A Time for Every Purpose
by Mary Pride
Karen Rhodes of Virginia recently wrote with a fairly common question, which I thought would nicely introduce a section on time management:
Mary Pride, how do you do it? I realize in your last newsletter you admitted to too many hot dogs and a messy house and have now dropped book selling, but even with what's still left-HOW?
Your article on time sharing has helped me some-now I teach my five year old while washing dishes, folding clothes, etc. But I still feel frustrated, like I am not accomplishing all I should.
I feel like I should give 2-1/2 hours, or a tithe of my time, to God, but can't seem to carve it out.
Other goals:
In answer to your question, "How do you do it?" . . . first, let me say that this idea of
tithing your time to God is unbiblical (where can you find this idea in the Bible?) and
furthermore ignores the fact that you are already giving all your time to God, if you are
living as a Christian. "Whatsoever you do to the least of My brethren, that you do unto Me,"
says Jesus. Therefore time spent diapering, cleaning, cooking, homeschooling, and in other
types of service to your family and others is directly given to Jesus if done in the right
spirit. So is time spent washing your hair and looking through the mail. Do everything to the
glory of God! That's enough!
God asked us to pray always, not for 10% of our time! This means that we are supposed to always
listen to Him (not always talk at Him, which is impossible, as many tasks require full
concentration). We are supposed to be always in a spirit of openness to God and His leading.
Similarly, we are supposed to "Rejoice in the Lord always," which means keeping a grateful and
thankful heart towards our Father in Heaven, not that we run around yelling, "Praise the Lord!"
all day, much less for a timed 10% of our day!
If you try to spend 2.4 hours a day talking to God and reading the Bible, I promise you you will
end up neglecting the work He has commanded you to do in the home.
An old Puritan preacher told this true story of the time he visited a very pious mother. The
children were running wild all over the house, which was a mess. Spying the mother in her
prayer closet, the preacher loudly asked, "Is there no fear of God in this house?" The next
time he came by, the children were neatly dressed and behaving, the house was clean, and the
mother was where the children could find her!
Individual time with each of the children, "doing whatever they would like to do"-is this really
a good goal? First, our kids need personal attention, not necessarily scheduled time completely
alone with us. Second, should they always be the boss in our times together?
I find that time alone with each child arises spontaneously. You can give a child your full
attention even if the room is filled with other children! Besides, often some children will be
napping or playing in another room, while one remains behind on his own to talk with you.
Homeschooling, which requires personal attention to each child's work, automatically provides
such personal times together. These can be used for discussing other things besides homework!
Shopping trips provide opportunities for one or two children to be alone with Mom or Dad while
the others stay home with the other parent. In our family, the kids don't take turns
accompanying Dad. It depends simply on who is awake, who is clean and able to get ready quickly,
and who behaved well the last time he was taken along.
"Special times" can so easily degenerate into each child being jealous of the other and
developing an attitude of "I hate to share Mommy with you." We don't make a big thing out of
time alone for this reason. Most fun times are actually more fun if done as a family, anyway!.
Our job as mothers is to help our children discover and learn to love what they should do. This
includes a proper sense of what is fun and what is not. Sometimes the child can initiate a good
fun time. Sometimes he or she will be bored or overburdened, if left to figure out what he or
she wants to do.
Most of us enjoy surprises planned for us more than being asked to plan our own fun. You can
give the kids a choice ("Would you like me to read to you or would you rather I pitch while you
bat?") or you can simply tell them, "Come here and I'll read you a book" or "Let's do a craft
project," or whatever. We are open to their suggestions, but do not feel that we always have to
follow the kids' ideas!
I also wouldn't think in terms of "building my marriage" or "building my relationship" if I
could help it. Time with your husband is just a natural, organic part of life. When we get too
serious about "building" things when we are with our loved ones, it adds stress.
