Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] doom and gloom--cessation,and plea for critical thinking
[email protected]
In a message dated 4/16/01 8:57:26 AM, sld29@... writes:
<< Butting in here- what I gather from all of Sandra's posts is not that
she is arguing to be right, rather she is opening her mind to discuss
other possibilities. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Sandra, but I'd be
willing to bet Sandra would have been open to the possibility of WRONG. >>
The reason I'm so often right is that I run my ideas and knowledge up against
other ideas and knowledge all the time, and if I find something better or
that seems more useable, workable or otherwise "right," it becomes mine. I'm
learning from other people all the time. Maybe that's why when it seems
someone has an unworkable or baseless idea I'm surprised if they seem
unwilling to consider input from me or others about it.
My husband taught me a cool thing, years ago. I used to get really
frustrated when I was in my 20's when people would make what seemed
mysterious assumptions about my abilities or motives or something, and he
said, "People assume that you are like they are." I forget to recite that
to myself sometimes, but it has shown itself to be true over and over again,
and so it stays in the 'things I believe' set.
Sandra
<< Butting in here- what I gather from all of Sandra's posts is not that
she is arguing to be right, rather she is opening her mind to discuss
other possibilities. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Sandra, but I'd be
willing to bet Sandra would have been open to the possibility of WRONG. >>
The reason I'm so often right is that I run my ideas and knowledge up against
other ideas and knowledge all the time, and if I find something better or
that seems more useable, workable or otherwise "right," it becomes mine. I'm
learning from other people all the time. Maybe that's why when it seems
someone has an unworkable or baseless idea I'm surprised if they seem
unwilling to consider input from me or others about it.
My husband taught me a cool thing, years ago. I used to get really
frustrated when I was in my 20's when people would make what seemed
mysterious assumptions about my abilities or motives or something, and he
said, "People assume that you are like they are." I forget to recite that
to myself sometimes, but it has shown itself to be true over and over again,
and so it stays in the 'things I believe' set.
Sandra
Sarah
Juli wrote:
To me, it seemed to be a determination from allButting in here- what I gather from all of Sandra's posts is not that she is arguing to be right, rather she is opening her mind to discuss other possibilities. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Sandra, but I'd be willing to bet Sandra would have been open to the possibility of WRONG. She asked for quotes and sites and back up with fact. She did not ask or accept urban legend as a citation for her personal bibliography. I think if Sandra had been presented with *the* source that backed up theory with fact or statistics she would have had some fun and mind opening experience in, once again, reevaluating her best theories.
involved, from the very beginning, to be RIGHT. Or to
argue for the sake of argument.Every day--partly from Sandra's posts, partly from interaction with family and friends, partly from TCS theory--I learn to discard antiquated theories in favor of more correct or plausible theories. What's the harm in questioning the paradigm, and opening oneself to a new idea?
I agree with Sandra that unschooling should be about opening one's mind to all possibilities.
Sarah Anderson-Thimmes
Lynda
Let me preface this with a disclaimer. This is not a personal attack
on anyone, it is a question of equity. The discussion in question really
took off when a piece of gossip with racial undertones was used as an
example.
As to the balance, several sites have been given
including one which clearly showed that another example used was still in the
testing phase and that the latest research (http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/fead6.htm) found "the response was not statistically
significant."
Several of the responses have had nothing to do
with the discussion simply a let's take sides sort of posts.
So, here is my question (again which I expect to
get no actual response to), why can an opinion/theory/gossip/urban
legend (which is precisely what the statement about c-sections was) be
stated without any references/bibliography/documentation and/or links, as were
all the points of the original discussion. Then if someone disagrees
with any of the points, even when they provide links and quotes from
folks*** who lived through part of the span in history inwhich the subject of
the discussion took place, do people persist in saying that no links or sources
have been given.
The fact remains that bloodletting was deadly and
that the current medical practices of bloodletting are discussing apples and
oranges. Bloodletting does not cure hemorrages, it does not cure sore
throats, it does not cure the plague and diseases aren't caused by humors and
getting rid of the humors by perging, starving, vomitting and bloodletting are
going to cure any of those diseases. Now, if someone can find me a site
that says that the illnesses they were trying to cure by that method are now
being cured by bloodletting, then we are talking apples to apples, oranges to
oranges. The use of leeches NOW is not for bloodletting but rather for
increasing blood flow. Again apples and oranges. The only thing that
is used for the same reason now as it was then is maggots. Maggots were
allowed to eat the dead flesh and they have been found to be an good
resource and documented by the medical community resource
for removing gangrene and narcrotic flesh.
