My Coming Year: Front Page News

I stopped in a local coffee shop this morning on my way to school (a rarity for me... especially before an 8:30 class) and the Metro newspaper on the table caught my eye: "Mothers rally for midwifery" read the headline.

In Canada, midwives are covered in the government funded healthcare, which is sort of bittersweet in my opinion. Midwives=good. Government healthcare=bad. I digress... in Halifax, they seem to be lacking. Currently, the IWK [local hospital] has suspended all the midwives because of a labor shortage.

At this point you are probably wondering why on earth I am writing about midwives.

A year and a half ago, when I graduated high school I was utterly lost. Since I had grown up in the suburbs of west Houston I was supposed to go to university, but had no idea what I wanted to study or do afterwards. I like science, I like heath, I like babies, but I really did not want to be a nurse. I wrestled with such a range of jobs: linguist, statistician, and yes, even owner of a bed and breakfast. Then, through some late nights scouring the internet for ideas, it struck me: pregnancy massage therapy. Ever since then, everything has come together beautifully. I really can't explain it. Since I can remember, I have had a great sense of awe for pregnant women, and something that cannot be described in any other way but a passion to serve them. I'd just not known what to do with it until then.

Yes, I am at university studying mathematics. I do like math after all, and a degree is handy, but I have had a very interesting experience here, because unlike my fellow math students, I have no intention of having a job in this field afterwards. There are some math subjects, like analysis, that you would use constantly in employment. Others, like cryptography, you would use if you somehow got a job with the CIA. So while my fellow students are filling up their schedules with analysis, I fill up with game theory and cryptography (also useful topics, but not the kind that get you employed). I have also taken Biblical Hebrew, Nutrition, Anatomy, and History of Scotland, and I have loved it.

However, through all of this, I have been itching to start with the massage therapy. When the opportunity came up in November (three days before the class started...) to get my postpartum doula training, I jumped at it.

To be continued...

The Dirty Dozen

Since I've been back in Calgary, I've been doing the grocery shopping for my mom. I actually really love it! It's like shopping, but for necessities. And it's a game to figure out the best prices, and the best apple in the pile.

One thing I've had trouble with was deciding to buy organic or not. Of course, organic is no doubt healthier, but some things hold more pesticides than others anyways. Wouldn't it be great to know what fruits and vegetables were worth the extra financial cost?

The day after I was mulling this over, I found this adorable cheat sheet! It's available to be printed off, and has the good produce on one side and the "dirty dozen" on the other, complete with illustrations for the illiterate.

I've got to go grocery shopping, because I've been slack in my duties the last couple days, what with the two weddings I am in over the next two weeks. :)

The Jon and Kate Debacle

Well, since every tabloid is getting nosy, I'm going to take advantage of this somewhat unsurprising event to give my opinion on "Jon and Kate Plus 8." I have watched the show twice. I know one of my readers is (or was, not sure what her opinion is now) a die hard fan.

Let me preface by saying that when I was babysitting several months ago, a young girl wanted to watch "Jon and Kate" and her parents always let her, etc etc. I said no. You can watch it with your parents when they get back, but I didn't feel it was appropriate for her to be watching at her age. First off, from the, maybe forty minutes I have seen of the show, I was very disappointed. The family is advertised as being a Christian family (If you'd like to argue that, then why is their biography in Christian bookstores and the Christian aisles of secular bookstores?), but I do not have a sense of peace when watching them. Sure, they have eight kids. Sure, that causes stress and tension. My family is a perfect example of faulty relationships. However, if you know your family needs to work on its character traits of patience and peace, then why invite a camera crew in to broadcast every dramatic scene? It appeared to me, quite frankly, to be a family that wanted to be in the spotlight and was willing to foster drama to get there.