You do need time with your husband. If you are like me you need to talk things over, cuddle and
be affectionate, and so on. Perhaps you may have to plan this time since you are the one who
needs it (unlike your time with your kids, where you can depend on them to force themselves on
you if you neglect them!). But you want this time because you already love your husband and
want to be with him, just as you did when you were courting, not because you are working toward
some intangible goal of marriage-building! It's one thing to be wanted and needed, and quite
another to be enlisted in a "relationship-building" project! The first is fun, the second is
work. Guess which most husbands would rather do?
Cleaning house is something you get better at as you go along. If you are making gradual
progress, feel good about it! You will never have enough time for a perfect job of housekeeping
until you are a widow with grown children. Count your muddy blessings!
Time to write, sew, garden . . . Do a little instead of taking on massive projects. A letter to
the editor that gets written is better than a novel that never makes it past Chapter One.
Almost every writer I know started small, myself included. Ditto sewing (one dress for the
toddler v. an entire spring wardrobe for yourself), gardening (one new flower bed v. an entire
landscape project), etc. You are aiming for progress, not perfection! Also, these are learning
experiences that will make you speedier and more effective at future projects. Even if your
garden does not grow (as mine threatens in spots!), you will have learned something.
WAYS TO REDUCE HOMESCHOOLING PANIC
I mentioned homeschool panic above. Now, it's not very helpful to just say, "Don't panic . . .
things will get better!" I've spent some time analyzing homeschool panic, and think I have it
pinned down.
First is the Pressure Panic, caused by trying to prove to skeptical neighbors, relatives, and
possibly school officials, that you are doing a better job than any public school could ever
do. This panic is mainly caused by unrealistic expectations of what the public schools do do.
Keep a grip on yourself, and remember that after 13 years of public schooling, lots of kids
don't even know how to read. So what if the school syllabus says they teach 24 different
subjects starting in kindergarten? The bottom line is, What are the kids learning? Answer:
Frequently, not much. So if your kids eventually learn to read and to add without using their
fingers, you are doing more than the government schools are able to guarantee.
Second comes the Do It All Panic. You, too, want to cover 24 subjects in one grade. But you
find that you can't fit in Math and Language Arts and Bicycle Maintenance and Art and Field
Trips to Places of Historical Interest and a hundred other different things all at once. So you
feel like a failure.
The answer to this panic is twofold: concentrate and prioritize.
First, identify the stuff your kids really need to know. Yes, an understanding of the great
artists of the last ten centuries is wonderful to have. So is the ability to play gracefully on
the violin, or a knowledge of all the kings and queens of England, etc. Almost everything is
worth knowing-but not everything is essential. Pick the essentials.
I'll help you a little. Reading, writing, math, and Bible are essential for everybody. History
is essential-but not for two-year-olds. Art may be essential some day-but you can always pick
it up later, when the kids are reading and writing beautifully.
Keep in mind that children of school age must by law be learning something, whereas preschoolers
can fool around the house and play without bringing angry state officials down on you. Thus,
educating the schoolagers is more essential than a fancy preschool program for the toddler.
Different families have different essentials. If your family is a performing acrobatic troupe,
then Junior absolutely must learn acrobatics. If Sally is an absolute whiz at art, it also
would be a shame to make her wait forever for art lessons-provided she knows her basics.
Most of us, though, will find our priorities centering around the basic core subjects: math,
reading, writing, handwriting, history and geography, and Bible. Science is not as important as
these, and most early grades science texts are a waste of time, so feel free to ease off on
science for a bit if that helps.
HOW SUSAN DOES IT
I suppose this is addressed to Mary. I'm sure that the really BIG question in people's minds is,
How Do You Do It? When people wrote, praising you for "doing so much," are you sure they weren't
really wondering how?
See, I have four small children, youngest seven months, all just under two years apart, and I
happen to be one of those people that other people look at blankly and frequently question how
I did it. I've written 6+ novels, five of them in one year (about 2,000 pages), and people are
baffled by it.
But there are some clear and very definite things that helped me.
Anyway, what I'm getting at is that we have never seen housework and cooking and even
child-tending (breast feeding of course is different) as only my job-but as ours. We share it,
providing time for each other to do the other work God has called us to. . . .
