automatically be labeled dirty, disgusting, or anything else. There is good news though. First of all, the statistics seem to show (to varying degrees) that this practice is being reconsidered by a growing segment of the population. In the 1980's something like 85% of boys were circumcised, now that number is less than 50% in some states (it varies greatly by region- western states have the fewest circumcisions, but in the north east it is still very popular). Also, as Latter-Day Saints, we should probably be accustomed to doing things the rest of the world considers "strange" or "different" especially since it should feel a little weird to do something just because "everyone else it doing it." It is still uncomfortable sometimes though. THIS page is one of a series and the best resource I think I have found for dispelling hygiene myths. 
• Fear of Later Problems: Perhaps the strongest fear-based argument in favor of circumcision goes something like this; "I know a man who was forced to get circumcised for medical reasons when he was 30! He says he wouldn't wish that on anyone and that he wishes he was circumcised as a baby."  Just for arguments' sake, consider this hypothetical story; "I know a woman who had to get a mastectomy when she was 30! She says it was a horrible experience. Wouldn't it have been so much better for her if she had been able to have that done as a baby?" My answer to that question would go something like this: I imagine if she had been able to have the procedure performed in her infancy she would not remember the trauma of the surgery. She also would have missed out to some degree. More importantly though, what would that have meant about her parents that they would decide to deprive her of a part of her body for the first 30 years of her life because of the risk of needing to have it removed at some later period? One day I may have to have a mastectomy or appendectomy or tonsillectomy or any number of procedures if a part of my body fails to such a degree that it must be removed. However, I would not find that to be a reasonable justification for my parents to have a part of my infant body removed before it was necessary.  This argument, while scary, and accusatory ("if your son's penis catastrophically fails later in life it will basically be your fault for not performing prophylactic surgery on him in his infancy"), is not logically sound. 
• Father-Son "Matching": This is, perhaps, the dumbest argument I can imagine- yet one of the most popular. Let me address it in two ways. First, your son is not going to "match" his father's looks entirely in any way (unless he is a clone)- he is likely to have different color hair and eyes, be a different height, and even have a different skin tone than his father. He is not going to match the way his father's penis looks, even if they are both circumcised, for a very long time. Among other things, I imagine the presence of hair would be one of the most obvious differences to a young boy.  Secondly, this argument sounds as absurd as it ought to when we replace it with any other procedure. Is this a good reason for a baby to get his tongue pierced? To have his appendix or tonsils removed? To have his arm amputated?  Think about it.
• Fear of Minor "Issues": This usually boils down to things like urinary tract infections and "extra trouble." As far as "extra trouble" is concerned, this usually is in reference to washing, baths and diaper changes. Ironically, it is circumcised boys that are significantly "extra trouble" initially since they have an open wound in their diapers that must be protected, kept clean, and watched for signs of infection. But after that wound is healed, hygiene is not much different. As a baby, toddler, and small child the foreskin is fused on, and only the visible outside needs to be washed (the inside keeps itself clean like the inside of your eyelids keep themselves clean).  More is explained about that on THIS excellent website that I refer to all over this page.  As far as urinary tract infections go, girls are at a much higher risk of UTIs than intact or circumcised boys (and we don't normally suggest surgery as a solution for that).  There are studies that suggest that circumcised boys are at a slightly reduced risk, there are also some concerns about the accuracy of the conclusions of those studies. Quoting from the article linked above "This claim [that circumcision protects boys from UTIs] is based on one study that looked at charts of babies born in one hospital (Wiswell 1985).  The study had many problems, including that it didn't accurately count whether or not the babies were circumcised(!?), whether they were premature and thus more susceptible to infection in general, whether they were breastfed (breastfeeding protects against UTI), and if their foreskins had been forcibly retracted (which can introduce harmful bacteria and cause UTI)  (Pisacane 1990).  There have been many studies since which show either no decrease in UTI with circumcision, or else an increase in UTI from circumcision. Thus circumcision is not recommended to prevent UTI  (Thompson 1990).  Girls have higher rates of UTI than boys, and yet when a girl gets a UTI, she is simply prescribed antibiotics.  The same treatment works for boys." 
• Desire to Protect "Women"/Desire to Sacrifice Son: Not really sure how to address this one other than to suggest you watch THIS video (it is less than a minute long) of famous obstetrician Lisa Masterson (who I disagree with on almost everything I have ever heard her say) and the host of some late show, Craig Ferguson. Also THIS page I continue to recommend you read. If you want information on the ways circumcision of male babies may be harmful to women I have links at the bottom of the page.
• Concern For Dad's Well-Being: This is a very real concern and one that all loving wives need to be conscientious and considerate about. It can be hard to approach this topic.  It is important to find a way to discuss this topic without hurting your husband's feelings or ego.  If you and your husband find yourselves in perfect agreement (whatever that may be) it is much easier, but you can have a great marriage and not start out in perfect agreement about everything. If you find yourself leaning against circumcision and your husband leaning for it, please tread gently. It is hard to hear that your wife doesn't want her son to be like you. It is very personal. As THIS page explains "The real issue at play here is [...] the father: if it is okay for his son to not be circumcised, then he did not have to be circumcised, and so he is missing something from his penis" and that is a big deal and a really overwhelming thought. I actually really liked this little essay on discussing this issue with your husband- the best part starts near the end (about paragraph 7). But I like how he explains the goal: "So, the problem is how do we save our son's genitals without psychologically emasculating their fathers?"  Because as much as I didn't want to circumcise our [hypothetical] son, I am not sure sacrificing my marriage or my husband's psychological health would have been worth it. I am grateful that I didn't have to choose between those options, but some women do. 
• Fear of botched Circumcision: This one did influence my decision, and is also part of how I addressed the above concern. You see, in my digging, I found some surprising stories. Obviously one should not make a decision based on one, or even multiple, anecdotal horror stories.  However, one also rarely makes decisions based on statistics alone, particularly on a topic in which statistics are frustratingly unavailable. It is hard to be sure that the data we have on the percentage of boys who are actually circumcised at all are very accurate- let alone the statistics that are openly "guesstimated" such as circumcisions that require corrective surgery, circumcisions with "complications" and deaths caused by circumcisions. And there are horror stories. There are stories of little boys who came back from the experience with problems that required additional corrective surgeries. Stories of little boys who died from hemorrhage, or who lost their entire penis.  Stories of men who live with unique mutilations, usually in silence.  I remember telling my husband, that if I could be 100% certain that our son would have a perfect circumcision, with no complications, that I could be certain he would look just like his dad, I would think about it differently, and I would probably have considered it more heartily. But nobody could give me that kind of guarantee- and I knew it. So regardless of what the actual (unknown) statistics are- is it worth the risk? For me, it wasn't.