Therefore maggots comes under "was o.k., then was
yukky and unacceptable and now is o.k." Apples to apples.
Lynda
***I can't find the post with the comment about my
spelling (please note that I have a slightly lopsided grin and a twinkle in my
eye as I say this) of the gentleman's name. Yes he was the Frenchman and
no he isn't someone new. I hold out my hands to the spelling police (again
I am grinning here!) and throw myself on the mercy of the court. I plead
being language-challenged due to a French teacher in 8th grade who was from
Mexico, lived in East LA and spoke French with a Spanish/East LA accent.
Being determined to learn French, I again took a class in 9th grade. New
teacher. Yippee, a French teacher with a French name. ~~sigh~~
Well, French parents who had immigrated to Ireland and then lived in the
Bronx. I will leave to your immagination his accent. I am now able
to read a little French but couldn't spell it or speak it if my life depended on
it.
So, I for one will not be upset if someone corrects
me if my French leaves a bit to be desired. O.K., so it leaves a whole lot
to be desired <g>
----- Original Message -----From: SarahButting in here- what I gather from all of Sandra's posts is not that she is arguing to be right, rather she is opening her mind to discuss other possibilities. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Sandra, but I'd be willing to bet Sandra would have been open to the possibility of WRONG. She asked for quotes and sites and back up with fact. She did not ask or accept urban legend as a citation for her personal bibliography. I think if Sandra had been presented with *the* source that backed up theory with fact or statistics she would have had some fun and mind opening experience in, once again, reevaluating her best theories.Every day--partly from Sandra's posts, partly from interaction with family and friends, partly from TCS theory--I learn to discard antiquated theories in favor of more correct or plausible theories. What's the harm in questioning the paradigm, and opening oneself to a new idea?
I agree with Sandra that unschooling should be about opening one's mind to all possibilities.
Sarah Anderson-Thimmes
Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[email protected]
In a message dated 4/16/01 10:50:37 AM, lurine@... writes:
<< So, here is my question (again which I expect to get no actual response
to) >>
That is already challenging.
<<why can an opinion/theory/gossip/urban legend (which is precisely what the
statement about c-sections was) be stated without any
references/bibliography/documentation and/or links, as were all the points of
the original discussion. >>
The point of the original was that some ideas which are considered unworthy
of consideration, wacko, dangerous, racist, goofy, unscientific or wrong are
sometimes later found to have been not so crazy after all. And some things
which are considered Good and Right are later found to have been not so good
and not so right.
Antibiotics.
Milk being good for everyone.
Baby formula (i.e. evaporated milk and sugar) being as good as breast milk.
It would not be racist to suggest that African Americans are more likely to
be lactose intolerant than northern Europeans. It would be insanely
"politically correct" to treat everyone exactly the same, medically,
regardless of genetic liklihoods. To test all of Iceland for sickle cell
anemia, or Mexico for Tay-Sachs would be a misuse of medical testing. Would
it be racist to screen FIRST before checking only those with a possibility of
having the disease? My friend Carol lost a baby from having amniocentesis to
check for Tay-Sachs or Epstein Barr or something which she could only have
had if she AND her husband were Eastern European Jews. Her husband is Irish
Catholic. They tested her anyway. Someday amnio will be seen as a horror
foisted upon many women against their wills, but right now it's not. The
doctor told her it was a one in a million chance that it was the amnio that
caused that miscarriage. Let's see... the miscarriage started within about
20 hours of the amnio, and the statistics I've seen are between 1 in 100 and
1 in 300 (180/200 are most quoted) on ANY amniocentesis causing loss of
pregnancy. Those were the stats last I knew, when I was involved with
cesarean prevention.
<<Yes he was the Frenchman and no he isn't someone new. >>
But he wasn't a medical guy either. We could quote Shakespeare for period
quotes, but as he was writing characters who aid all KINDS of things
Shakespeare himself didn't necessarily believe to be true, quoting
Shakespeare to prove some sort of point wouldn't work. Same. That's why I
was asking context. Was it a letter to someone about medicine? Or was it a
character in a play? Or a political essay in which he was being figurative?
Sandra
<< So, here is my question (again which I expect to get no actual response
to) >>
That is already challenging.