I'm really sorry if it comes across that I think women should do all the housework no matter
what. You are right that housework, cooking, etc. is not biblically designated as women's work.
Jesus cooked fish for His disciples! What I was trying to say is that women who try to "have it
all" at the expense of their husbands and family are not likely to get much male support!
At this very minute Bill is making lunch. Most of the time I do the cooking, but when I am
stuck under a horrendous load of mail (or whatever), Bill very graciously allows me to survive
it by giving me enough time to subdue the mountain! I do almost all the homeschooling (again,
today is an exception), the light cleaning (Bill scrubs the floors), the light gardening
(including shoveling topsoil, but not bucking the rototiller), and most of the general
straightening up. Bill cleans up after himself, as do the kids, thus making what remains a
feasible task for a waddling pregnant lady who can hardly bend over!
When I am not pregnant, I do tougher jobs (even rototilling!), but right now it would just be
stupid showing-off to even try it, knowing what the consequences would be.
Since our baby weighs 35 pounds (he was 12 pounds 10 oz. at birth; we determined afterward that
our scale was more reliable than the midwife's!), I can only carry him about ten feet at a time
without extensive huffing, puffing, back strain, etc. Thus Bill carries him to the changing
table for me, and often changes him as well. Since I get so exhausted, he also gets up first in
the morning when Franky wakes up early, diapers him, and feeds him breakfast.
It's only because Bill is now home full-time that I presume to ask him for so much help. Back
in the days when he spent all day grappling with piles of computer work in a smoke-filled
office, I did my best to "do it all" and give him a chance to relax at home. He helped a lot
when I was pregnant (by necessity, as I was too sick to do much with the early ones), but I
would even wear myself out to make his life easier. Now that I have so much more to do, and
less strength in my back to do it with, and he has more free time, he helps a lot more. Still,
I try not to just pile on the requests for help. I need help as the "weaker vessel" as long as
I have an extra I-hate-to-admit-how-much to carry around (I BLOAT when I get pregnant!), but I
can do a lot more in between times.
The bottom line seems to be that I help Bill a lot with a lot of things, but not to the point
of exhaustion. Depending on your own point of exhaustion (pregnant or not . . . strong or weak
constitution
. . . loaded with many projects or blessed with lots of free time . . . childless or mother of
four preschoolers) and your husband's actual strength, at some point he can and should step in
and lift your burden. Jesus, the Lord of the Church and its Husband, says He makes our yoke
easy and our burden light. We wouldn't dare as Christians try to do all Jesus' work in our own
strength, but freely call on Him for His strength and help. Similarly, part of our husbands'
leadership is to not dump heavy loads and burdensome yokes on us, but to only ask us to do what
we are able to readily bear and to do the rest themselves. This is showing "respect unto the
weaker vessel."
As I've said before, and probably should say louder this time, I have not accomplished very
much on my own. The books, newsletter, garden work, and almost everything else have been family
projects. My name goes on the books because I did the actual writing (this is one of the rules
of publishing!), but Bill talked them over with me, pre-edited them, discussed ways to get
around the hard spots, did mailings, and even made the indexes for the last books! He is now
working on a book of his own (due out this summer), and I am helping him in the same way.
I wish every woman had a husband like Bill. Honestly, I think that most of today's complaints
about not being able to stand the kids, hating housework, and all the rest come down to the
husbands shirking their roles.
God never said that only women should be interested in and working in the home. The ideal is for
both man and wife to work together at home‹not for women to have to become father and mother
and housekeeper and gardener and cook and chauffeur, etc., while the man is narrowed down to
concentrating on a "career" and meanwhile ignoring his family. When husbands do their jobs, we
wives can do a tremendous amount more of ours . . . and the husbands even get more done!
HOMESCHOOL TIPS
A recent help to me was acquiring a "To Do List" pad from a local Speedy Print shop for 10¢. My
children love pads and paper. . . . It seemed that "To Do List" pad of paper, coveted by the
two oldest, immediately solved a home school trial we were encountering. This tiny sheet of
paper is teaching the children great organizational skills. They really enjoy writing six or
seven "school" assignments on that sheet of paper and finishing them each day. It is a great
accomplishment for them to complete their lists! . . .