Now, on the topic of their separation, I think the reasons given are beautiful goals, but the execution is wrong. They both stated in video interviews that they were getting separated because they wanted to give their children a peaceful environment. Separation does not create a peaceful environment. It creates a void in the children's life. Sure, they still have a mom and dad, but they do not have parents. They don't get to witness the interaction between two grown adults on a day-to-day basis. Furthermore, bitter feelings eventually create resentment. Just because the two parents aren't there to bicker in front of their children does not mean there will not be bickering. Bitterness seeks out common areas to take a stance, and for them, this will be their children. Even if they say they won't, they will try to gain the preference of their children at the cost of the other. My parents said they wouldn't (and I can tell they tried not to for a long time) but after being separated for five years, the jabs just get worse.

Next, the arrangements that they have made for their children seem to shine the spotlight on their weakness of placing their children before their marriage. They have decided to keep the children at one house, and each live their on their separate days. They referred to it as the "children's house". Whoa. Does anyone see the world these children are being raised in? They are being taught that they are the center of their world.

This show (both before and after the announced separation) has turned me completely against reality TV (not that I was a fan before this show appeared). I find it absolutely revolting what people will do for fame and money. Apparently, Jon mentioned that he was annoyed with paparazzi following the family's every move, but both have agreed that the show will go on... through the divorce. Hopefully people will watch it long enough to see what a messy and depressing solution divorce is to their problems.

*Sigh* Oh, Canada

I'm a little ticked at the whole democratic system. We had an election. Conservatives won. Now the opposition is forming a coalition and taking over. They claim Canadians aren't happy with Stephen Harper's economic plan. Well, then why would they vote for him!??! Everyone knows he's a conservative and wasn't going to spur on the economy. Not much has changed in the last couple months. It's "a slap in the face to all who voted in October."

They're leaving the decision up to the political candidates that usually vote with their party anyway. Insane!

Here is a good editorial.

Come to Canada

Because we're number 2! :P

Step It Up, Dudes!

It's a sad, state of affairs out there...

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=102408A

Yes, I'm Asking For It

I don't want to talk about politics now. Really, I've had enough.
So I'm not- here are two articles which, though written at the extremes, I agree with. I wouldn't write them so assertively, though I probably should... so I'm starting my assertiveness by backing them. Here they are:

"Sarah Palin... Ya, I'm Going There"

"More Thoughts On Palin" (written by the same blog author)

Ok, forget that. I'm writing. I really don't know how to feel about this. I mean, this is an amazing step for Republicans to have such a pro-lifer, family-lover on board, but like the article said, this is a major responsibility, and I have qualms putting her in such a position over so many people. How she organizes her life is her business, and I am in no position to judge, but it's all very oxymoronic and ironic. Ah the inner turmoil. This election is becoming so personally abnoxious that I'm glad I have 6 months... oops, 4 (where'd they go?) months till I'm 18.

I may write something less politicish soon.
Comment if you wish, but please no directed politicish/feminism/social equality arguments- I'm sick of it, though I will publish them for public discussion, unless requested not to.

Would You Make A Good President?

I just finished watching the Saddleback Forum, where Rev. Warren presented identical questions to both presidential candidates separately. It's probably the most I've heard from either man, and I'm starting to feel a little more hope than I was, either way. The fact of the matter is, Obama and McCain seem like strong men. I don't agree with each point that they make (though I was surprised to find myself favoring Obama over McCain in two answers). Their answering styles were unique- McCain was quick and to the point, and Obama meandered a bit. However, throughout the interview, what impressed me most were the questions. They were the type of questions I would ask my president. The topics were varied, but relevant to my life. Then I started thinking about my answers to the questions. Sure, not all were relevant ("Why do you want to be president?") but they gave me significant insight to myself. I've posted them below. Take some time to think about them- I believe they're questions we should all ask ourselves every once and a while. If you want, you can even pretend you're running for president.