<<why can an opinion/theory/gossip/urban legend (which is precisely what the
statement about c-sections was) be stated without any
references/bibliography/documentation and/or links, as were all the points of
the original discussion. >>
The point of the original was that some ideas which are considered unworthy
of consideration, wacko, dangerous, racist, goofy, unscientific or wrong are
sometimes later found to have been not so crazy after all. And some things
which are considered Good and Right are later found to have been not so good
and not so right.
Antibiotics.
Milk being good for everyone.
Baby formula (i.e. evaporated milk and sugar) being as good as breast milk.
It would not be racist to suggest that African Americans are more likely to
be lactose intolerant than northern Europeans. It would be insanely
"politically correct" to treat everyone exactly the same, medically,
regardless of genetic liklihoods. To test all of Iceland for sickle cell
anemia, or Mexico for Tay-Sachs would be a misuse of medical testing. Would
it be racist to screen FIRST before checking only those with a possibility of
having the disease? My friend Carol lost a baby from having amniocentesis to
check for Tay-Sachs or Epstein Barr or something which she could only have
had if she AND her husband were Eastern European Jews. Her husband is Irish
Catholic. They tested her anyway. Someday amnio will be seen as a horror
foisted upon many women against their wills, but right now it's not. The
doctor told her it was a one in a million chance that it was the amnio that
caused that miscarriage. Let's see... the miscarriage started within about
20 hours of the amnio, and the statistics I've seen are between 1 in 100 and
1 in 300 (180/200 are most quoted) on ANY amniocentesis causing loss of
pregnancy. Those were the stats last I knew, when I was involved with
cesarean prevention.
<<Yes he was the Frenchman and no he isn't someone new. >>
But he wasn't a medical guy either. We could quote Shakespeare for period
quotes, but as he was writing characters who aid all KINDS of things
Shakespeare himself didn't necessarily believe to be true, quoting
Shakespeare to prove some sort of point wouldn't work. Same. That's why I
was asking context. Was it a letter to someone about medicine? Or was it a
character in a play? Or a political essay in which he was being figurative?
Sandra
Tami Labig-Duquette
"People dont see the world as it is, but as they are" From Anna and the
king, and true :)
Tami
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
king, and true :)
Tami
>From: SandraDodd@..._________________________________________________________________
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] doom and gloom--cessation,and plea for
>critical thinking
>Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 11:47:47 EDT
>
>
>In a message dated 4/16/01 8:57:26 AM, sld29@... writes:
>
><< Butting in here- what I gather from all of Sandra's posts is not that
>she is arguing to be right, rather she is opening her mind to discuss
>other possibilities. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Sandra, but I'd be
>willing to bet Sandra would have been open to the possibility of WRONG. >>
>
>The reason I'm so often right is that I run my ideas and knowledge up
>against
>other ideas and knowledge all the time, and if I find something better or
>that seems more useable, workable or otherwise "right," it becomes mine.
>I'm
>learning from other people all the time. Maybe that's why when it seems
>someone has an unworkable or baseless idea I'm surprised if they seem
>unwilling to consider input from me or others about it.
>
>My husband taught me a cool thing, years ago. I used to get really
>frustrated when I was in my 20's when people would make what seemed
>mysterious assumptions about my abilities or motives or something, and he
>said, "People assume that you are like they are." I forget to recite that
>to myself sometimes, but it has shown itself to be true over and over
>again,
>and so it stays in the 'things I believe' set.
>
>Sandra
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Johanna
As we used to say "question authority" Heck,
question everything. My favorite way to learn! By the way, what is TCS theory?
Johanna
"Our hunger to be bigger than we are could be just delusions of grandeur or
it could be the very voice of God inside calling us to a larger inheritance, to
a bigger stake in reality, to a truer sense of our identity as the sons and
daughters of God." Bruce Larson
----- Original Message -----From: SarahSent: Monday, April 16, 2001 11:09 AMSubject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] doom and gloom--cessation,and plea for critical thinkingJuli wrote:
To me, it seemed to be a determination from allButting in here- what I gather from all of Sandra's posts is not that she is arguing to be right, rather she is opening her mind to discuss other possibilities. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Sandra, but I'd be willing to bet Sandra would have been open to the possibility of WRONG. She asked for quotes and sites and back up with fact. She did not ask or accept urban legend as a citation for her personal bibliography. I think if Sandra had been presented with *the* source that backed up theory with fact or statistics she would have had some fun and mind opening experience in, once again, reevaluating her best theories.
involved, from the very beginning, to be RIGHT. Or to
argue for the sake of argument.Every day--partly from Sandra's posts, partly from interaction with family and friends, partly from TCS theory--I learn to discard antiquated theories in favor of more correct or plausible theories. What's the harm in questioning the paradigm, and opening oneself to a new idea?