Interestingly, one of my personal greatest concerns came from a story I had heard in regards to a very different issue that came up when my brother was born. The relevant part boiled down to this: when my brother was born my Mom had some concerns about circumcision, she thought she would rather not do it (which was rather radical at that time; yes my dear sisters, we come by it honestly). My Dad, who deeply respects my Mom and her concerns, was cool with that plan. My maternal grandfather, who is not circumcised, heard about this plan and... basically panicked.  He talked to my Dad and the two of them came back to my Mom and basically told her that it really needed to be done; and it was.  

The first time I heard that story I was not pregnant and though I casually inquired as to the nature of the problem Grandpa had brought to my father's attention, my Mom told me she didn't know or couldn't remember and I left it at that.  But once I was pregnant, and considering that the circumcision question would have to be addressed in the event my baby was a boy, this story quickly came back to haunt me.  I had to know- what was the big deal that had changed everyone's minds? What was this incredibly persuasive argument?  I asked my Mom, but she again told me that she couldn't remember if she had even ever heard the argument. So I asked my Dad. Amazingly, he also couldn't remember what it was that Grandpa said that persuaded him. I am however still very curious and may ask him about it if I get a good opportunity.

In the meantime, I have made the educated guess that it was related to his military experience and the theories of the medical establishment at that time.

Like so many parenting decisions, the circumcision question is a tough one.  And if you have a boy, there is no escaping it.  I am not even sure that the "right" answer to this question is the same for everyone. But I do know that Heavenly Father will comfort and guide you if you invite His help through fasting and prayer.  


