Two things I've been thinking about lately...
First, this article on Salon, from Babble contributor Madeline Holler. She discusses the birth of her third child, which she went through at home. But what she mostly focuses on is how she made her two young daughters be present during the late stages of labor and the delivery, despite the girls repeatedly, pleadingly, clearly, stating that they did not want to be there. She educated them about birth beforehand, which I think is fine and necessary, because it is true that birth is natural and part of life and what not. But after she gave them a choice and they told her no (four times), she simply ignored them, dismissed their answer and frightened feelings, and continued to believe that this would be "a great gift to them".
Should children witness births? I'm a bit on the fence with this one, but I guess in some cases it can totally be right and positive for families. But the child should be ready, and willing. Some children probably think nothing of it, or even really be into it. But I can also totally see how much of a traumatic experience it could be for a young child, how scary, and confusing, and deeply upsetting it could all seem. People know their own kids, and they should respect them in that. I got cold sweats reading about that little girl hiding in her room, sobbing, shaking, repeating that she didn't want to be there, horrified by her mom's pain, and saying that she was going to faint. Do you think she was ready and should have been there? I know I'm oversensitive and this can be perceived as totally melodramatic by people who simply don't have that gene - and of course it figures... But how could you think that this was no big deal or that they will come to appreciate it over time? It doesn't work that way. After witnessing how crazily traumatized LP got over a seemingly harmless, meaningless thing like a fire drill last year, I just don't think that some kids will, or should, simply "get over themselves".
Holler said that "she's not a Type-A Organizer" person, and that's why she didn't really made plans for the kids to go elsewhere. Hmm, hello? No plan is not an option, especially when the kids make it really clear they don't want to see that. I usually try to avoid being too snarky, but I couldn't help agreeing with some commenters there: don't say you were "surprised" by the birth, that you "didn't have time", and that's why they ended up there, then go on to say that you updated your Facebook status on more than one occasion. I mean, you were not surprised. This was your third child, you knew the drill, such plans are not that long or complicated to make -everyone does it. Even at the last minute, you could have called a neighbor, a friend, even an acquaintance to come fetch the girls, anyone. I mean, if I ever received a phone call to come and help like that, even in the middle of the night, and even from someone I didn't know that much, I would definitely step up. Because that's just what you do. I don't think that having a bad taste in my mouth after reading this makes me a "sanctimommy", just, you know, someone who has feelings and empathy.
Second, any of you have been watching the Sister Wives show on TLC? It's about a polygamist family in Utah, that promises to make you reconsider your initial ideas about them. And, it's true! I'm a little disconcerted ever since seeing it. My view on polygamy hasn't changed: I think there's something completely wrong and one-sided and unfair about it, because even though these women say they chose this lifestyle you just know the playing field is not level... But this family is a million miles away from the idea I had of fundamentalist Mormons, and how the way they live tends to perpetrate the women's submission and acceptance of the marriage: isolated from society, receiving minimal education and contact with the outside world, wearing old-fashioned clothes and living very simply, etc. But this was definitely a modern family: with one wife teasingly telling her husband to "shut up," the guy working in ad sales and driving a shiny Lexus, one of the teenagers (totally goth princess) being allowed to express her disapproval of the lifestyle for her own future marriage, the wives openly and jokingly talking about their sex life (with the same man!), one of them pursuing a college degree, and another one working! I mean, every day she drives her big SUV to an office where she talks to people, lunches out, textes her kids on her cell phone, and brings home an income, yet still willingly stays in this marriage. Maybe I'm narrow-minded (and I don't pretend not to be ignorant about this culture), but I can't really compute the two!
Apart from that, there was something perplexingly warm about this family, with all three wives (soon to be a fourth) living under the same roof, with the husband and their 13 kids. I thought the guy was mostly insufferable (although to them he's probably "very charismatic"), with his sense of being "the big prize" (constantly saying things like "I must assure that everyone gets the same amount of time with me"), and his initial turning up his nose at the woman who will become wife #4 since she's divorced and thus "used goods" (er, dude, you're making your three wives, who love you and put up with you, go through knowing you're sleeping with others in their own home every day)... But although it probably isn't always easy, you could sense real affection between the wives, and towards each other's kids. The two who are busy outside the house can rely on the third, who happily stays home, takes care of all the children and makes dinner for them, so everyone is less stressed. Wife #1, who wanted a very large family but was only able to bear one daughter, says she's so happy that her daughter has siblings anyway, and that she could still be able to participate in parenting a large brood herself. I'm quite confounded, actually.
