A cat forum. CatBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CatBanter forum » Cat Newsgroups » Cat anecdotes
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

[OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 27th 06, 06:26 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke

On 2006-05-27 00:49:35 -0500, "Monique Y. Mudama" said:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...500875_pf.html


I

am *not* pre-pregnant. I am human. If I'm going to worry about
alcohol consumption, proper weight, and vitamins, it will be because
of *my* health, not some hypothetical baby. It's insulting. It's
demeaning. As a blog I found somewhere said, reading this makes me
want to down 20 shots of tequila and throw myself down the stairs.

I am not a baby factory. I am on birth control for a reason. Even if
I weren't, I would still find this kind of patronizing, "We know what
you want better than you do and don't trust you to figure out the
right end of a condom" bull**** infuriating.

Here's a quote from the WP article:

"We know that women -- unless you're actively planning [a pregnancy],
. . . she doesn't want to talk about it," Biermann said. So clinicians
must find a "way to do this and not scare women," by promoting
preconception care as part of standard women's health care, she said.

Now, that is scary. They're advocating that physicians not make the
distinction between treatments that are good for a woman and ones that
might be good for a hypothetical fetus.

*kicks Bush administration in the nads, hard*

This one really scares me, although apparently it's ongoing and only
tangentially related to the article ... a woman claims she can't get
access to the majority of epilepsy medications because she's female
and therefore potentially could get pregnant, even though she is
asking desperately to try different meds:

http://shadesong.livejournal.com/2871261.html

What an odd moment for me. In the past week, the wives of two of my
male friends gave birth. Certainly healthy babies are on my mind.
But don't call me pre-pregnant. What a crock.

I do find one poster's suggestion (somewhere; I've been googling
around and don't remember all the places I went) that all men should
be advised to start a "pre-child support" account amusing.


Oh for God's sake. Why don't you just wrap us up in tissue paper and
not allow us to do anything "workplace hazards" "cat feces". So, the
bottom line is impose as many limitations as possible on any woman
because she MIGHT at SOME POINT get pregnant. This is SOOOOO incredibly
Big Brother I can barely keep from throwing up.

  #12  
Old May 27th 06, 06:28 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke


"Karen" wrote in message
news:2006052712263516807%kchuplis@alltelnet...
On 2006-05-27 00:49:35 -0500, "Monique Y. Mudama"

said:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...5/AR2006051500
875_pf.html

I

am *not* pre-pregnant. I am human. If I'm going to worry about
alcohol consumption, proper weight, and vitamins, it will be because
of *my* health, not some hypothetical baby. It's insulting. It's
demeaning. As a blog I found somewhere said, reading this makes me
want to down 20 shots of tequila and throw myself down the stairs.

I am not a baby factory. I am on birth control for a reason. Even if
I weren't, I would still find this kind of patronizing, "We know what
you want better than you do and don't trust you to figure out the
right end of a condom" bull**** infuriating.

Here's a quote from the WP article:

"We know that women -- unless you're actively planning [a pregnancy],
. . . she doesn't want to talk about it," Biermann said. So clinicians
must find a "way to do this and not scare women," by promoting
preconception care as part of standard women's health care, she said.

Now, that is scary. They're advocating that physicians not make the
distinction between treatments that are good for a woman and ones that
might be good for a hypothetical fetus.

*kicks Bush administration in the nads, hard*

This one really scares me, although apparently it's ongoing and only
tangentially related to the article ... a woman claims she can't get
access to the majority of epilepsy medications because she's female
and therefore potentially could get pregnant, even though she is
asking desperately to try different meds:

http://shadesong.livejournal.com/2871261.html

What an odd moment for me. In the past week, the wives of two of my
male friends gave birth. Certainly healthy babies are on my mind.
But don't call me pre-pregnant. What a crock.

I do find one poster's suggestion (somewhere; I've been googling
around and don't remember all the places I went) that all men should
be advised to start a "pre-child support" account amusing.


Oh for God's sake. Why don't you just wrap us up in tissue paper and
not allow us to do anything "workplace hazards" "cat feces". So, the
bottom line is impose as many limitations as possible on any woman
because she MIGHT at SOME POINT get pregnant. This is SOOOOO incredibly
Big Brother I can barely keep from throwing up.


I'm with you on that one, Karen. People have been having children for at
least 8,000 years. Was a government involved then? Was there even a
government? Please...........

kili


  #13  
Old May 27th 06, 06:30 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
jmcquown wrote:

I have known since I was 16 years old I didn't want to have
children. 30 years later I'm still taking measures to prevent it.
I agree with you, this is patronizing as hell and implies any woman
who is fertile will act with casual disregard for not only their own
health but the health of a child who does not yet exist. I started
menstruating at age 13; does that mean I should have been taking
folic acid since then? I don't think so!


