The Long Arm of the Law

There are some days when nothing lawmakers do (or try to do) surprises you. Then there are days like this. In Virginia, state senator Mark Obenshain has introduced Senate Bill 926, a bill that is not only an insult to each and every female in the Commonwealth, but also, if passed, an insane intrusion into the right of privacy that every individual has. In a nutshell, the bill seeks to mandate that within 24 hours of a miscarriage, law enforcement officials must be informed of the incident, if medical professionals were not present at the miscarriage. In addition, the remains must be saved until law enforcement professionals give their permission for the disposal.

What?!?

First of all, 20 to 25% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage. And I would venture a guess that a large number of those miscarriages do not conveniently occur with medical professionals in attendance. That would be a large number of incidents that would need to be reported to and investigated by law enforcement. Given the budget shortfalls occurring across the nation in light of the recession, is that really an effective use of investigative resources?

Second, the majority of miscarriages occur before the end of the 1st trimester. Any remains of the fetus can be hard to discern at that point. Are women really supposed to hang on to every bloody toliet paper strip and maxi pad? Are they not allowed to flush the toliet? No showers during the loss, because blood and tissue could go down the drain? I mean, honestly? I hate to say it, but only a man -who could never have personally experienced a miscarriage - could write such an inane bill.

Third, many miscarriages are the loss of a very much wanted and hoped for baby. For the mothers (and yes, the fathers as well) who experience them, there is very real grief over something that is still poorly understood by medical science. There are few answers for the woman who is - or has - suffered a miscarriage, and as a result, women will often times blame themselves for real or imagined mistakes that they made during the pregnancy. To have to deal with law enforcement personnel at that time, rather than spending that time and energy dealing with the emotional and physical aftermath of the pregnancy loss, is an unconscionable mandate.

The bill is an affront to the rights of every woman - not just those of childbearing age. Should this bill become law, it would set a dangerous precedent as to when and how government can intervene in the private medical matters of women. I mean, what's next? A government inquest every time a woman gets her period?

Give me a break.

Someone needs to go back to Journalism 101...

Someone at 20/20, that is. On January 2, 2009, 20/20 ran an episode themed "Extreme Parenting." As part of this package of segments, they ran one about homebirth. Sort of. Captioned as a story about homebirth, the segment interchangeably describes homebirthing with a trained nurse-midwife in attendance with homebirthing without medical personnel in attendance, a practice often called unassisted birth. By conflating the two, 20/20 not only does a disservice to the general viewing audience and those who choose to homebirth, it also calls into question the intelligence of its story editors and journalists.

The segment opens somewhat dramatically with a shot of a log cabin surrounded by mountains. Journalist Elizabeth Vargas voices over this image, inviting the audience to think about what it must have been like to give birth on the American frontier 200 years ago. "There's not a hospital or a pain-relieving drug or an ob/gyn in sight." Heavens to Betsy!! What shall we do? In order to showcase what Betsy might have done, the segment then shows snippets of classic Western movies (or perhaps they confused these fictional movies with actual historical documents - one can only guess). Vargas states that in spite of the "primitive" and "dangerous" methods, by today's standards, women seemed to do okay. However, she states, there is a small segment of modern American mothers-to-be who are "choosing to give birth without medical assistance." As Vargas says this, we see images of women holding newborns right after giving birth - images that are likely familiar to anyone who has seen the documentary "The Business of Being Born." You know, that documentary that followed medically-trained midwives as they helped women give birth, not just some layperson off the street who don't know nothing about birthing no babies. Next, we are introduced to Laura Shanley, a Colorado woman who is one of the most outspoken proponents of unassisted birth. We move directly from a quote by Shanley to a snippet from The Business of Being Born showing Ricki Lake's homebirth with her 2nd child. A homebirth that was attended by a midwife. Confused yet? This back and forth between unassisted birth and midwife-attended homebirth continues throughout the poorly-written segment. To blur the line even more, the last part of the segment is Shanley talking about unassisted birth. Wow. Way to not muddy the waters, ABC.

I really wonder if after viewing the final version of the segment, Ricki Lake got pissed off and decided to do an expose of the geniuses at 20/20, because if I was her, I would be right pissed off. Really, the only thing lacking from the terrible segment was an interview with the notorious homebirth opponent, Amy Tuteur. Eh, maybe someone at 20/20 was thinking that day...