I agree with Sandra that unschooling should be about opening one's mind to all possibilities.
Sarah Anderson-Thimmes
Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Johanna
I have often told my children "remember not
everyone thinks the same way you do. Be willing to see another person's
view"
Johanna
"Our hunger to be bigger than we are could be
just delusions of grandeur or it could be the very voice of God inside calling
us to a larger inheritance, to a bigger stake in reality, to a truer sense of
our identity as the sons and daughters of God." Bruce Larson
----- Original Message -----From: SandraDodd@...Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 10:47 AMSubject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] doom and gloom--cessation,and plea for critical thinking
In a message dated 4/16/01 8:57:26 AM, sld29@... writes:
<< Butting in here- what I gather from all of Sandra's posts is not that
she is arguing to be right, rather she is opening her mind to discuss
other possibilities. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Sandra, but I'd be
willing to bet Sandra would have been open to the possibility of WRONG. >>
The reason I'm so often right is that I run my ideas and knowledge up against
other ideas and knowledge all the time, and if I find something better or
that seems more useable, workable or otherwise "right," it becomes mine. I'm
learning from other people all the time. Maybe that's why when it seems
someone has an unworkable or baseless idea I'm surprised if they seem
unwilling to consider input from me or others about it.
My husband taught me a cool thing, years ago. I used to get really
frustrated when I was in my 20's when people would make what seemed
mysterious assumptions about my abilities or motives or something, and he
said, "People assume that you are like they are." I forget to recite that
to myself sometimes, but it has shown itself to be true over and over again,
and so it stays in the 'things I believe' set.
Sandra
Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
DiamondAir
> From: SandraDodd@...Irish
> My friend Carol lost a baby from having amniocentesis to
> check for Tay-Sachs or Epstein Barr or something which she could only have
> had if she AND her husband were Eastern European Jews. Her husband is
> Catholic. They tested her anyway.They can't give anyone an amnio against her will. She chose to be tested, in
an era where there is tons of information on the danger of that test
available. The miscarriage rates are indeed (as you state) about 1 in 200.
Anyone can hop on the internet and do a search and find this information.
This is nothing against you Sandra, but one of my big pet peeves is hearing
"then the doctors did *this* to me" in birth/pregnancy stories when women
really do have a choice (starting with choice of practitioner of course).
> Someday amnio will be seen as a horrorI'm curious about that one. To my knowledge it is not a standard test, and
> foisted upon many women against their wills,
indeed you have to sign several "informed consent" types of papers to even
have one. Usually they are suggested after an abnormal blood test reading
indicating some form of genetic problem. I was on a pregnancy list for each
of my kids (Sep '96 list and Oct '99 list) and only a few women out of the
hundreds on those lists had amnios. If there are doctors out there doing
them routinely, that would be scary. Let alone "forcing" women to have them.
> Thethat
> doctor told her it was a one in a million chance that it was the amnio
> caused that miscarriage.Hmmm, sounds like lawsuit material to me. That doctor is either lying or
vastly uninformed, or both. Personally, I'd make sure he wasn't doing this
to other women and killing other babies.
-Robin-
climbing off the ol' soapbox. Guess I can tell I haven't been doula-ing for
awhile when I can't stop from typing about birth subjects :-)
Blue Skies!
-Robin-
Mom to Mackenzie (8/28/96) "Asa is running her voice out"
and Asa (10/5/99) Who sings "the alien song"
http://www.geocities.com/the_clevengers Flying Clevenger Family
[email protected]
In a message dated 4/17/01 9:05:23 AM, diamondair@... writes:
<< I'm curious about that one. To my knowledge it is not a standard test, and
indeed you have to sign several "informed consent" types of papers to even
have one. >>
First the "genetic screening tests" (AFP and interview) and then the
boogie-man fears.
For moms over 35 it's treated as routine.
Yes, my friend consented, against my CONSTANT and noisy advice, and
booklists. Her mom said she should trust doctors and be on the safe side.
Her mom was wrong. They spent YEARS in fertility clinics to get that second
pregnancy.
The doctor should not have recommended it.
Yes, she should have said no, but unless she was screwing around on her
husband with an eastern European Jew, she shouldn't (by what is currently
believed) have been a candidate for that danger.
<<Hmmm, sounds like lawsuit material to me. That doctor is either lying or
vastly uninformed, or both. Personally, I'd make sure he wasn't doing this
to other women and killing other babies.>>
She didn't have the energy/ability/desire to think one extra thought about it
at that point. Devastation.