-----------------------------------------------------

If you are looking for additional resources with information against circumcision, I have compiled the following links with descriptions. While my husband and I decided not to circumcise our baby, I want to make it clear that this is a very personal decision and that many of the sites and videos I share below have opinions with which I disagree.

-This YouTube video (14:40) is a critique of an episode of "The Doctors" which aired on January 12, 2011 in which the panel of doctors discuss the proposed circumcision ban in San Francisco. The creator of the video tries to use logic-based arguments and has references at the end for his assertions. There are no visually graphic scenes (but because of the nature of circumcision, discussions are almost inevitably verbally graphic- we are talking about male anatomy), although some of his video-editing gets obnoxious and annoying (but it does get better later on).

-Ryan McAllister, PhD,  from Georgetown University has several YouTube videos regarding circumcision.
     -Child Circumcision: An Elephant in the Hospital (33:32) if you are interested in academic/scientific rebuttals to some of the controversial conclusions of various studies and arguments in favor of circumcision, he addresses several starting about 26 minutes in.  At the beginning he talks about the history of circumcision and the procedure itself and the functions of the foreskin and really its just an overall very thorough informative video- but it has a very strong anti-circumcision position and there is a graphic video of a circumcision being performed on an infant as well as pictures of male anatomy- he usually gives a warning/heads up before showing anything like that to give his audience an opportunity to turn away.
     - Unrepresented Voices in Circumcision (15:43) has some personal perspectives from men. The most memorable part of this video for me starts at 6:50 and is about a botched circumcision that was not medically addressed. There is also a brief clip of an interview with a circumcised gay man who is in a relationship with an intact man. There are pictures of male anatomy (without warning).

-Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon made a documentary on Circumcision called Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision (which I cannot recommend as it is *very* graphic, as I found out in the first 5 seconds of the YouTube preview- I only watched the first 8 seconds so I don't know much else about it). But honestly, this interview clip (3:27) had a big impact on me. This is exactly the sort of thing that is hardest and scariest for circumcised Daddy's to consider, but as a Mommy I am glad I saw this. This YouTube video (33:32) is an interview he gave on how he decided to make the film (Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision) and some of his experience and perspective on circumcision (which is not visually graphic- only shows him talking)- one of my favorite quotes in this starts at 18:53 where he says "Its not a comfortable subject. Its not something people want to spend time thinking about. If you are a circumcised man it is definitely not something you want to think about. And if you've done this to someone else- if you're a mother or a father who has done this to your child, its probably not something you want to think about. And that sort of covers a lot of people." One of the most indisputable statements on circumcision I have ever heard!

-History of Circumcision (it says "short history" but it still takes a fair amount of time to read) also, if you prefer, Chronological Timeline of Circumcision (doesn't really get interesting until about the 12th century)

-THIS page contains the basic intactivist spiel. It is not particularly academic or scientific, but it does contain links that are more so.  What probably hit me hardest was this little piece at the end:

It takes a brave man to admit

that his sexuality might not be

all that it could be.

It takes a strong man

to grant his son

something that was taken from him.

-How male infant circumcision harms women. This is at the very end for a reason.  I almost didn't include it at all. There are other resources for information on this subject if you are really interested, but I will share two. THIS essay by Ronald Goldman, PhD, is very thorough- too thorough in fact- I don't agree with all of his suggestions for harm, but as he mentions, more research is needed (Also, he refers to THIS study, but I did not notice an actual reference). Speaking of research, there is THIS article from sciencenordic.com about some research that has been done and what the results were. 

When The Internet Calls You Names

In case this is the first post you are reading- I subscribe, at least partially, to multiple controversial parenting philosophies.  This makes me (along with everyone else who reads the internet with an opinion) an anonymous target. And yes, sometimes it hurts- and not just in the way that stupid hurts. 

One of the crappiest things about parenting in this era of the internet (which has a LOT of benefits) is that you cannot realistically shield yourself from the plethora of anonymous voices out there who, no matter what you choose to do or not to do, no matter whether you follow the mainstream or the beat of a distant drummer, they will call you names. They will call you ignorant, naive, foolish, irresponsible, and even abusive. And that can cut deep.