I have a small direct sales business. I had been to a seminar on time management in which the
benefits of a To Do list were praise. Never did I think to apply this simple list to the kids
so they could monitor their accomplishments. When everything is checked off, they are so happy
and fulfilled. . . .
GOOD NEWS
Remember the couple mentioned in [HELP #1] from my letter, who had a tubal ligation reversed?
They have been married 17 years and how we wept at their testimony. We now REJOICE!- God in His
Great Mercy has given them a daughter, born December 16, 7-1/2 pounds, 20 inches. Praise the
Lord for his goodness and for His wonderful works to the children of men.
Kathy Glader, South Dakota
I'm 37 years old. My first child was born 11 years ago, the second 12 months later. Both were
C-sections for very unfounded reasons. The doctor convinced us that we should be happy we had
our boy and girl, the ideal family, and should consider not having more children. My husband
promptly had a vasectomy with the blessing and encouragement of all our pastor, friends, and
Christian associates. For many years I silently grieved over the fact that I'd never have
another child.
However, God did a beautiful work in my husband's heart two years ago and he decided to have a
reversal done. Since then, we've had another son and daughter. Our third child was a C-section,
again quite unnecessary, but just four weeks ago [as of 1-18] we gave birth to our fourth child
naturally! God brought a cooperative doctor into our lives and by God's grace, through many
obstacles, I was able to deliver vaginally.
CHILDREN'S CHURCH
We do not volunteer with children's church, etc. We feel all should worship together. It doesn't
say that the church should teach the children-that is given to parents-yet as that one article
on Segregated Worship said-and it's true-the church even started daycare centers. . . .
Most churches find children a nuisance and they [churches] were the first to have daycare
centers and nurseries. We believed in worshipping together as a family from the beginning. Mark
has gone to church every Sunday since he was four days old! He's our youngest and always tells
me, "Don't ask or plead with me to do anything. Just tell me-that's what I'm here for." Would
the world believe this ? ? ? ?
We never believed in terrible twos, troublesome threes, etc. We always told ours how wonderful
they are-and this is how they all turned out! The power of life and death are in the Word. . .
Laurie Sleeper, Washington
Children's church . . . just skip it altogether and train your children to sit through the
worship service and take notes as soon as they are able. Of course, I can say this because I
have a husband who is teaching our children regularly at home-this may not at all be the course
another should take with differing circumstances.
Lynn Searle, California
I wanted to share some ideas that we have about children and church involvement. I realize that
there is some concern about whether or not there should be age segregation at church (Sunday
school, children's church). I feel that if families are consistent on a daily basis with their
devotions and worship time, the age divisions can be an asset rather than a liability.
As a pastor's wife I see a little broader picture of the workings of the church in relation to
all children. At our church, many children are simply dropped off by non-Christian parents.
Sunday school and church may be the only godly training that they ever receive. During SS these
children climb into an "ark" (a large box) and learn about salvation. They march around a tower
of blocks and learn about God's power when the walls of Jericho fell down. They learn the truth
of creation. . . I could go on and on. The children who come from Christian homes have their parents'
teaching reinforced.
If SS classes or children's church seem disorganized or uncontrolled at times, instead of
criticizing or complaining, maybe we can see it as an area where we are needed! Many teachers
are just thrown into a classroom with little or no training-this does need to be rectified. Our
children return to the sanctuary for the song service, prayer time, offering, etc. They are
dismissed during the preaching (ages 3-8) for CC. I generally have one of the 13 or 14-year-old
girls help out during this time. This not only helps me, but she can learn and be trained how
to relate to children, tell Bible stories with enthusiasm, lead the children to Christ, and
discipline.
There are several ways that children can really get involved in church and become an important
part:
These things are not just for PKs (preacher's kids)! All children need to be taught and shown
how to serve the Lord. They should know that ministry to others is not just for grownups. When
they see results from their service, they are rewarded with joy and a feeling of accomplishment.