Sandra
<< I'm curious about that one. To my knowledge it is not a standard test, and
indeed you have to sign several "informed consent" types of papers to even
have one. >>
First the "genetic screening tests" (AFP and interview) and then the
boogie-man fears.
For moms over 35 it's treated as routine.
Yes, my friend consented, against my CONSTANT and noisy advice, and
booklists. Her mom said she should trust doctors and be on the safe side.
Her mom was wrong. They spent YEARS in fertility clinics to get that second
pregnancy.
The doctor should not have recommended it.
Yes, she should have said no, but unless she was screwing around on her
husband with an eastern European Jew, she shouldn't (by what is currently
believed) have been a candidate for that danger.
<<Hmmm, sounds like lawsuit material to me. That doctor is either lying or
vastly uninformed, or both. Personally, I'd make sure he wasn't doing this
to other women and killing other babies.>>
She didn't have the energy/ability/desire to think one extra thought about it
at that point. Devastation.
Sandra
Johanna
my heart goes out to your friend in her loss.
I never "trust" doctors implicitly. When I was pregnant with my third child
they recommended amniocentesis, because of a screwy blood test result. The odds
of a birth defect were 1/200 and the odds of a problem with the test causing
loss or miscarriage were 1/100. Right.
I didn't do it because I looked at the info. I
hate it when people pressure you to make a decision their way, and don't give
you the time to decide what's best for you.
Johanna
Life is the ultimate learning experience!
Life is the ultimate learning experience!
----- Original Message -----From: SandraDodd@...Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 11:06 AMSubject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: doom and gloom--cessation,and plea for critical thinking
In a message dated 4/17/01 9:05:23 AM, diamondair@... writes:
<< I'm curious about that one. To my knowledge it is not a standard test, and
indeed you have to sign several "informed consent" types of papers to even
have one. >>
First the "genetic screening tests" (AFP and interview) and then the
boogie-man fears.
For moms over 35 it's treated as routine.
Yes, my friend consented, against my CONSTANT and noisy advice, and
booklists. Her mom said she should trust doctors and be on the safe side.
Her mom was wrong. They spent YEARS in fertility clinics to get that second
pregnancy.
The doctor should not have recommended it.
Yes, she should have said no, but unless she was screwing around on her
husband with an eastern European Jew, she shouldn't (by what is currently
believed) have been a candidate for that danger.
<<Hmmm, sounds like lawsuit material to me. That doctor is either lying or
vastly uninformed, or both. Personally, I'd make sure he wasn't doing this
to other women and killing other babies.>>
She didn't have the energy/ability/desire to think one extra thought about it
at that point. Devastation.
Sandra
Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Lynda
Epstein-Barr is a virus, blood tests are done for evidence of EPB
antibodies. It can cause glandular fever in teens and is associated with
infectious mononucleosis and CFS.
Tay-Sachs on the other hand is something they test for with an amnio. It is
a genetic condition in which the body stores waste products in the cells or
tissues and the build up causes damage which results in the cell/tissues's
loss of ability to function properly. There are a whole family of these
diseases known as the NTSAD family and sometimes when doctors are testing
for something in that family, the only one that people pick up on from the
list is the Tay-Sachs because that one they've heard of. I mean, how many
folks have heard of Fabry, Gaucher, Niemann-Pick, Canavan, Sandhoff,
Krabbe, Wolman, Hurler or for that matter, Asparylglucosaminuria and that's
the short list.
As to genetics and it taking both, that only applies to the child having the
active disease, not to the child being a carrier. The woman could very
easily have the disease or carry the disease, her husband would not be a
factor in that. And, being Catholic has absolutely nothing to do with
whether or not one could be a carrier. To be a Jew is to be from an ethnic
group and does not mean that one is Jewish in religion. Where one is from
does not guarantee that is what one's complete ancestry is either. A real
good example of that is a group of Africans who have the same genetic coding
(Jewish Y-chromosome, not the European or African Y-chromosome) as a certain
sect of Jewish rabbis. As long as blood testing and genetic testing has
been around it was thought and then tested for and only this one group of
rabbis was found to have this one specific variant of the Jewish
Y-chromosome. Now a very small population of Africans have been found that
not only have practiced a form of Judiasm for hundreds of years but have
this specific Jewish Y-chromosome.
While amnios are done as a relatively safe procedure, orders for them aren't
handed out like the ones for ultrasounds. Knowing the age of the woman
would have some bearing on this discussion, however we don't have that.
