Again I find myself apologizing for the blog silence. There are a few reasons I have been quiet.
First of all, my ex has been reading my posts and complaining to players in our divorce about what I write on here. So, I am not writing more about our divorce on here.
Secondly, I have been pretty busy. I have been doing the holiday thing with the kids, family and friends. I did get a few days off work. I am actually pretty happy to get back. I am enjoying pulmonology, and may look into doing a 4th year elective with the same attending physician. I am getting pretty good at ABGs.
I am not so good at EKGs. I did a module on EKGs using this ECG Wave-Maven, and I am really confused by a 5:4 AV Wenkebach. I could spot the MI’s, which is a relief, I guess.
So, there is more stuff I wish I had the energy to talk about. Mtv had an episode of “16 and Pregnant” called No Easy Decision in which one of the teen moms gets pregnant again, and decides to terminate the pregnancy. I have not seen it, but I think there are actually three young women who discuss choosing abortion. From what I have heard, it is a well put together show. Exhale has put together a site called 16 and loved that supports her coming forward with her story.
California Watch published a report entitled “As early elective births increase so do health risks for mother, child”. Thanks to Jill at The Unnecesarean for covering this.
CNN had an article on CNN.com called “Mom defies doctor, has baby her way” about a woman who had a home birth VBA3C (vaginal delivery after 3 cesareans). She was alternately painted as reckless and also as having no other option. How is a woman supposed to have a VBAC in a facility “with staff immediately available to provide emergency care” if practitioners who deliver in these facilities refuse to attend VBACs?
Anyway, I’m back, at least for the time being. I hope my son’s guardian doesn’t tell me he got an earful about my blog again. I am not airing all of our dirty laundry on here. Believe it or not, this is reticence.
Sungold has a great post up at Kittywampus about the little known use of the copper IUD as emergency contraception. I wrote a reply, and figured I would share it here:
No one seems familiar with this whenever I bring it up, and that includes ob/gyn clinicians. In the US, IUDs are supposed to be just as acceptable to insert in nulliparous (never had a baby) women as parous (has had a baby) women. As Sungold pointed out, that is not the reality for all women. I was actually told by my ob/gyn that I wasn’t a good candidate, even though I had already had a baby, because I was divorced. (!!)
According to a midwife who taught me about birth control, the reason why IUDs were not recommended for nulliarous women were because so many of them successfully sued over the Dalkon shield. The company had to pay a much higher settlement to women who never got to have children due to their injuries than they did to those who already had children. The indications for the newer IUDs, including the copper T, originally said the ideal candidates were parous women, but that is no longer the case. New recommendations say that pretty much any woman who does not have active pelvic inflammatory disease is a good candidate.
The Dalkon shield was a completely untested, unresearched, unregulated piece of scrap metal. The copper IUD is a much more carefully created and substantiated device. It has a higher rate of continuance of use than any other form of birth control. Not only do I have an IUD, but the IUD is an incredibly popular form of birth control among female ob/gyns I have very unscientifically surveyed.
The main issue I can see with using IUDs as emergency contraception is that the standard of care is to screen for and treat STDs, particularly gonorrhea and chlamydia, before insertion. With conventional screening, time for results, and then treatment if necessary, you are probably running over the 5 day window. So, even if USian practitioners were comfortable with using the IUD as emergency birth control theoretically, this protocol may be a barrier.
(Trigger warning, description of forced medical procedures)
Governor Charlie Crist of Florida vetoed Florida HB 1143, which would require transvaginal ultrasound (also known as the affectionately as the “dildocam”) for women seeking abortion in Florida, above and beyond what was medically necessary (which would be more likely a much less invasive transabdominal ultrasound if needed for dating purposes). In fact, many women consider being forced to have a vaginal procedure against their will as medical rape.
Gov. Crist said:
“This bill places an inappropriate burden on women seeking to terminate a pregnancy. Individuals hold strong personal views on the issue of life, as do I. However, personal views should not result in laws that unwisely expand the role of government and coerce people to obtain medical tests or procedures that are not medically necessary. In this case, such action would violate a woman’s right to privacy.”
I was one of the many Florida voters who emailed and called to urge for this bill to be vetoed.
Charlie Crist was elected to governor as a Republican. I have been a fan of his since his election. He has continuously been a moderate who is highly practical and responsive to the state’s will and needs. He is running for Senate now, but will be running as an Independent, due to a far right tea party challenger.
I hope this veto helps him with the moderate and liberal vote. I will be voting for him. Sorry, Kendrick Meek, but Crist continues to deliver.
I have gotten my share of hostile comments, but I think I have gotten my first death threat. I considered not letting it through the spam filter, but I decided to let it stand in all its hostile, angry glory.
Funny, I thought my first comment wishing death to me and my children would come from an anti-choice troll. Ironically, this seems to be from a childfree, also anti-choice but anti-choice in a different way, troll. I have always thought it was B.S. when people say being attacked from both sides means you must be doing something right. I am still not sure if it’s the case that I am doing something right, but at least I look better than these balls of hate.
When someone tries to defend being anti-choice because women need to “accept responsibility” for their actions (i.e. having sex), it always confuses me. I even heard a classmate use that as an excuse to be against birth control, also. I have always thought avoiding unwanted pregnancy, and not bringing unwanted children into the world was much more responsible than using babies as some sort of punishment for fertile women and girls.
Please read this article in the Nation about birth control sabotage as part of abuse.
Here is a chilling passage (emphasis mine):
In the largest study of this phenomenon to date, “Pregnancy Coercion, Intimate Partner Violence and Unintended Pregnancy,” published in the January issue of the journal Contraception, lead researcher Elizabeth Miller and others surveyed nearly 1,300 16- to 29-year-old women who’d sought a variety of services at five different Northern California reproductive health clinics. Among those who had experienced intercourse, i.e. who could be at risk of unintended pregnancy, not only did 53 percent of respondents say they’d experienced physical or sexual violence from a partner, but one in five said they had experienced pregnancy coercion; 15 percent said they experienced birth control sabotage, including hiding or flushing birth control pills down the toilet, intentional breaking of condoms and removing contraceptive rings or patches. These figures were consistent from clinic to clinic.
Who do we want taking responsibility for what actions? Who are we blaming for unplanned pregnancy? And, who will suffer if these reproductive clinics (like Planned Parenthood) have their funding stripped?
Sorry about the heavy. I will try to bring back some poop jokes.