The great birthing con is  taking choice away from women

Australia’s caesarean rate is  too high, but the Government is too scared to take on the doctors’ lobby  and legislate for midwife care.

AUSTRALIA’S  caesarean rate of more than 30 per cent is disgraceful. The World Health  Organisation recommends a caesarean rate of under 15 per cent, and the  First World countries closest to that are the Netherlands (13.6 per cent)  and Finland (16.1 per cent) – countries that have legislated one-on-one  midwife care and have a medical culture that supports it.

The world’s  best and safest care for low-risk pregnancies is one-on-one midwife care.  This care has been recommended by countless investigations and studies  because it drastically cuts rates of unnecessary caesareans and other  negative outcomes. Since New Zealand made sweeping legislation on birth  choices 13 years ago, the percentage of women there who choose midwifery  care has risen from 14 per cent to 80 per cent. There are sound medical  reasons for caesareans, but not 30 per cent worth. Some women and babies  are being ripped off.

How can the “too posh to push” consider that  they are making an informed choice when the president of the Royal  Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists,  Chris Tippett, is on record saying, “the risks of caesarean for the mother  are significantly greater, particularly if she has more than one  caesarean. And secondly, it is very doubtful that there is any protective  effect for the baby and there may be a significant disadvantage to the  babies.”

Answer? Negative optimism. Which is basically “it won’t happen  to me”.

Last year a US study of more than 5 million births found that  babies born by medically unnecessary caesarean were three times as likely  to die in the newborn period as those born vaginally.

Professor James  King , chairman of a ministerial advisory council on infant health,  recommends strict guidelines on caesareans for private and public  hospitals: “Caesareans divert funds from normal childbirth, but if you are  operating in a private, for-profit system there is no disincentive to put  a ceiling on that.”

Dr Andrew Child, head of obstetrics at Royal Prince  Alfred Hospital, has found that obstetricians in private practice fear  legal action if they refuse a caesarean and the woman then has a problem  birth. “They say, ‘if someone asks, we just go along with it’.”

Many  women are sucked in by the idea of a specialist because they want to be  special. You hear a lot of, “My obstetrician said that if I hadn’t had a  caesarean I would have died.” Of course they are going to say that. Show  me an obstetrician who has performed a caesarean and then said, “I’m  sorry, you actually could have delivered vaginally.”

For many women,  having a caesarean birth is like going to France and not seeing the Eiffel  Tower. They suffer guilt, loss, anger, grief and depression because of  feelings that they were bullied, coerced and manipulated at their most  vulnerable. Many feel conned and cheated by “defensive medicine”, which is  generally the route taken so that if legal action arises they can say, “At  least I did something.”

I spent a day recently calling six hospitals  asking for statistics on their birthing practices. I was greeted with,  “Who did you say you were? And where are you calling from? And why do you  want these statistics?” To which I replied, “To be informed.” I was then  told, “They’re confidential and we generally don’t give them out to the  public.”

Women generally make their decisions based on information from  their peers. The majority will simply choose the same care that the  majority of their family and friends choose.

So why won’t the Federal  Government legislate for safer births with better outcomes for mothers,  babies and society on the whole? Birth practices that would save the  taxpayers millions of dollars?

Tony Abbott is too gutless to take on  the doctors, because the doctors don’t want their profits or power eroded.  The mere suggestion that the Government might take away their honey pot  and power stick would have the AMA inciting panic and scare-mongering. It  would alienate voters because the public will always believe doctors over  politicians.

It is difficult to dismantle the deeply entrenched  cultural status that doctors have of being gods. They can’t all be that  smart, a fair whack of them vote Liberal. If they are so informed and so  infallible why do some doctors drink-drive, smoke cigarettes, have obesity  problems or take recreational drugs? Negative optimism fuelled by a deep  sense of superiority.

The Cochrane Collaboration, an international  not-for-profit independent organisation dedicated to providing information  about the effects of health care, offers this conclusion in its Guide to  Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth: “It is inherently unwise, and  perhaps unsafe, for women with normal pregnancies to be cared for by an  obstetric specialist even if the required personnel are available.”

I  rest my case.