What do you think?
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Chit-chatting about families
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comment(s):
I read that Salon article too and am happy to get a view on it from a mom! I was right outside of the room that my mother had my youngest sister in at home (I was almost 7), and I was SURE that she was going to die. It was a very not-ok night. I don't especially think I would want that for my children, even though it provided me with great stories to tell.
I haven't seen Sister Wives because we don't have cable, but it has peaked my interest. Thanks for your evaluation of it. (The idea makes me want to vomit, and I'm trying not to judge too harshly!). I found it really interesting that law enforcement officials are pursuing them now for the illegal aspects of it.
(1) Making your elder children witness the birth of your third child - when they don't want to be there - is selfish. That's it.
Jolynn gives me another perspective. She must have been devastated thinking she was listening to her mom die. How awful!
(2) I haven't seen Sister Wives. What you say does open my mind about polygamy. However, until it's polygyny and polyandry equally, it's sexist.
Plus, it's hard enough to give your heart and sole to one person ... how could you give it to three or four?
I totally agree with you about the Salon article. Those poor girls. To me they have basically been taught that even if they say no it doesn't mean anything. I cannot imagine a worse lesson to teach young girls.
My sister was maybe 7 or 8 when an artery in my mom's nose burst which was horrifying for her because when your that age things seem bigger and even though everyone says things are going to be ok all you see is the horrifying bit. My sister remembers the night completely different than I do because she was younger and frightened.
Alas I too don't have cable but the clips I have seen from Sister Wives leave me scratching my head and wanting to see it.
Wow, I am totally shocked by that first topic. How could a mother force her children to watch something that could be so traumatic for them to see if they weren't totally prepared to witness it? And obviously they weren't ready given all the protests. I'm right there with u.
And now onto Sister Wives. I haven't watched the show yet but I did see an interview with them on the Today Show a few weeks ago and I was really shocked at how NORMAL they seemed. Call me naive but I had the same misconception about what I thought a fundamentalist Mormon family would be too.
J and I were just talking about polygomy the other day. I really have no problem with what any consensual adults do together but I feel the same way as you do...Is this really consensual or is there some sort of mind games going on? What woman really wants to share her husband with other women. I mean we're not taking about people in polyamorous relationships which I can understand more {kind of}. I mean at least all parties are getting something out of the deal. But this is something else all together.
I also find it funny how they go around calling themselves an alternative family and how people shouls be tolerant of them. I wonder how tolerant they are of other alternative families...
Great post, Marie-Eve! You certainly got me thinking :) xoxo
I gotta say, lady, I'm super pro everyone being tolerant of polygamy and polyandry. First of all, I think that it's impossible to be pro gay marriage, while at the same time saying that I'm not tolerant of another form of marriage undertaking by caring consenting adults. Do I get it? Yeah, actually, I kind of do. The idea of having a whole bunch of other women to lean on is not a bad one. And having a literal village to raise your kids in sounds pretty great to me. Am I on board with a lot of the fundamental teachings? Nope. Do I think it can be done well by other groups in other ways? Yup. Is their historical basis for it? Well, yes, a huge amount. So. I haven't seen the show, but I'm pretty loud about us all working to open our minds and be more tolerant on the subject. David actually wrote a long legal piece examining polygamy and polyandry, which I totally talked him into writing.
As for forcing your kids to watch birth, I'm have nothing nice to say, so I'm going to say nothing at all ;)
Regardless of what it is that you're proposing (from witnessing birth to riding on a roller coaster), when you ask your children if they want to do something and they say no, no is the answer. Otherwise, you're teaching them a whole bunch of lessons about whether their own ideas and opinions count that they'll be hard pressed to unlearn when they're older -- like girls and women need more of those!