It is common knowledge that anyone suffering a loss, be it miscarriage or
any other type of loss, looks for a reason and frequently looks for an
outside force to blame. The amnio is an easy target.
This is a good example of why everyone should take forms home and read them
carefully before signing them. The amnio consent forms are suppose to list
all the possible side effects and the possibility of miscarriage. She
should also have been given discharge orders which detailed what she should
be doing, what she should look for and what she should do it she had any
symptoms.
Since none of us have first hand knowledge of what her doctor did, we'll
never know if he did completely inform her and this is simply the result of
grief induced tramatic hysteria where everything is exaggerated or if he
should be slapped with a malpractice suit. We also don't really know if she
had an amnio or CVS, whether it was before 14 weeks (more risky, 5-7% chance
of miscarriage) or after 14 weeks (1% chance of miscarriage). Lots of
unknowns.
As to "Someday amnio will be seen as a horror foisted upon many women
against their wills" I doubt that it will as it has saved far too many
lives that would not have been saved without the knowledge gained with its
use. And, as Robin stated, it is hardly against their will, it is a choice
and it is also their choice not to make it an informed one.
Lynda
antibodies. It can cause glandular fever in teens and is associated with
infectious mononucleosis and CFS.
Tay-Sachs on the other hand is something they test for with an amnio. It is
a genetic condition in which the body stores waste products in the cells or
tissues and the build up causes damage which results in the cell/tissues's
loss of ability to function properly. There are a whole family of these
diseases known as the NTSAD family and sometimes when doctors are testing
for something in that family, the only one that people pick up on from the
list is the Tay-Sachs because that one they've heard of. I mean, how many
folks have heard of Fabry, Gaucher, Niemann-Pick, Canavan, Sandhoff,
Krabbe, Wolman, Hurler or for that matter, Asparylglucosaminuria and that's
the short list.
As to genetics and it taking both, that only applies to the child having the
active disease, not to the child being a carrier. The woman could very
easily have the disease or carry the disease, her husband would not be a
factor in that. And, being Catholic has absolutely nothing to do with
whether or not one could be a carrier. To be a Jew is to be from an ethnic
group and does not mean that one is Jewish in religion. Where one is from
does not guarantee that is what one's complete ancestry is either. A real
good example of that is a group of Africans who have the same genetic coding
(Jewish Y-chromosome, not the European or African Y-chromosome) as a certain
sect of Jewish rabbis. As long as blood testing and genetic testing has
been around it was thought and then tested for and only this one group of
rabbis was found to have this one specific variant of the Jewish
Y-chromosome. Now a very small population of Africans have been found that
not only have practiced a form of Judiasm for hundreds of years but have
this specific Jewish Y-chromosome.
While amnios are done as a relatively safe procedure, orders for them aren't
handed out like the ones for ultrasounds. Knowing the age of the woman
would have some bearing on this discussion, however we don't have that.
It is common knowledge that anyone suffering a loss, be it miscarriage or
any other type of loss, looks for a reason and frequently looks for an
outside force to blame. The amnio is an easy target.
This is a good example of why everyone should take forms home and read them
carefully before signing them. The amnio consent forms are suppose to list
all the possible side effects and the possibility of miscarriage. She
should also have been given discharge orders which detailed what she should
be doing, what she should look for and what she should do it she had any
symptoms.
Since none of us have first hand knowledge of what her doctor did, we'll
never know if he did completely inform her and this is simply the result of
grief induced tramatic hysteria where everything is exaggerated or if he
should be slapped with a malpractice suit. We also don't really know if she
had an amnio or CVS, whether it was before 14 weeks (more risky, 5-7% chance
of miscarriage) or after 14 weeks (1% chance of miscarriage). Lots of
unknowns.
As to "Someday amnio will be seen as a horror foisted upon many women
against their wills" I doubt that it will as it has saved far too many
lives that would not have been saved without the knowledge gained with its
use. And, as Robin stated, it is hardly against their will, it is a choice
and it is also their choice not to make it an informed one.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: "DiamondAir" <diamondair@...>
> > From: SandraDodd@...
> > My friend Carol lost a baby from having amniocentesis to
> > check for Tay-Sachs or Epstein Barr or something which she could only
have
> > had if she AND her husband were Eastern European Jews. Her husband is
> Irish
> > Catholic. They tested her anyway.