What's your objection to folic acid? I didn't read the
article, but I was well past child-bearing age when a
nutritional specialist M.D. I consulted put me on folic
acid. He said there were studies that appeared to show that
generous doses of folic acid (I take 2400mcg daily) prevent
uterine cancer. I never much cared whether I reproduced or
not - it didn't happen, but I just figured "that's life".
However, I see no reason NOT to take supplements that may be
beneficial, just because they prescribe them for pregnant
women, as well!


I have no objection to folic acid, but this article is recommending anyone
who is of age to become pregnant needs to start taking it immediately. Why?
And who is going to pay for it? IMHO, most supplements are *very* expensive
and aren't covered by insurance (assuming you have insurance). If my doctor
recommends folic acid, I'll be happy to take it. Otherwise, my point is,
the government isn't going to tell me I must take it.

Jill


  #14  
Old May 27th 06, 06:45 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...500875_pf.html

I am *not* pre-pregnant. I am human. If I'm going to worry about
alcohol consumption, proper weight, and vitamins, it will be because
of *my* health, not some hypothetical baby. It's insulting. It's
demeaning. As a blog I found somewhere said, reading this makes me
want to down 20 shots of tequila and throw myself down the stairs.

I am not a baby factory. I am on birth control for a reason. Even if
I weren't, I would still find this kind of patronizing, "We know what
you want better than you do and don't trust you to figure out the
right end of a condom" bull**** infuriating.

Here's a quote from the WP article:

"We know that women -- unless you're actively planning [a pregnancy],
. . . she doesn't want to talk about it," Biermann said. So clinicians
must find a "way to do this and not scare women," by promoting
preconception care as part of standard women's health care, she said.

Now, that is scary. They're advocating that physicians not make the
distinction between treatments that are good for a woman and ones that
might be good for a hypothetical fetus.

*kicks Bush administration in the nads, hard*

This one really scares me, although apparently it's ongoing and only
tangentially related to the article ... a woman claims she can't get
access to the majority of epilepsy medications because she's female
and therefore potentially could get pregnant, even though she is
asking desperately to try different meds:



Someone mentioned "The Handmaid's Tale" on another thread. This somehow
made me think of that novel again. ;o/

--
Marina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki.
Stories and pics at http://koti.welho.com/mkurten/
Pics at http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/frankiennikki/
and http://community.webshots.com/user/frankiennikki
  #15  
Old May 27th 06, 06:48 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:

I still do want the perks available through corporate health
insurance, but I also want to see everyone in the US cared for. The
problem IMO is that the socialized medicine countries got it wrong --
no one's willing to pay the taxes.


I'm perfectly willing to pay the taxes for our universal health care. Or
did you mean that Americans are not prepared to pay the taxes?

--
Marina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki.
Stories and pics at http://koti.welho.com/mkurten/
Pics at http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/frankiennikki/
and http://community.webshots.com/user/frankiennikki
  #16  
Old May 27th 06, 07:10 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke


"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in message
...


jmcquown wrote:

I have known since I was 16 years old I didn't want to have children.

30
years later I'm still taking measures to prevent it. I agree with you,

this
is patronizing as hell and implies any woman who is fertile will act

with
casual disregard for not only their own health but the health of a child

who
does not yet exist. I started menstruating at age 13; does that mean I
should have been taking folic acid since then? I don't think so!


What's your objection to folic acid? I didn't read the
article, but I was well past child-bearing age when a
nutritional specialist M.D. I consulted put me on folic
acid. He said there were studies that appeared to show that
generous doses of folic acid (I take 2400mcg daily) prevent
uterine cancer. I never much cared whether I reproduced or
not - it didn't happen, but I just figured "that's life".
However, I see no reason NOT to take supplements that may be
beneficial, just because they prescribe them for pregnant
women, as well!


Folic acid is actually a good idea for both sexes, especially for people
with cardiac risk factors. The purpose mentioned here is preventing neural
tube-related birth defects.

I take supplemental folic acid with great confidence that I will not become
pregnant, but to lower blood levels of homocysteine, an amino acid that
plays a role in atherosclerosis and possibly the predisposition to heart
attacks.


  #17  
Old May 27th 06, 07:21 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke


"Marina" wrote in message
...
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:

I still do want the perks available through corporate health
insurance, but I also want to see everyone in the US cared for. The
problem IMO is that the socialized medicine countries got it wrong --
no one's willing to pay the taxes.