As for polygamy, I'm not sure. I think Meg's got a good point about the need to consider being accepting of non-traditional marriages (and I'd add here, non-traditional in which society?), but I think that in the majority of cases, polygamy is a losing arrangement for all of its participants, especially for the children who aren't able to choose the lifestyle, except when they're old enough to leave under their own steam.
For yet another perspective, read the novel "The Lonely Polygamist" by Bradley Udall. I just finished it, and really enjoyed it.
I think there are some things that children have to do because their parents tell they they have to. They have to go to school, they have to go on vacation, they have to be polite, etc. I don't think that witnessing birth is a "must"
Polygamy is fascinating. I have never seen the show; it seems you entertain us all so we don't need cable!
@Meg Really interesting point of view! But, would there be a way to have this "help and support" relationship with other women (or men), without having to share an emotional and sexual connection with the same partner? (I'm also for being tolerant of non-traditional families, whatever form they take. It's just that in these kind of cases, it seems a little skewed in terms of equality for the partners.)
The other thing I'm thinking about, as well, is that in populations where it is very prevalent, this type of polygamy somewhat restricts the gene pool, and takes a lot of males out of the reproduction game, indicating that it's not a desirable behavior from an evolutionary point of view.
My sister no.6 (trainee midwife) and I were talking about this just the other day. She is reading a book about birth around the world, and it talks about how in most cultures women grow up around birth, and witness birth at least once before they give birth themselves. In the West, on the other hand, most women hear nothing about birth until they become pregnant, when they are bombarded with (mostly scare) stories. And we had this TV show here recently, Cherry Has A Baby, and Cherry witnessed a very peaceful home birth while she was pregnant, and said it made her feel much better about her impending birth. So my sister was asking me whether I thought everyone should attend a birth in their lifetime, and whether we should try to make it that women get to see a birth before they give birth themselves. My answer was that yes, I thought they should be encouraged to, so long as they want to, and of course always putting the needs and feelings of the labouring woman first.
But... kids? Hmmm. Probably the same applies. So long as they want to be there, and they and the parents feel they are ready, probably is could be a good thing. But when are they ready? Not at 7 and 3, I don't think so. And certainly not if they are saying no, no way.
Oh, on the other issue, I do see Meg's point totally, and generally believe that people should be allowed to do what they want in their own homes/bedrooms, so long as they're all fit to consent, and do so. And I can see the appeal of sister wives, an intimate familial relationship with other women as your peers. And in the case of the first wife, wanting a sibling for your child, but not to lose your husband in the process. (Although I personally can never imagine thinking those things were worth sharing my spouse for. Like you say, you can get that support elsewhere.)
BUT even if everyone goes into the arrangement eyes open, there are some serious issues with it. What has happened to all the other men, if some men have two, three, four or more wives? They've been forced out (historically in horrible, cruel ways). And there's the gene pool issue you mentioned.
So it's hard. In the example you cite, it seems these are educated women making a choice. But in most cases, are they? Why would educated women make this choice on a large scale, knowing the effect on their menfolk? It's hard to get your head around.
I'm not sure about the first issue. I agree with Cate that everyone should witness a birth before they give birth, that the whole process needs to be demystified and have the fear taken out of it and that childhood seems like a good place to start with that. But I think these kids were probably too young. I'm curious about what the older one was told that made her so terrified to be there from the beginning? That seems kind of unnatural to me.
As for polygamy, why is the husband always mostly insufferable? Every example I've seen (on the telly) seems like it would be a perfect living situation - without the husband.
yeah, the forcing part is the problem. i watched (er, video taped) my sister being born at home when i was 12. and it was fine. a good friend has had several home births with children present and, i think because of her overall attitude and education with them, they were eager for the experience. (though i think one time the kids were still sleeping, and she didnt wake them just for it)
yeah, i am pretty much with meg. but it is hard in our socitey because we have heard so many horror stories about deep utah-oppressed-undereducated type situations. but in concenting situations?
i think the scale will always be more frequently tipped to multiple wives more often then multiple husband, even with the choice in completely free. woman are just so much more likely to be able to share with other women, i think, then men would with other men. (heterosexually speaking, anyways...)?
Post a Comment