You would think I would be accustomed to web-based vitriol directed towards those groups with whom I count myself, since I have been very politically involved and opinionated since at least middle school. I grew up noticing the political slant in subtly political stories and recognizing when my views were being called names. And sometimes it infuriated me, and sometimes I took it a little personally, but as I grew up I found that I took it personally less and less frequently. I knew how "the other side" perceived my views and how they categorized my intellect, compassion, and soul. And I could live with that.

But with parenting, its different. When people attack my political views my vulnerable part turns off- it doesn't have to be personal. But when people attack my religion, and when people attack my parenting, it seems to hit the same soft spot. The main difference is that with religion you will almost always have that moral majority expressing their disgust with those who openly attack others for their religious views- whatever they are. You don't need to be Amish to feel a bursting of compassion towards them and anger or frustration towards any anonymous internet commentator who is purposely attacking their religion.  Essentially, you don't have to be with them to be for them. But with these explosive parenting decisions, the philosophy seems to be far more harsh.

Like religion, parenting frequently comes down to faith. No matter how many people begin their accusations of you and your philosophy with phrases like "FACT-- studies x, y & z PROVE..." or "this link to this well-respected organization's website...." or "history shows..." the miserable truth is that there are studies that demonstrate, or suggest, or imply almost anything you want. There are organizations that are well-respected that are wrong, or that change their position on all sorts of topics throughout their existence. And history can be studied and interpreted a whole host of different ways- and many of them are valid. You will have to decide, for example, whether or not to circumcise your son. You can't decide to stay out of it- your son will either be circumcised or intact. And whichever you choose, you will likely have the studies and the documentaries, and the organizations and whatever else, that convinced you to make whichever decision you did. But the fact is, that these are the things that you decided to trust. There are studies and organizations that suggest this procedure carries benefits that make it worthwhile, there are studies and organizations that suggest the opposite. Some will be more convincing to you than others. Those are the ones you have faith in. It will still come down to faith. As scientific as the medical field tries to be, it isn't that simple. A friend of mine recently graduated from her nursing program. As she was studying for her test she posted the following on facebook:

So sick of studying for nursing. Graduation is riding on an exam worth 40% of my grade and this is the crap I have to deal with!Textbook:"dont splint fractured ribs it increases the Risk for ineffective breathing"Teachers:"use splinting to decrease pain of breathing""

Don't tell me that you are either with the science or against the science! It isn't that simple.

I hope as I "grow up in parenting" I will find that I take it personally less and less frequently, but in the meantime, I will try to practice compassion and understanding for others' parenting as I travel this wide opinionated world.

Blessed with Life

THIS has to be one of the most amazing and surprising articles I have come across in a long time! I can't remember exactly where I was introduced to the story, anyway it is from LifeSiteNews.com and the headline reads "Unborn child just a ‘parasite’? Cutting edge science shows fetal cells heal mother for life" by Peter Baklinski.  So, as usual, I have highlighted my favorite portions, and have some additional thoughts at the end.

