@cat they are subjective because they depend on the individual rating themselves; this is of course going to vary greatly between individuals and even with the individual themselves. Surveys (which is essentially what they are) are notoriously one of the most unreliable methods of gathering information there is.
@niko I think we are on the same page it is definitely all about choice. I wasn’t referring at all to the skin to skin contact straight after birth; which was well known about when I had all of my babies but; rather that I would have liked the choice to have been able to recover from a big operation without trying to look after a baby by myself. The staffing shortages are at play in both scenarios.
Where has the presumption come from that All
@anonymous I agree with the over diagnosing and then people believing that their label defines them. This is particularly prevalent amongst our young people, who are so vulnerable to this. The process for getting diagnosed for a mental illness is so subjective - it really is possible, and does happen, that someone who is experiencing normal nerves or normal sadness or grief can go in and get diagnosed with anxiety or depression. Many of the mental health services are actually perpetuating this problem. In an effort to destigmatise Mental illness, which was needed, the pendulum has swing too far and we have agencies such as Headspace and the Blackdog Institute give presentations to students telling them that 1 in 3 will experience a mental illness and that they must reach out and get help ( ironic because services are so swamped there is no help). No wonder our poor students are then convinced that they have a serious medical condition when in all likelihood they are just experiencing the normal gamut of human emotions; albeit intensified by teenage hormones. We also have the ridiculous idea that only counsellors can help. Tragedy strikes and schools have to call in grief counsellors. Whatever happened to just supporting one another and turning to people you have a relationship with; rather than strangers who don’t even know you!
@chezshah Great response. My only question is re the diagnosis of mental health. Absolutely no doubt that many diagnoses are genuine medical issues and I agree that it’s incredibly unhelpful and worse, damaging, to dismiss them as caused by stress, lifestyle or hormones. However, I know for myself that I genuinely don’t know whether I have a mental illness or am just a victim of circumstances - tired, stressed and then self medicating with food and poor lifestyle choices. No question I could go into a dr tomorrow and be diagnosed with anxiety and depression - but I’m not entirely sure this would be a correct diagnosis. If I could somehow change my circumstances and hence lifestyle, I don’t think I would be suffering. Obviously lifestyle and stress plays a part in mental illness; but real medicalised mental illness will exist whatever the circumstances.
Great article and glad you are doing what’s best for you. I went through all of this with three of my children - I hated breastfeeding! It didn’t come easily, it didn’t suit my personality (never knew how much they’d had etc) andy it completely tied me to Bub - there’s no way I could ever express enough to miss even 1 feed. With my last baby -Id had enough and bottle fed from the start! What a relief - may have been a coincidence but he was by far my best baby in terms of sleeping and being content and best of all my husband and parents could feed him as well. Luckily his birth coincided with the release of latest research which finally proved that the health benefits of breastfeeding have been greatly overstated - at best breastfeeding has a few short term and very small benefits to tummy and digestion and no proven long term benefits.
I’m not sure if the card is the answer or not - but anyone who has lived and worked in these communities knows that the situation is absolutely dire. it does make you wonder when people are concerned about civil liberties etc whether they have ever seen first hand for themselves what is actually happening. There is generational welfare dependency and entrenched violence and absolute family dysfunction. Not every family of course but certainly enough to warrant something to be done. As has been pointed out by several it is the communities themselves who are crying out for some drastic action.
Whilst the pain and emotion was genuine and quite powerful to watch, remember we have only heard one side of the story. There is always two sides and it is quite likely that we will never hear the other and certainly not in the form of a tell all interview. Misunderstandings and misrepresentations do occur. Is it possible, for example, that the ‘senior royal’ made a comment a long the lines ‘oh wonder who baby will take over - will he have your colouring Meghan or be fair like Harry’. Obviously I wouldn’t have a clue but do know that sometimes even the most innocent of comments can be misconstrued if the person is feeling particularly vulnerable. Maybe it was more a case of foot n mouth - insensitive, inappropriate but not actually racist. Again whatever occurred I think it’s important to remember that we only have heard from Meghan and Harry - certainly speaking ‘their truth’ but perhaps not the objective truth.
This might be a really stupid question - but does just finding a foot mean 100% she is dead. Obviously I know given all the circumstances around her situation it is almost certain that she is - but theoretically you can survive without a foot and without a body I just didn’t think you could definitively say someone was dead?
@guest2 of course there are educated and well off republicans who support Trump because they are looking after their own interests but as this article eludes to and is well known, there are also a lot of uneducated and relatively poor voters who support Trump for the reasons outlined in this article and because Trump has deliberately exploited their ignorance. He has even boasted how the uneducated poor love him! While Democrats don’t have much of a hope of introducing universal healthcare that’s not from want of trying which is far better than the Republicans who vehemently oppose it and were responsible for watering down Obamacare so much.
But the really sad thing is that Trump brought in policies that actually hurt the working class or poor far more than the Democrats. It is the Democrats that want universal healthcare for example and Trump who is vehemently opposed to this. It is Trump who favours big business and tax cuts to the rich at the expense of the poor. The abominable thing is that Trump exploited the ignorance and educational disadvantage of so many of his supporters.
I had 4 c- sections. The first was emergency and was under a general. Physically I was in a lot of pain afterwards but still recovered quickly and it was managed well with medication. The others were all elective and what I wasn’t prepared for was the overwhelming nausea from the spinal block. Have never experienced anything like it and was by the far the worst part of the experience. So much so that I would have preferred to go under as I didn’t experience any nausea from the general. The 4th was also quite stressful - a lot of bleeding and subsequent quite slow and emotional recovery rate after losing so much blood. I found the physical pain of recovery the easiest part of the procedure.
I haven't changed my argument at all. It is a really complex issue and I certainly don't have the answers. It's all well and good to say that they shouldn't have children but no one has logistically said how this is to be carried out and what the ramifications would be of forced sterilisation on society. Because that's what it would be - forced sterilization. What I have objected to and what other people have objected to is the totally inappropriate and disrespectful way you are talking about people with intellectual disabilities. Even if you do work with them does not give you the right to talk about them in this way - infact it makes it worse. I would be horrified if any of my sons workers were referring to him in this way and it is one of rhe main reasons why I am such a strong advocate for people with disabilities - I don't want the sector to be so under resourced and stressed that they are forced to employ nasty and judgemental people like yourself. Hopefully this is only your internet facade and you are using exaggeration for effect and to get your point across.
So do we intervene with everyone who we believe can't look after a baby? Who decides? What is the IQ cut off point? What about people with drug addictions? Women in violent relationships? How do we do this? Forced sterilisation - do police come around and get them? Not so simple is it.
I guess my point was - as a mother of a son with a significant disability- it is so important to me that he is treated with respect. Your comment and reply was disrespectful towards people with disabilities and is deeply offensive. They have the right to be treated with respect and dignity and for their wants to be acknowledged. As stated in my original comment- which you seemed to have missed- this is very different to having their wants granted. I am really hopeful that you don't really work with people with disabilities and have just said this to give your argument more 'weight' - otherwise it is truly frightening that someone with such simplistic and narrow views is working with such vulnerable people.