Catherine Deveny and Daniel Burt. Talking Go Back To Where You Come From LIVE TODAY September 9th 3pm. Tickets at the door.

Catherine Deveny explains why 50 Shades of Grey is one of the worst books she’s ever read, with terrible writing and sexual politics alike – but she’s still really glad that people are reading, talking about and being turned on by it.

A few hours after I finished 50 Shades, I found myself at Costco.

I’m not proud of it, I was there for research. (Okay I was there for toilet paper. WHATEVER. I don’t judge your happy place.)

As soon as I walked into Costco, I was faced with 200 copies of 50 Shades Of Grey, plus similar amounts of other two – 50 Shades Darker and 50 Shades Freed – all at the mass-produced price of $9.97 each. A wall of porn.

Finding porn in between caterer packs of Cling Film and one kilo buckets of Vegemite in a warehouse can only be a good thing … (even if it is a badly-written book, being sold at a cathedral of corporate maggotry, environmental vandalism and competition consumerism).

CLICK TO READ MORE

I wrote this for The Age in 2008 and the wouldn’t publish it.

Isn’t this newspaper about varied voices, rigorous discussion and dissecting the important issues that affect us all? Isn’t Melbourne the place where we love a chat and are not afraid, indeed we relish a stoush, an argument and a heated discussion about what’s going on in our world no matter how close to home and uncomfortable it may be?

Isn’t Melbourne the culture capital, the coffee capital and the chinwag capital of Australia and weren’t we recently universally recognized as mad for words, bang up for ideas and not afraid of rigorous debate when UNESCO named Melbourne as it’s second city of literature.  Why Melbourne? Because we have more writers living in our town, more bookshops per head and because we devour more books, newspapers and magazines than anywhere else in this sunburnt country. And we’re proud of it.

Aren’t we passionate about bravely nutting out our changing world and isn’t this newspaper a crucial part of that?

The Age newspaper is an enormous part of the heart and soul of Melbourne.  It’s up there with trams, footy, potato cakes, pots of beer, Flinders Street Station, wenchy girls in black with red wine colored lips and blokes who proudly push prams. The Age sponsors, among other things, the Melbourne Comedy Festival and The Melbourne Writers Festival. Places people come for entertainment but often leave saited after being dazzled with ideas and  confronted with uncomfortable truths.

Then hang on here ladies and gents, can anyone explain to me why there have been no opinion articles published about Fairfax media cutting 550 jobs from their media business despite recording a net profit of $386.9 million for 2007-08. And no comment about Sydney Morning Herald’s Mike Carlton being sacked for refusing to cross the picket line and file his weekly column?   Fairfax promises that the cuts won’t undermine the quality of the newpapers and the CEO David Kirk suggest that it’s “mischievous” for outspoken staff to suggest otherwise. Isn’t it great we care? Isn’t that what you would want as an employer?  Employees that give a rats? Staff went on strike on Friday and the good news is that Fairfax Media has reached an agreement with the striking workers. So it’s business as usual.  For now.

Corporate anorexia is rife in these tumultuous times and Fairfax is no different to any other business.  Last year it posted a big fat healthy profit.  The job cuts are part of a predictive damage control initiative to combat the projected effects of the dramatic changes in mainstream media from print to digital. The whole media landscape is changing. We all know that.  The dissemination of information is moving online because that’s where the readers and the advertisers are heading.  But not all of them.  We’re from Melbourne.

Ben Eltham from New Matilda reported that The Age has been one of the very few newspapers anywhere in the western world to increase circulations in the past three years.  Do keep in mind that Melbourne is one of the only places in the world where Starbucks coffee and McDonald have been forced to close stores.  Yep you aren’t from round here are ya?

This paper, our paper was once run by a company with ink in it’s veins, a company passionate about newspapers.  It’s now run by a corporation.  Business people, accountants and lawyers who view news and information as a product. It’s your job, as readers, to keep an eye on them.   A newspaper is not the same as a fruit shop.  When you own a newspaper you have a corporate responsibility to contribute to and encourage national debate and to remember that you provide a community service, not just profits to the shareholders. The content of your newspaper and how it’s communicated effects the fabric of the society we live in and the culture we become. My kids want to eat ice cream for breakfast everyday.  That doesn’t mean I give it to them.