January 4, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A standard pro-abortion argument hinges on the premise that a baby inside his mom’s womb attacks her bodily integrity. The developing baby is seen in this light as an intruder, a parasite, a threat to the woman’s autonomy. From this perspective the pregnant woman is viewed as being occupied. The only way she can continue to exercise her interest in bodily integrity, the argument goes, is to be liberated through the termination and expulsion of the invader.
But science paints a vastly different picture about the actual relationship between a baby in utero and his or her mother, showing that, far from being a parasite, the unborn child can help heal his mother for the rest of her life, as beneficial cells from the child pass into the mother’s body during pregnancy.
Science writer Jena Pinctott explores this relationship in her October 2011 book “Do Chocolate Lovers Have Sweeter Babies?: The Surprising Science of Pregnancy.”
Science has been studying the phenomena of fetal cell microchimerism for more than 30 years, after researchers at Stanford University were shocked in 1979 to discover a pregnant mother’s blood containing cells with Y sex chromosomes. Since women only have X chromosomes, they concluded that the cells must have entered into her body from the male baby she carried within her.
Drawing on studies in biology, reproductive genetics, and epigenetics, Pincott outlined in her book what science has learned since the Stanford discovery. “During pregnancy,” she wrote, “cells sneak across the placenta in both directions. The fetus’s cells enter his mother, and the mother’s cells enter the fetus.”
Scientists have discovered, she said, that a baby’s fetal cells show up more often in a mother’s healthy breast tissue and less often in a woman who has breast cancer (43 versus 14 percent).
Pinctott pointed out that as the quantity of fetal cells in a mother’s body increase the activity of autoimmune conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis decreases. She called the evidence “tantalizing” that fetal cells may offer the mother increased resistance to certain diseases.
One kind of fetal cells that enter into the mother’s body is the baby’s stem cells. Stem cells have what Pinctott calls “magical properties” in that they can “morph” into other types of cells through a process called differentiation. The baby’s fetal stem cells can actually become the mother’s own cells that make up her liver, heart, or brain.
In what any ethicist might declare to be legitimate ‘embryonic stem cell therapy,’ the baby’s fetal stem cells migrate to the mother’s injured sites and offer themselves as a healing remedy, becoming part of the mother’s very body. Pinctott writes that such cells have been found in “diseased thyroid and liver tissue and have turned themselves into thyroid and liver cells respectively.”
Pinctott calls the evidence “striking” that a baby’s fetal cells “repair and rejuvenate moms.”Genetics specialist Dr. Kirby Johnson of Tufts Medical Center, Boston, and professor Carol Artlett, a researcher at Philadelphia’s Thomas Jefferson University, back up Pinctott’s ideas. Their research shows that when a woman becomes pregnant she acquires an army of protective cells - what might be called a gift from her child - that remains with her for decades, perhaps till the end of her life.
Johnson and Artlett spoke to NPR’s Robert Krulwich in a 2006 interview.  In their research, Johnson found that a teaspoon of blood from a pregnant mother contained “dozens, perhaps even hundreds of cells… from the baby.” Science has shown that at the end of a mother’s pregnancy, up to 6 percent of the DNA in her blood plasma comes from her baby.
“One would expect them [the fetal cells in the mother’s body] to be attacked fairly rapidly. You would expect them to be cleared within hours, if not days. What we found is that that is not the case, not anywhere near the case,” Johnson said.
Artlett pointed out that even if a woman miscarries or deliberately aborts her child, the cells of the unborn child nonetheless remain with the mother, even for decades.Both Johnson and Artlett defend the hypothesis that the baby’s fetal cells have a beneficent purpose, not to hurt the mother, but to protect, defend, and repair her for the rest of her life, especially when she becomes seriously ill.“There’s a lot of evidence now starting to come out that these cells may actually be repairing tissue,” said Artlett.
During the interview, Johnson told the story of one woman who was admitted into a Boston hospital with symptoms of hepatitis. She was an intravenous drug user with five pregnancies on record: one birth, two miscarriages, and two abortions. Johnson speculated that she would be carrying a lot of fetal cells.In the process of examining her, the medical team performed a liver biopsy. A sample of her liver was sent to a lab to see if any fetal cells had congregated in the diseased area of her liver. What they found surprised them. “We found hundreds… and hundreds of fetal cells,” said Johnson, adding that they saw “literally sheets of cells, whole areas that seemed to be normal.”
Scientists are still trying to determine what causes the baby’s cells to work with the mother’s body in such a synergetic fashion. Pinctott wonders how many people have left their DNA in a mother’s body. “Any baby we’ve ever conceived,” she concludes.
Pinctott sees something “beautiful” in this. “Long post postpartum, we mothers continue to carry our children, at least in a sense. Our babies become part of us, just as we are a part of them. The barriers have broken down; the lines are no longer fixed.”
Perhaps it is not at all poetic to say along with Pinctott that a baby lives a lifetime in a mother’s heart and mind.

It may be that further research finds that this effect is much less significant than this research suggests, or that it is possible for this effect to be unhelpful in some cases. But for right now, it is a really beautiful thought that every baby I conceive, whether or not I am able to raise them, will leave a physical legacy in my body as a testament to their beginnings. 