1)Who are the three wisest people you know, and who are you going to rely on heavily?
2)What would be your greatest moral failure in your life, and what would be the greatest moral failure in America?
3)What was the most gut-wrenching decision you've ever made, and what is the process you used to make it?
4)What viewpoint did you have 10 years ago [personally, I'm going to go with 5, since 10 years ago I was a pipsqueek] that you have changed your mind on due to more knowledge/experience?
5)As a Christian, what does it mean to trust Christ on a daily basis?
6)Abortion: At what point is a baby entitled to human rights?
7)Define "marriage."
8)Do we still need federal funding for research on embryo stem cells?
9)Does evil exist, and if it does, do we ignore it, do we negotiate with it, do we contain it, or do we defeat it?
10)Would you require that faith-based organizations [church missions] forfeit their right [to hire those with similar beliefs (potential discrimination)] to access federal funds?
11)Do you think better paid teachers should be paid better (merit based pay)?
12)Taxes: Define "rich."
13)War: As an American, what is worth sacrificing American lives for? What would be the criteria for sending troops in for a genocide?
14)Which supreme court justice(s) would you not have nominated?
15)Would you be willing to create an emergency relief for orphans, like Bush did for AIDS?
16)What do you think the US should do to end religious persecution [worldwide]?
17)When do our right to security and our right to privacy collide?
18)In one minute, tell me why you want to be president?
19)What do you say to people who oppose me [as a pastor] asking you these questions [in a church]?

If you want, feel free to comment, though I'll definitely be moderating closely.

Grounded (aka "Excessive" Punishment)

Recently, a Quebec judge overruled a father's authority by saying his daughter was "excessively punished" when she was grounded. The details are in this article [National Post] and this article [Albert Mohler's Blog]. I'm not going to reiterate what they've said, but I want to look at one particular angle.

She's 12. She's in 6th grade. (I don't even remember most of 6th grade, and it was only 5 years ago!). What astonishes me most in this case is that she had the gull, at the age of 12, to fight this. At 17, I wouldn't take my parents to court because I couldn't go to prom. It's absurd. What makes it worse is it wasn't just a father's opinion, where he didn't think she should go in general. It was a punishment. So what happens the next time her father tries to punish her? Even if she doesn't take it to court again, she could threaten to. Now he'll second guess every decision he makes- talk about tough parenting.

In a way, it reminds me of one of my favorite books, My Sister's Keeper. In it, the parents of a girl who has cancer have another daughter who is compatible genetically with the first. Though they love both their daughters, the fact that they had the second with the intention of using her as a donor makes them inclined to abuse their right. She takes them to court for medical emancipation, because they want her to donate a kidney. Even then, they can still prevent her from going on camping trips; they just can't control her medical decisions. Taking away a parents right to be a parent leaves them with nothing.

Any 12 year old who takes her father to court for doing his job deserves to be grounded, but maybe that's a little exsessive.

Three Cheers For Starbucks

Warning: this was written very cheesily. (I blame the caffeine I'm on.)

Last week, I stopped in at Starbucks to buy two lattes and a granola parfait while balancing my wallet and keys. Luckily, Starbucks has nifty drink holders that allow you to carry three cups and a wallet with one hand, or I would have had to make multiple, awkward trips to my car. However, as I was at the till, I was trying to figure out how I would drive. Calgary roads tend to be slightly pothole-prolific, and as much as I love the smell of coffee, it's not the scent I want in my car. So, as they mixed the drinks, I stood and pondered the ways that Starbucks could improve upon their lids. My two, rather comical conclusions were 1) that they made two types of lids- one with a mouth hole and one without. You put the one without mouth hole on your drink as you drive, and when you get to your destination, switch! Or, better yet, 2) succumb to common gas station coffee lids and make ones that the customer opens themselves. Sure, it's not as classy, but it would cost less than two lids. Then my drinks came, and I left, slowly maneuvering the streets of the northwest. Luckily, I did not spill a drop, but the dilemma still nagged at me.

Then, today I went into Starbucks (really, I'm not that addicted) to get a frappuccino in celebration of the wonderful exam I finished and the beautiful day. As I was waiting for it to be mixed, I noticed a cup of green sticks at the stand. I couldn't really figure out what they were, but I figured that Starbucks had improved upon their wooden stir sticks by making them reusable. Then, a lady who had gotten two lattes (deja vu) reached over, pulled two out and placed them into the lid holes. I watched them slide down and, gasp, fit perfectly! My jaw dropped, I'm sure. Just a week after I had put my entrepreneurial mind to work for Starbucks, they had felt my pains and invented something for me! Ok, I'm not that egotistical. Turns out, these new "splash sticks" came out in April. Maybe they had a late release date for Canada.