Since I have been writing for The Age I have been astonished and heartwarmed by the level of pride and passion that people have who work for this paper.  And the loyalty of the readers. Readers who are disappointed in the quality or content or feel let down by editorial direction are vocal, noisy and as wounded as a jilted lover.

Sure, Fairfax owns this newspaper.  But it belongs to us.  The readers and the people who make this paper.  Cherish it and protect it because when you start dismantling things nut-by-nut, bolt-by-bolt, screw-by-screw it can be impossible to put it back together again.  Make your voices heard about how you want to digest your news, your culture, your sport and your commentary. Because if you don’t you may end up with a newspaper outsourced to India and delivered by text to your mobile phone.  And then how will you be able to cut a Leunig cartoon out and stick it on your fridge?

This Sunday June 24 Catherine Deveny In Conversation with Stella Young 3pm North Fitzroy Star. BUY TICKETS HERE with QandA, special guest Nelly Thomas, door prizes and a musical act you’ll be talking about for weeks.

IT’S that time of year when parents begin wringing their sweaty palms about where their child should start school next year. I laughed like a drain when I heard reports of parents at primary school open days with clipboards. I didn’t believe it, of course, until a mate told me that several of her mother’s group were guilty as charged.

“With clipboards?” “Yes, with clipboards.” “To check out a school?” “No, to check out about six schools.” At this point I fell off my chair in hysterics. “So tell me, what are these mothers (and it’s always mothers stressing about this occasionally fathers jump on board in solidarity but are never (perhaps I should pur the word rarely in there to hose down the trolls) the initiators) trying to find in a school?” “Well, Dev, they are trying to find the school that is going to turn their child into a genius.” BINGO. So if they can’t be a genius maybe their kid can be the genius they might have been. Now that sounds like healthy parenting. Why would anyone want their kids to be a genius? I just want my kids to be well rounded, resilient and not in jail. All I hope is that by the time they are 25 they have survived a broken heart, a flat tyre, food poisoning and have a couple of good mates. Bad mother, me.

When my eldest started school I met a woman at the school information night. She listed off eight primary schools that she had already checked out. I said: “We haven’t seen any others we’ve just booked him into this one.” By the grave look on her face it was as if the principal was Pol Pot and the teachers were ex-military personnel from Abu Ghraib. I’d love to tell you that I turned to her and said: “Get over yourself.” But I didn’t. All we wanted was for our son to turn up on the first day of school and know a familiar face from kinder. And for it to be a fair reflection of the society he’d be living in. Because you can’t tell if a place is right for your kid simply by wandering around the corridors.

Here’s a tip. If you have checked out more that two schools it’s probably a good idea to consider getting yourself a life at some stage. If you have a good reason not to send them to the local primary school send them to the next closest. If you feel the difference is between a child who will be a Nobel Prize winner and a child who is a crack-addicted hooker you’re wrong.

Here’s a message from all of us here at Calm Down International: “If you are so tragic that you need your kids to go to a certain school to feel better about yourself may I suggest that you take a short course, do some volunteer work or try yoga.”

What is best for kids is not the idyllic  school environment as perceived by their anxious, hovering parents.  Children are better equipped in life by learning persistence and  motivation through failure, disappointment and frustration than by some  fantasy school created by their parents’ inner five-year-old. Kids just  want: a place to play chasey, some teachers who know their name and a few  mates they can laugh and swap lunches with.

Most kids don’t give a  rat’s about the improvised music workshops, organic gardens and  interpretative dance classes they do at school. But the parents, eyes  blazing, face alight, will bore people senseless about it in an attempt to  convince you of their coolness. All it actually does is convince us that  they are Wannabe Creatives; insecure dags who had friends in bands but  were never in bands themselves. Too much exposure to organised creativity  immunises children against creativity. I can guarantee you that they will  never hunger to paint like Monet, read Shakespeare or play cello like  Casals because: “Nah. I did that when I was six and I was crap at it.  Let’s go to the casino!”