Remembering Pregnancy Loss- by Olivia Hinebaugh

So it seems last month was Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness month and Olivia Hinebaugh wrote a particularly touching article for mothering.com entitled Remembering Pregnancy Loss.  She was able to put into words many of the feelings I remember experiencing that I struggled to define and explain. 

I do not share my experience with everyone, and I try to be selective about who I share it with and how I share it. But, I am not always careful enough, and there have been one or two times that I have regretted it. Interestingly, it has always been with women who have suffered a miscarriage themselves. Not everyone, it seems, feels a deep emotional pain of loss with early miscarriage. But I do. I didn't know how to explain it before, but Olivia's words were perfect: "But when I saw that line [confirming that she was pregnant], my heart made some extra space for that baby--a space that is still there, still empty." 

Later she says, (emphasis mine)

"My friends who knew I was pregnant did their best. They said: “You’ll have another,” and “it wasn’t meant to be.” But I loved this baby. How could they say that? I wanted a sympathy card. Or flowers. Or acknowledgement that I hadn’t made this whole thing up. One of my friends heard of the miscarriage and immediately came over and fixed me dinner. This was truly a kindness. My grandmother sent me an email of condolence. I saved it. I saved the home pregnancy test. I saved the onesies and the bib. I needed to know that this baby was real and that I loved it.

When I hear that friends of mine have lost a pregnancy. I remember how I felt. I write them a card of condolence. I give a little memento for their baby. Something they can look at. Something to know that it was real. Perhaps my friends don’t need these to grieve, but in case they do, they know that I grieve with them and remember their baby."

I love these suggestions and wish I had thought of them myself when I found out a friend of mine was suffering though this experience. 

If you have experienced early pregnancy loss, or if you are close to someone who is experiencing pregnancy loss, I recommend you read this piece in its entirety.  To some, pregnancy loss is not a big deal, but it was for me and for Olivia and it may be for you- and that is a perfectly valid feeling. 

What I Want My Sisters to Know About Circumcision

There are some topics that I actually try to stay away from in conversations with people.  Circumcision is definitely one of them- luckily it doesn't come up often.  However, this blog isn't for people, it is for my sisters- and I don't want to avoid any important topics with them.  In fact, I want to make sure I cover all the important topics with them- and that is why I have decided to write this post.

Circumcision is a tough subject though. A really tough subject. It is so very personal and, at least when we were faced with the question of whether we would circumcise or not, it felt so pressing.  The problem was, as much as those against it would say that if you didn't do it, you could always change your mind later, that didn't really ring true for us... for my husband in particular. Yes, you could circumcise your 2, or 4, or 8 year-old, but it would be a memorable traumatic experience.  As far as my husband was concerned, if it was going to happen it had to happen early- very early. And I can't blame him for being very grateful that he doesn't remember his.

But we found that there is a great deal of conflicting information out there- much of it in angry and alarmist tones- on both sides. Both sides 'debunk' the 'myths' perpetuated by the other side.  They can't seem to concede a single assertion- babies do get adequate pain blockers (or any other argument for or against)- they don't- they do, back and forth all day long. You will find that most mainstream publications from the US lean in favor of the procedure to varying degrees, and most 'studies' about the procedure are either outdated or performed under questionable conditions.  Which makes all the (often redundant) information even harder to sift through.  Things may not have actually been worded that strongly, but it felt like if we didn't do it our son would get cancer after a never-ending series of UTIs and HIV susceptibility and if we did do it he would bear emotional scars, never enjoy sex, and discover through primal therapy that he could remember the experience! It felt like a lose-lose (and made having a girl seem so much simpler).

And yet, we were able to come to a decision. Since we had a girl it is a decision we have not yet implemented, but at least it is settled for when the time comes.

So, let me start with my strongest feelings about circumcision. I am a strong believer in parental rights (those of you to whom I am not related who are joining this conversation: don't be obtuse- I am not advocating the idea that parents should be able to do anything with or to their children- just hold on to your hats).  I do consider circumcision to be a parental decision (ie; not a government decision); however, like all parental decisions, circumcision is not a decision to make based on convenience or ignorance. I also believe parents have a responsibility to make informed decisions, which should reduce the likelihood of regretting that decision later.  