It makes them want to do more!
Peggy Franklin, Washington
It is really sad to think that we cannot trust our church programs to be the best environment,
but because of the children in public school attending church classes (and general defects of
peer grouping) our own homeschooled children come home from church with more information about
their friends and current cultural "hot" items than with knowledge of the Word of God! We are
concerned!
At first we thought we would just take them out of class and keep them with us, but then we felt
we should share our concern with the pastor. He was willing to listen to us and is hoping to
try a "family" class. We offered to help. Now, we need help from you. Have you or anyone out
there ever tried such a class? What works and what didn't? It seems like a difficult assignment
in our "entertain me" style of church programs to take care of all those age-groups at once!
Please send your ideas and suggestions to:
Peggy Franklin
Thanks so much!
ALIDA WAS ON THE BALL
Found "Witches and Housework" very interesting. Would love to pen Alida Gookin a few lines-I
love her! She really has studied the subject!
Diane Stearns-Smith, Florida
Diane sent in this clipping (appropriately, from the "Nibbles" column in the Boulder, Colorado
Camera):
Director Anthony "Psycho" Perkins has begun shooting a movie called "Mr Christmas Dinner" in
California. The plot, according to early reports, centers on a 300-pound boy who is seduced by
a bombshell who takes him home to meet her parents and be eaten.
Diane's comment: "I remember Alida predicting this for the next new movie perversion."
My comment: Ugh!
READERS RESPOND TO DR. BROWN
Surgeon Jim Brown, FPO Seattle, WA, wrote a letter in the second edition of HELP to which you
hoped I would respond "in my own behalf." Though I don't care to write on my "own behalf," but
rather on the behalf of accuracy, Dr. Brown's accusations against me were humiliating. As both
a Christian and a paid writer, not only do I strive to speak without deceit and to use only
resources that I believe are reliable, but I am committed to never even wrest the words of
those whose ideas are contrary to my own . . .
I wish Dr. Brown had read the pamphlet entitled Sexual Sterilization which you recommended and
which also was the source of my information, for then he could have challenged such sources as
the British Medical Journal and the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology as being
"untrue and sensational" rather than my mere letter. But since the doctor has decided not to
perform routine sterilizations and has "borne the indignant wrath of those who felt [he] was
infringing on their rights to be sterilized," let's forget the reproach I have borne.
Dr. Brown may not have been able to order Sexual Sterilization since the wrong address was given
in HELP. This pamphlet can be ordered from:
The Couple to Couple League
if you include 20¢ and an SASE.
While citing several medical studies in both Britain and the US, the pamphlet said, "the figure
of a 40% increase in menstrual problems as the result of tubal ligation seems standard." (One
study said 43%.) Furthermore, a study cited in the American Journal of Obstetrics and
Gynecology found that the rate of cervical cancer experienced within three and one-half years
after tubal ligation was 250% (3-1/2 times) higher than the normal rate. In a study cited in
the British Medical Journal, 18.7% returned for a hysterectomy. This figure represents almost
one-half of those who had continuing problems following the surgery.
Dr. Brown said I implied that hormonal balance is altered by tubal ligation. I did not imply
that. I said that hysterectomy, especially when ovaries are removed, can change hormonal
balance, and I gave the case of a friend as an example. However, upon rechecking my sources, I
found that some women who have merely had a tubal ligation had "menstrual disturbances
requiring hormone treatments." . . .
Planned Parenthood statistics that were published in the Memphis Commercial Appeal said that
25% of forty-year-old women have had a hysterectomy. Based upon the information I have cited,
plus the testimonies of several women I know who have had hysterectomies, I wrote a letter to
the editor asking why Planned Parenthood, in its zeal to further popularize sterilization, did
not mention that hysterectomy may be a side effect of female sterilization. Several days later
I visited my gynecologist, and the registered nurse with many years of experience there said
she saw my letter in the paper and agreed that I was "absolutely right." . . .