I'm perfectly willing to pay the taxes for our universal health care. Or
did you mean that Americans are not prepared to pay the taxes?


It always ends up sounding like the only people in the US who get health
care are those with employer insurance and those who are wealthy.

There are a lot of provisions for low cost and free health care for low
income families, for children and for the elderly and disabled. All paid
for by our taxes.

There are low cost insurance plans in many states for low income people.

The biggest holes in the system are those who do not have jobs that pay for
insurance. And who in theory earn enough to buy their own insurance but
choose not to.

Of course its a long way from perfect and needs a great deal of improvement.

Jo


  #18  
Old May 27th 06, 07:40 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke

Marina wrote:
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...500875_pf.html

I am *not* pre-pregnant. I am human. If I'm going to worry about
alcohol consumption, proper weight, and vitamins, it will be because
of *my* health, not some hypothetical baby. It's insulting. It's
demeaning. As a blog I found somewhere said, reading this makes me
want to down 20 shots of tequila and throw myself down the stairs.

Someone mentioned "The Handmaid's Tale" on another thread. This
somehow
made me think of that novel again. ;o/


I have that novel around here somewhere. Might need to read it again

Jill


  #19  
Old May 27th 06, 07:47 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Benefits for Low Income (WAS: [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke)

Jo Firey wrote:
"Marina" wrote in message
...
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:

I still do want the perks available through corporate health
insurance, but I also want to see everyone in the US cared for. The
problem IMO is that the socialized medicine countries got it wrong
--
no one's willing to pay the taxes.


I'm perfectly willing to pay the taxes for our universal health
care. Or did you mean that Americans are not prepared to pay the
taxes?


It always ends up sounding like the only people in the US who get
health care are those with employer insurance and those who are
wealthy.

There are a lot of provisions for low cost and free health care for
low income families, for children and for the elderly and disabled.
All paid for by our taxes.

There are low cost insurance plans in many states for low income
people.

The biggest holes in the system are those who do not have jobs that
pay for insurance. And who in theory earn enough to buy their own
insurance but choose not to.

Of course its a long way from perfect and needs a great deal of
improvement.

Jo


The problem is the term "families". I have to purchase my own personal
health insurance. I don't qualify for any sort of assistance from the
government because I don't have children. I have NO income; I'm living off
my retirement fund and gifts from my family and friends. I don't get any
assistance from the government because I don't have children. Trust me,
I've checked into it. There also isn't a "national" healthcare plan; all
the rules are up to the individual states. Maybe in another state I could
get some assistance and not have to pay for my own insurance, but not in TN.
I don't qualify.

I also don't qualify for food stamps (WIC), but I *can* go to the food
pantry and get a box of food if need be; they don't have such stringent
requirements.

Somehow I'm managing to hold it all together but I'm not sure how long I can
keep this up.

Jill


  #20  
Old May 27th 06, 08:55 PM posted to rec.pets.cats.anecdotes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [OT] Pre-pregnant? I think I'm gonna pre-puke


"Jo Firey" wrote in message
et...

"Marina" wrote in message
...
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:

I still do want the perks available through corporate health
insurance, but I also want to see everyone in the US cared for. The
problem IMO is that the socialized medicine countries got it wrong --
no one's willing to pay the taxes.


I'm perfectly willing to pay the taxes for our universal health care. Or
did you mean that Americans are not prepared to pay the taxes?


It always ends up sounding like the only people in the US who get health
care are those with employer insurance and those who are wealthy.

There are a lot of provisions for low cost and free health care for low
income families, for children and for the elderly and disabled. All paid
for by our taxes.

There are low cost insurance plans in many states for low income people.

The biggest holes in the system are those who do not have jobs that pay

for
insurance. And who in theory earn enough to buy their own insurance but
choose not to.


Or can't. Even when I was earning a very good salary in Virginia, even when
I was looking at high-deductible policies coupled to Medical Savings
Accounts, no company would accept me for private insurance as an individual.
There were some options through professional societies, but at $1000/month
or more with 2-3 year exceptions for preexisting conditions.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cat Puke Rachel Cat health & behaviour 2 March 8th 06 06:34 AM
[OT] Why we love children - humor CatNipped Cat anecdotes 9 November 28th 05 04:27 AM
is cat really pregnant? Calvin Rice Cat health & behaviour 20 August 8th 05 01:17 PM
[OT] Yowlet Update 30th March 5am Yowie Cat anecdotes 15 April 4th 04 02:39 AM
When is it ok to fix a pregnant Queen? Mike Romain Cat health & behaviour 14 October 10th 03 05:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CatBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.