head in the sand

freebirth. sounds like some kind of drug thing, doesn't it. actually, it's an absence of things. the concept means birthing a child by yourself. and one supporter believes "As long as clean water and reasonable living standards are available ... then the task is to eliminate the other two factors and a natural birth will be as safe as it can be." (the three factors being, according to her, poverty, intervention, and fear.)

excuse me while i guffaw here. i mean, are these people really serious? yes, apparently they are. the idea has taken hold in britain and here in the u.s. the proponents say that we haven't gotten where we are, as homo sapiens, by requiring medical personnel to help with birth events.

that's true, but it's also true that many women throughout the ages have died in childbirth. while i have to admire the indian woman who goes off to have her child by herself (is that really true?), i don't think i would have done a very good job of delivering my two children all by myself. i suppose i could have done it if i'd had to. but i didn't have to. i chose to do the lamaze thing and felt proud of myself for handling that much of it in a self-reliant way.

but, freebirth? pardon me, but i have no desire to pull my own tooth, bandage my own broken leg, take out my own appendix. or anyone else's for that matter. if i were the only one left after an earthquake of maximum proportions, then yes, necessity is the mother of do-it-yourself. but when there's a choice? hufft ... haha, you've got to be kidding. hahahaha.....