Upon my research on these splash sticks, I came upon several comments that they are not environmentally friendly, etc etc. To that I would like to ask, what would the purpose of this stick be? It seems like Starbucks is trying to make a multipurpose stir stick, and thereby fade out their wooden ones. So, if it's something people are already using, I don't see how making it in a different material harms anything. In fact, plastic would improve the situation because they're simple to rinse and reuse (as opposed to wood that soaks in). Products like this and their cardboard sleeves are great opportunities for personal recycling.

And if I'm going to a fair-trade supporting shop (thereby environmentally aware) and spending $4.00 on a cup of coffee that I could be spending $1.25 on at Tim Horton's or Second Cup, I don't want it sloshing around in my car, so thank you Starbucks!

Picture from USA Today http://www.usatoday.com/money/advertising/adtrack/2008-04-13-ad-track_N.htm?csp=N008 (I think it's by Starbucks, but can't really tell).

FLDS Raid Update

Today, the Texas Court threw the case out. Overall, I think this was a good thing.

Even if there is abuse (as I'm sure there is) the case was presented as a group abuse, when cases should have been more individual. Plus there was a lot of confusion on details- apparently out of 31 of the "pregnant teens", at least 15 girls are older than 18, and even then, they can be legally married at 16, so being a pregnant teen is not illegal. Hopefully the abuse can be sorted out, and the raid will be a deterrant to future abuse.

Plus, now that the group has gotten more publicity, if something were to happen in the future it would be treated with fewer steriotypes and hopefully judged as any other family would be. I'm still not sure what they're going to do about the polygamy issue. At this point, I think it would be more detrimental spliting up the families again, and do more harm than good. Morally, I have an issue with it, but I'm not sure why something like that is a legal issue.

For more information: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat;_ylt=AkASZLQMQlSQNNqP93RHWaSs0NUE

Opinion on FLDS Raid

For some reason, the raid on the Fundamentalist Church of Later-Day Saints in Eldorado, Texas has really interested me. Removed from the whole religious perspective, and the polygamy (a whole other discussion in itself), the child custody case and government right balance is an interesting case study.
For those of you who have not heard anything about this, last week a 16 year-old called from the ranch and said she had been abused by her much older husband. She has not been found. This triggered a raid of the ranch, and a removal of 413 children and over a hundred mothers who chose to go with them. On one hand, there is then the possibility that the whole thing was fabricated. In hindsight, the raid may not ever be substantiated. Though this is a possibility, how, as a government official do you deal with that. I have watched a lot of lawyers tackle this question in video interviews from news stations, and they all say that it is the major point for the defense. However, nobody has pointed out that it is the duty of the government to investigate these situations.
That is my main point for the government's side. Beyond that, I think it was a overwhelming overreaction to a call. I have no doubt that abuse is occurring in the compounds. The whole basis for their second warrant was that they saw several pregnant teenage girls once they were on the compound for the first warrant. However, I think each case should have been treated individually, as large a job as that is. Just because a group practices a common religion doesn't mean that all the marriages are under-age (despite the religion's tenants, for those alone are not enough evidence to pursue the case).
At the same time, though the mothers are experiencing trauma like no other with their children away, it's hard to believe some of the things they are saying. At one point, a lady was asked if it is true that "14, 15, 16 year old girls married here?" and she replied that "this is about our children," and "we need to talk about our children and what they are doing." In several interviews, women have avoided this question by changing the subject, or saying "Not to my knowledge." When asked how old they were when they were married, they won't answer. When asked if they are in polygamist marriages, there are varied answers of "yes", and "I cannot say at this time."
The trial, the largest child custody case in the history of the US, begins tomorrow. Could you all please pray for the judge and lawyers as they prepare for the case, the children who are overwhelmed, and their parents.

Photo courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/slopjop/942931893/