I will share the information that had the most influence on my decision and perhaps in subsequent posts I will share some additional relevant info.

Of course I first considered circumcision from my religious perspective. I was familiar with the fact that circumcision was commanded by God in the old testament, and that, as the Bible Dictionary explains "The Church under direction of Peter and the Twelve, and acting under the guidance of the Spirit, declared that circumcision was not obligatory for gentile converts. However, it apparently did not settle the matter of whether or not Jewish members of the Church should have their children circumcised." I appreciate that it also adds "As one reads the scriptures on the matter, it becomes evident that the real issue was not circumcision only but also the larger question as to continued observance of the law of Moses by members of the Church. The word circumcision seems to have been representative of the law in these instances." However, this did not make it clear to me what the best course of action was for my baby. Clearly new converts are under no obligation to be circumcised- but is it still preferable? It can't be a requirement for exaltation (or else it would be required for converts), but are there benefits to having it done anyway? I appreciated these scriptures, but still felt unsure.

Ultimately, the piece of information that had the biggest influence on me personally was learning that biblical circumcision and modern circumcision are NOT the same thing. When I first started learning about this, all I knew about circumcision was that it was a surgical procedure done to the foreskin, which is part of a baby boy's penis- which is about as much as a lot of baby-books tell you. In some health class I remember hearing about some medical benefit(s) of circumcision (which may or may not be 'debunked'), and thinking "oh, well that must be why God commanded the Jews to practice circumcision." But, because I don't believe God intended our bodies, which are made in His image, to have useless parts (which we have already found about most of those 'useless' organs we used to surgically remove without much thought, such as the appendix), this did seem to be a rather unusual case to me.  As it turns out, the circumcisions practiced by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were more of a cut (Zipporah was able to circumcise her son with a stone in Exodas 4:25) that was intended to supply some drops of blood for a covenant and leave a scar to mark the person with the covenant. I really like the way this this blog explains it. The circumcisions practiced in modern hospitals are more like amputations which remove hundreds of feet of nerves, and tens of thousands of nerve-endings.  Fatal hemorrhaging is a risk of the procedure even today. All of this information had a profound effect on the way I thought about the possibility of having my son circumcised.  

So, I told my husband that I was comfortable with two options: leaving our son intact or circumcising him the biblical way. This settled the discussion since he answered that he was comfortable with two options as well: circumcising or not circumcising- but he was not okay with our son having something done to him that nobody does anymore.

If you would like additional circumcision information from an LDS perspective THIS is a neat pamphlet of info. Please note that the pamphlet was not created, nor is it distributed by, the leaders of the church.

5 Ways to Revolutionize How We Think About Pregnancy Loss by Jessica Zucker, Ph.D.

Not to start on a sad note, but this has been on my radar lately and I will start with some of the tabs that are on my browser right now.  I will quote the article in full below, with my comments embedded in maroon throughout. The original article can be found HERE 