If Planned Parenthood is correct in reporting that a fourth of all forty-year-old women have
hysterectomies, shouldn't we ask why? If any other human organ in middle-aged adults came to be
diseased and required surgical attention as much as the womb does, there would be a demand to
know what is causing such problems.
Dr. Brown considered it "outrageous" (his word) about the "association of vasectomy with AIDS."
My exact words were, "It appears that vasectomy affects the immunological system, the same
system affected by the AIDS virus, though it does not work against the immunological system as
rapidly as AIDS." Since we have been flooded with news about AIDS enough to know how important
the immunological system is to health, I considered it appropriate to mention that the same
important system may be affected by vasectomy. . . .
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services publishes a pamphlet entitled Vasectomy Safety.
According to the Association for Voluntary Sterilization (AVS) statistics cited therein, the
scare about the long-range risks of vasectomies caused the number of vasectomies performed in
1982 to be about half the number performed in 1974. However, after a study on vasectomy based
at UCLA became widely reported in 1983, the number of vasectomies began to climb dramatically. . . .
According to the government pamphlet, sterilization is now the most popular form of birth
control in the U.S., used by four out of ten couples who use contraception . . .
This study, along with some other government-funded studies, claimed that "men with vasectomies
are just as healthy as other men, if not more so." The pamphlet concludes by recommending
Planned Parenthood and the AVS, plus two other lesser-known organizations, as sources for more
information.
I did not know of the government reports on vasectomy when I wrote the letter that appeared in
HELP. However, though it's supposedly "safe" and everybody's doing it, I am hesitant to put my
unquestioned faith in government reports. . . .
Jane M. van der Linden, Victoria, Australia
I strongly disagree with Dr. Brown who said "about 100% of women have some type of gynecological
problem from time to time." How does he substantiate this statement? There must be tens of
thousands of women like myself who experience no problems at all! (For which, I am quick to
add, "praise the Lord! Thank you for good health in this area.") If there are about 100% of
women suffering, then did God do something wrong? Or have we women messed up the works?
You may be interested in this newspaper clipping which appeared in our local paper about two
years ago, which supports the theory that tubal ligation does have an aftermath. That is not
surprising. Interfere with the finely tuned instrument our bodies are for the wrong reason and
there is a price to be paid. God's approval does not rest on these operations.
The article reads as follows:
Now a Melbourne doctor says he is disturbed by complications such as heavy bleeding and the
rate of hysterectomies after sterilization.
In a research paper in the leading British medical journal, The Lancet, Dr. John Cattanach, of
Hawthorne, said the long-term complications of physical and psychological trauma are caused by
damage to a small artery during the operation.
Dr. Cattanach's theory, based on his research when practicing at Lilydale, is that damage to
the small artery, which runs close to the fallopian tubes of the uterus, restricts blood supply
and oestrogen production.
This finding seems the key to the whole sad mystery of suffering after the tubal ligation.
Adequate oestrogens are essential to the physical and psycho-sexual wellbeing of women.
The article goes on to say that using microsurgical techniques instead of diathermy-blocking
the tubes by burning-could perhaps prevent the damage to the artery as well as making the tubal
ligation routinely reversible.
Dee Smith, Arizona
It has been a while since I have read something and felt the need to respond. The letter from
the family practice surgeon, Jim Brown of Seattle, Washington, is such a letter.
I underwent a tubal ligation in June, 1981. Because my husband and I were divorced and I was
sure I did not want to bring any more children into this world (or so I thought), I saw no
other recourse. However, in June of 1984 the Lord began to deal with me. He showed me that what
I did in essence was to have an abortion because I cut off the life which could have begun.
What Bill Gothard stated [ed. note: actually it was a businessman speaking at a Gothard
seminar] is "Sterilization is no different than abortion . . . as it is killing off a godly
seed." As I shared with a friend (who also had a tubal ligation) what I knew she seemed
surprised and at the same time relieved to hear what was said. You see, the Lord had shown her
the very same thing!