>
> They can't give anyone an amnio against her will. She chose to be tested,
in
> an era where there is tons of information on the danger of that test
> available. The miscarriage rates are indeed (as you state) about 1 in 200.
> Anyone can hop on the internet and do a search and find this information.
> This is nothing against you Sandra, but one of my big pet peeves is
hearing
> "then the doctors did *this* to me" in birth/pregnancy stories when women
> really do have a choice (starting with choice of practitioner of course).
>
> > Someday amnio will be seen as a horror
> > foisted upon many women against their wills,
>
> I'm curious about that one. To my knowledge it is not a standard test, and
> indeed you have to sign several "informed consent" types of papers to even
> have one. Usually they are suggested after an abnormal blood test reading
> indicating some form of genetic problem. I was on a pregnancy list for
each
> of my kids (Sep '96 list and Oct '99 list) and only a few women out of the
> hundreds on those lists had amnios. If there are doctors out there doing
> them routinely, that would be scary. Let alone "forcing" women to have
them.
>
> > The
> > doctor told her it was a one in a million chance that it was the amnio
> that
> > caused that miscarriage.
>
>
> Hmmm, sounds like lawsuit material to me. That doctor is either lying or
> vastly uninformed, or both. Personally, I'd make sure he wasn't doing this
> to other women and killing other babies.
>
> -Robin-
> climbing off the ol' soapbox. Guess I can tell I haven't been doula-ing
for
> awhile when I can't stop from typing about birth subjects :-)
>
> Blue Skies!
> -Robin-
> Mom to Mackenzie (8/28/96) "Asa is running her voice out"
> and Asa (10/5/99) Who sings "the alien song"
> http://www.geocities.com/the_clevengers Flying Clevenger Family
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Tracy Oldfield
> my heart goes out to your friend in her loss. I never "trust" doctorsScary thing with amnios is that the babies with 'birth defects' aren't
> implicitly. When I was pregnant with my third child they recommended
> amniocentesis, because of a screwy blood test result. The odds of a
> birth defect were 1/200 and the odds of a problem with the test
> causing loss or miscarriage were 1/100. Right. I didn't do it because
> I looked at the info. I hate it when people pressure you to make a
> decision their way, and don't give you the time to decide what's best
> for you.
> Johanna
> Life is the ultimate learning experience!
counted in the miscarraige risk... and there are doctors out there
who take an ultrasound, then trust that the baby hasn't moved
since, and do the amnio up to half an hour later (saw this on a
documentary before anyone shouts 'references!!') instead of doing
a 'live' ultrasound while they're doing the amnio... on the
programme there were babies where you could visibly see the
damage done, one in a leg and another in the brain. Not only
unnecessary, but much worse than Downs Syndrome would have
been.
They're probably much safer in the hands of someone competent,
including miscarriage rates (because of this type of malpractice.)
Tracy
[email protected]
In a message dated 4/17/01 12:12:07 PM, lurine@... writes:
<< And, being Catholic has absolutely nothing to do with
whether or not one could be a carrier. >>
And being Irish Catholic from the family and background he was means he was
not Jewish, nor Eastern European, nor were any of his many known ancestors.
<<Knowing the age of the woman
would have some bearing on this discussion, however we don't have that.>>
I do. She was over 35. And it wasn't a discussion. It was an example. A
single story. With a dead baby.
<<It is common knowledge that anyone suffering a loss, be it miscarriage or
any other type of loss, looks for a reason and frequently looks for an
outside force to blame. The amnio is an easy target.>>
If 1 in 200 is ADMITTEDLY (even by mainstream stats) causing "a loss" then
it's not just an easy target---if one in 200 people who got in a car, or ate
a banana, DIED, cars and bananas would be illegal.
<<Since none of us have first hand knowledge of what her doctor did, we'll
never know if he did completely inform her and this is simply the result of
grief induced tramatic hysteria where everything is exaggerated or if he
should be slapped with a malpractice suit. We also don't really know if she
had an amnio or CVS, whether it was before 14 weeks (more risky, 5-7% chance
of miscarriage) or after 14 weeks (1% chance of miscarriage). Lots of
unknowns.>>
I was getting the play by play two or three times a day during the week that
this happened, and during, and after the miscarriage. How about you drop it,
because I'm getting really grumpy now.
<<As to "Someday amnio will be seen as a horror foisted upon many women
against their wills" I doubt that it will as it has saved far too many
lives that would not have been saved without the knowledge gained with its
use. And, as Robin stated, it is hardly against their will, it is a choice
and it is also their choice not to make it an informed one.>>
I stand by my statement. There are tons of problems. When Marty was born
the woman in the room with me had decided NOT to abort her Down Syndrome baby
even though the geneticist and nurses and doctor had all pressured her to.