There is no one "right" way to feel after experiencing pregnancy loss. Stop. Re-read that. It is so true, and important to recognize whether you are the soul experiencing it or the soul trying to help. The trauma continuum is vast and varied. Every woman comes to this loss with differing maternal hopes, historical disappointments, pregnancy fantasies, relationships with their bodies, interpersonal support, psychological and spiritual resources and mental health landscapes. And these things do have a strong influence. However, in my clinical practice, I have witnessed an overriding shame-laden thread that invariably weaves through the grief-stricken stories I am privileged to hear. Why are women blaming themselves for something over which they have zero control? My hunch is that the pain of wanting something so badly and not knowing if it can be attained, or having no control over something so elusive as fetal development, is too terrifying to sit with. As a result, we scurry around, desperate for definitive answers and when there are none, blame ends up clutching onto our shoulders, leaking into our psyches and settling into our bodies.
Whether it has happened to you or someone you love, here are five ways we can revolutionize how we think about pregnancy loss and its aftermath, with the aim of unraveling the thread of shame:
1. Endeavor to Understand Self-blame. I have heard countless stories of pregnancy loss and a subsequent rush toward self-blame. Here's a sampling of ruminating what-if's:
"What if I miscarried because I don't deserve to experience the mystery of motherhood, exercised too much, am too old, too young, wasn't sure if I wanted a child, had a sip of wine, stopped believing in God when I was a kid, had too much sex while pregnant, desperately wanted to be a mother-- maybe I wanted it too much.""What if I was too obsessive, too invested, too aloof, too attached....?"All of these thought patterns underscore how steadfast the mind/heart can be in tirelessly trying to make sense of the dizzying despair that can accompany pregnancy loss. It might hurt too much to resist chasing every line of thinking, every possible pregnancy indulgence, every behavioral regret, every everything. Please know that just because you feel this way, does not make your blame justified. Take validation in knowing that it is easy to feel this way and many women do, but just because you may feel it is your fault and you may find arguments to justify that feeling, does not make it true. But, here's the thing: self-blame spirals into shame in a millisecond. As researcher Brene Brown aptly states, "Shame is lethal. And I think we are swimming in it deep. Here's the bottom line with shame. The less you talk about it, the more you got it. Shame needs three things to grow exponentially in our lives: secrecy, silence, and judgment." Can we attempt to sit in solace, rather than create more angst through appropriating misinformation or believing misguided stories we tell ourselves? Can we disband self-judgment and rest in the unknown?
2. Forfeit Control. There is an illusion that by pinpointing a reason why this happened, a solution can be harnessed and straddled for next time. Why? Because we prefer to act than to feel, to strive rather than to be, and to problem "solve" as opposed to wading through psychological discomfort. But do we really have control over our fertility? Over something as minuscule as chromosomes? Reproductive technologies often provide further confusion over what we have ultimate control over. But even when technologies assist women in achieving the family they long for, the health and development of a fetus is out of everyone's hands, no matter the level of scientific expertise. The American Congress of Obstetricians Gynecologists reports that 10-25% of pregnancies end in miscarriage sorry to interrupt mid-sentence, but I just want to point out that with that statistic note how likely it is that your sisters, mother, or friends have experienced this -- a glaring statistic which further serves to inform us that no matter how driven, accomplished or psychologically sturdy we are, we can't necessarily escape the unfortunate numerical facts.
3. Honor Uniqueness. Even if your sister, best friend, colleague and/or neighbor had a miscarriage too, trauma reverberates, hibernates and maybe even evaporates differently for everyone. Rather than comparing and contrasting stories and possibly projecting our own experience elsewhere, we might simply ask how she is feeling and inquire about what her emotional temperature is at any given moment. Checking in again, even months after the trauma, might be the very thing she was yearning for. Every day is different and grief knows no timeline. This. A thousand times this. It might be tempting to compare, by minimizing or magnifying, the pain of a loss at six weeks versus 20 weeks, but why go there? Loss is excruciating, no matter how far along we are in days/weeks/months. "Well, at least you were only six weeks. You can always try again in a few months," doesn't necessarily help assuage the sadness, the numbness or the fear of the future.
4. Lean into the Trauma. Despite how counterintuitive it seems, leaning into trauma might be the very antidote to drowning in it. Most people are poised to eschew trauma at any cost rather than excavate it, with the determined hope that avoiding/denying will magically whisk away dark experiences. In Dr. Mark Epstein's New York Times article "The Trauma of Being Alive," he states: "In resisting trauma and in defending ourselves from feeling its full impact, we deprive ourselves of its truth. The reflexive rush to normal is counterproductive. In the attempt to fit in, to be normal, the traumatized person (and this is most of us) feels estranged." We benefit from disbanding the notion that mourning is avoidable and has a finite end point.
5. Acknowledge the Courage. The courage it takes to endeavor to conceive again after trauma is noteworthy. I'm in awe over the millions of women who experience pregnancy loss and muster the physical and psychological wherewithal to enter into the unknown yet again. I am equally amazed by the courage it takes to declare that one is opting not to wade back into potentially painful or maybe potentially joyful waters. It takes a certain kind of self-understanding to know when to stop, to understand our limits and to honor them.

On a personal note, I believe having the right support system can make a big difference.  I want my sisters to know that I am honored to play whatever role in that support system you may need.  

 k