We began to see that our bodies are not our own as we are bought with a price, and we are to
glorify God in our bodies (I Cor 6:19-20). We are to present our bodies as living sacrifices
(Rom 12:1,2).
Over the last few years, I have run into many other women who in trying to walk in a pleasing
manner before God have also seen the same things in regard to sterilization. Most of these
women have had other developments in their bodies which can be traced back to their tubal
ligations. One major development is a sense of mourning and the lack of understanding as to why
it's there. The mourning is for the babies who aren't in their lives. Hormonal balance is
definitely affected!! I can attest to that myself.
Read in Deut. 28 about the blessings and curses and you will see that barrenness is a
curse-even a self-imposed barrenness. Look at Ex 23:26, Deut 28:4,11,15,18, Lev 26:9,22,
Deut 7:13,14. Children are a blessing from God, not a curse. God said we would not be barren if
we walk according to His design . . .
I paid for my disobedience (even though I was not yet living my life for Him) four days after
the tubal ligation. I was readmitted into the hospital with severe stomach pain-so severe you
could not touch me without the pain being unbearable! I underwent exploratory surgery. They
found a puncture (the size of the end of a large straw) in my lower bowel caused during the
tubal procedure! Caused by the cauterizing machine spark during the tubal!
I have since repented and God has been faithful. My heart says if He wishes for my husband and
me to have more children we know He is the healer! We have since remarried and know that God is
sufficient.
If I have learned anything though this it is that God is faithful. He has seen me through this
and I can warn others. Trust God to determine how many children you are to have and enjoy each
one fully! . . .
PS. I pray for the medical profession to begin to wake up and see their fallacy before it is
indeed too late. . . . Doctors have their place, but so many forget they are human and subject
to the same deceptions as we all are . . .
L.G., CA (a certified childbirth educator, registered nurse, and
midwife)
Home birth has been shown to be safer for most women (97%), even "high risk" pregnancies. The
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology has shown this over and over in their own studies!
They just don't make these known, for obvious reasons ($). I would suggest he read Five
Standards for Safe Childbearing by David Stewart-a compilation of all scientifically valid
studies on home v. hospital birth-available from NAPSAC.
Several births I've done at home would have become "high risk" if they had been in the hospital!
For example, when a woman's bag of waters breaks, and she doesn't go into labor within 12-24
hours, she is hospitalized and labor is induced, which is dangerous to not only the baby, but
the mom as well. We now know that the risk of infection goes down after 24 hours. The only time
the risk of infection from ruptured membranes goes up, is if mom is in the hospital, with people
examining her cervix! I, as well as most midwives in our area, let moms go three days to two
weeks with ruptured membranes, and we see far less infection than the hospitals do, and the
moms usually go into labor naturally.
Another example is postpartum hemorrhage. Most p.p. hemorrhage is iatrogenic, usually caused by
premature cord clamping and hasty delivery of the placenta, or lack of intensive nutritional
counseling in the final months of pregnancy. I have never had a mom bleed too much in my
practice. I never clamp or cut the cord until after the placenta is cut, and I always let the
placenta come out naturally-usually 1-2 hours after the baby! Now what hospital will do that?!
I could go on and on about this!
Martha Pugacz, Ohio
This doctor's own experience with three preemies and the intensive care unit (ICU) should be
looked into. Did you read Dr. Mendelsohn's newsletter on this subject? He sent me years ago an
entire book from a barrister in Canada re what happens in intensive care units. We know that in
our area one hospital will not get federal funds unless they put one baby in ICU a day! Now
what does that tell us!
by Mary Pride
"Susan," Pennsylvania
Tierney Ohly, Michigan
Martha Pugacz, Ohio
Martha Pugacz, Ohio
694 Samish Pt. Rd.
Bow, WA 98232
Martha Pugacz, OhioGUESS WHO'S COMING AS DINNER
Alida Gookin, Mississippi
3621 Glenmore Ave.
PO Box 111184
Cincinnati, OH 45211-1184Last year about 50,000 Australian women had an operation called tubal ligation
(sterilization) to prevent them from having children.
Help Issue 3 - Part II