As far as holding them back for an extra  year; when in doubt hold them back. If kinder has suggested that they can  do with another year, hold them back. If you are thinking that the earlier  you get a child into school the more you can stuff into them, hold them  back. If these instructions from me are pissing you off because people  around you are suggesting that you hold your kid back, hold them back. I  do not know of one parent who has held a child back and regretted it, but  know dozens of parents who sent them early who do. If your defence is that  they’ll be bored at home, trust me, kids are always bored at  home.

There have been countless studies showing that starting children early may have academic, social and psychological disadvantages, but it’s simply common sense to have kids coping as best as possible in the classroom rather than struggling, or worse still, being held back. It’s an individual decision and the Government desperately needs to increase funding to kindergartens and establish more preschool programs for four-to-five-year-olds attached to schools to make this decision easier.

I love this conversation ‘Oh (INSERT NAME OF SCHOOL DE JOUR HERE) has a great reputation.’ ‘From who? Only from the parents who send their kids there. To get over their own insecurity they keep banging on about how great their kid’s school is.

They’ll tell you they want their kids to meet the right people. Right people is just code for white people. This social engineering I find tragic and telling in more or less equal proportions.

“The heaviest burden a child carries is the unlived life of their parents” Carl Jung. 

FFS everyone, send em to the local. Stop trying to give your perfect child that perfect trajeectory into the perfect life you feel you never had.

The amount people bang on about the school their child attends is in inverse proportion to how successful they feel. Chill out, stop trying to live your life through your children and do some work on yourself. Your children are not you. Google ‘ego confusion’ for more information.

Catherine Deveny In Conversation with Stella Young! This Sunday June 24 3pm Tix $25/$22 secrets, swearing, champagne and rivetting candid chat. With q&a, door prizes, special guest Nelly Thomas and musical act BUY TICKETS HERE! 

Nicola Roxon and all involved are today’s heroes after this magnificent triumph for victims of domestic violence. 

This incredible justice has been met with tantrums from some, who I can only assume are abusers or sympathetic to abusers because they conveniently prop up many of their beliefs and prejudices. These people assert changes in the law will lead to an ‘avalanche’ of false claims by vindictive partners and that there are ‘millions’ of false rape and abuse claims. By women.

Shouldn’t these thug apologists who all seem to believe men are the hidden majority of domestic violence victims be thrilled by this news? Why are they not ecstatic  more women will be punished and justice be done for this disproportionate amount of silent male victims?

Bone up.

1. Over 75% of domestic violence cases go unreported.

2. Now we’ve added emotional, verbal, social and financial abuse to the definition of domestic violence the percentage of unreported and reported cases will increase significantly.

3. 95% of domestic violence victims are women. 

4. Domestic violence is the leading cause of death or injury for women aged 15 – 44. 

5. The most dangerous place for a woman or girl is in her own home.

6. The person most likely to injure, assault or kill a girl or woman is a man she is related to. 

7. Most women don’t report domestic violence. Most don’t even consider it violence as many are chosen as partners by bullies and creeps precisely because these women are naive, vulnerable and/or easy to manipulate and have been convinced abuse is their fault or minimized the abuser’s resposibility for their actions. Some studies suggest greater amounts of empathy could make some more susceptible to becoming victims of domestic violence than others. 

8. The amount of false claims are minuscule (and the amount of false claims that lead to charges 1000 times smaller than minuscule) in comparison to the amount that go unreported or result in no charges.

9. Misogynists will amplify the false claims and amount of female perpetrators and minimise the amount, extent and variety of abuse.

10. It is not only domestic violence if there are bruises, cuts, broken bones or blood you can see. Domestic violence is an epidemic.

This change in the law is not making the goal posts wider but a long overdue catch up. The law has been behind for centries and finally it’s beginning to catch up. Victims of domestic violence are not now ‘out in front’ , they are just a little less behind than they are and have been for years.

Let’s hope social attitudes from Neanderthals, internalized misogynists and self-hating women will follow.

It’s not okay to bully, slap, punch, stalk, hate on, scream at or hurt bitches, slags, nags or sluts either.

Even if they were ‘asking for it’.

Come and see me In Conversation With Samuel Johnson June 17 buy tickets here.