The baby was NOT Down Syndrome. Had she aborted when they advised her to, I
don't think they would have said "oops" to her in any way.
Women getting amnios are the test cases. They see the test results, the get
the pathology on the abortions, they don't report that stuff.
Another woman in town was told "girl" for sure, and got all girl stuff,
decorated girl style, had a boy.
If it's not reliable, not safe, and not being honestly recorded (Carol's
didn't go on stats; the doctor denied the relationship) why are they still
being done?
People are making money.
Sandra
<< And, being Catholic has absolutely nothing to do with
whether or not one could be a carrier. >>
And being Irish Catholic from the family and background he was means he was
not Jewish, nor Eastern European, nor were any of his many known ancestors.
<<Knowing the age of the woman
would have some bearing on this discussion, however we don't have that.>>
I do. She was over 35. And it wasn't a discussion. It was an example. A
single story. With a dead baby.
<<It is common knowledge that anyone suffering a loss, be it miscarriage or
any other type of loss, looks for a reason and frequently looks for an
outside force to blame. The amnio is an easy target.>>
If 1 in 200 is ADMITTEDLY (even by mainstream stats) causing "a loss" then
it's not just an easy target---if one in 200 people who got in a car, or ate
a banana, DIED, cars and bananas would be illegal.
<<Since none of us have first hand knowledge of what her doctor did, we'll
never know if he did completely inform her and this is simply the result of
grief induced tramatic hysteria where everything is exaggerated or if he
should be slapped with a malpractice suit. We also don't really know if she
had an amnio or CVS, whether it was before 14 weeks (more risky, 5-7% chance
of miscarriage) or after 14 weeks (1% chance of miscarriage). Lots of
unknowns.>>
I was getting the play by play two or three times a day during the week that
this happened, and during, and after the miscarriage. How about you drop it,
because I'm getting really grumpy now.
<<As to "Someday amnio will be seen as a horror foisted upon many women
against their wills" I doubt that it will as it has saved far too many
lives that would not have been saved without the knowledge gained with its
use. And, as Robin stated, it is hardly against their will, it is a choice
and it is also their choice not to make it an informed one.>>
I stand by my statement. There are tons of problems. When Marty was born
the woman in the room with me had decided NOT to abort her Down Syndrome baby
even though the geneticist and nurses and doctor had all pressured her to.
The baby was NOT Down Syndrome. Had she aborted when they advised her to, I
don't think they would have said "oops" to her in any way.
Women getting amnios are the test cases. They see the test results, the get
the pathology on the abortions, they don't report that stuff.
Another woman in town was told "girl" for sure, and got all girl stuff,
decorated girl style, had a boy.
If it's not reliable, not safe, and not being honestly recorded (Carol's
didn't go on stats; the doctor denied the relationship) why are they still
being done?
People are making money.
Sandra
Juli
--- SandraDodd@... wrote:
emphysema, etc. but I'd like to interject here that it
depends on how powerful the banana and car
manufacturers are. Cigarettes (to my unending dismay)
are not illegal. Juli
=====
You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him to find it within himself --Galileo
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
> If 1 in 200 is ADMITTEDLY (even by mainstream stats)I don't know the stats about smoking and lung cancer,
> causing "a loss" then
> it's not just an easy target---if one in 200 people
> who got in a car, or ate
> a banana, DIED, cars and bananas would be illegal.
emphysema, etc. but I'd like to interject here that it
depends on how powerful the banana and car
manufacturers are. Cigarettes (to my unending dismay)
are not illegal. Juli
=====
You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him to find it within himself --Galileo
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
DiamondAir
> From: SandraDodd@...second
> Yes, my friend consented, against my CONSTANT and noisy advice, and
> booklists. Her mom said she should trust doctors and be on the safe side.
> Her mom was wrong. They spent YEARS in fertility clinics to get that
> pregnancy.Oh, that is just so sad. Things like that make me feel so blessed by my easy
(all too easy maybe) ability to become pregnant and give birth.
Walking off muttering about #$@!#! doctors....and going to give my kids
some extra smooches...
Blue Skies!
-Robin-
Mom to Mackenzie (8/28/96) "Asa is running her voice out"
and Asa (10/5/99) Who sings "the alien song"
http://www.geocities.com/the_clevengers Flying Clevenger Family