babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Lefauvre, did you get my private message? Please be aware that you are posting in the feminism forum, which has a specific feminist mandate. Currently, your posts are violating that policy.
For that matter, you shouldn't serve anyone alcohol. Or sell cigarettes to someone with a chronic hacking cough, or who is known to have cancer. You shouldn't sell candy or pastries to obese people. You shouldn't serve alcohol, cigarettes or red meat to someone you know has had heart problems or bypass surgery. You should decide for yourself what's best for them.
I am skeptical of the link to FASD of low to moderate alcohol use during pregnancy. I think for cells to be that adversely affected, it would take a serious incident or chronic alcohol abuse. For a woman to have a beer or two or wine on occasion during her pregnancy should not harm the fetus. In fact, would no doubt help it, if it helps the mother. I think the anti-alcohol campaign, in its attempt to target FASD, far overshoots the mark.
Further on that thought, I think it's part of a western dualistic mindset to separate the fetus from the mother. Until the baby is born, they are one organism. Anything that harms the mother will harm the fetus. If the mother chronically abuses alcohol, she is harming her fetus because she is harming herself. If the mother wants to have, for example, a Guinness one night or a glass of wine because she craves it and it makes her feel good in the same way that having good food makes her feel good, she is helping herself and therefore helping the fetus. I think most people who do not have FASD themselves understand the difference between harmful and beneficial uses of anything.
ETA: as Ghislaine comments above.
My final thought on the matter: I would actually be more concerned if a pregnant woman denied herself the enjoyment of a drink or two during her pregnancy out of fears of peer censure.
Trouble is, we don't know the lower limit of safety when it comes to alcohol. True, if booze really was so dangerous that pregnant women would have to abstain completely, the entire population of western Europe would have fetal alcohol syndrome. I believe that poor nutrition during pregnancy may also play a role, particularly a deficit of folic acid. That said, the medical establishment can't recommend a safe lower limit for booze because it simply isn't known, and probably varies between individuals according to body size and ability to metabolize alcohol.
It's a troubling issue for me. I'm totally on side with the sanctity of a woman's dominion over her own body, but I have worked in drug/alcohol addiction treatment for a long time, and I've seen a lot of kids seriously damaged by booze. These kids have lifelong cognitive impairments that hamper their judgement, and they often end up in jail or with drug/alcohol problems of their own. According to the Public Health Agency of CAnada, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder is the leading cause of developmental delay in Canada, and has been especially devastating in aboriginal communities due to widespread substance abuse amongst residential school survivors.
The devastating consequences make this a more complicated issue than a woman's personal choice.
I think the question, Sineed, is not whether or not there are health risks unique to pregnant women when it comes to nutrition and/or inotoxicating substances, but that who is best suited to assess, determine and prescribe solutions to those risks? Your average bartender? And only then to "visibly" pregnant women? Better for me, and, I imagine, for you, would be a comprehensive education program, easily accessible and universal, dedicated to maternal health issues. The BC midwife plan is certainly a step in that direction, but it could stand to be more attractive and more accessible to every potential mother.
Also, society tends to focus on the choices made by pregnant women individually (i.e. abstain from alcohol or citarettes) and situational factors (is a pregnant woman exposed to hazards like dangeorus chemicals or shift work at her job) are completely ignored.
A question I have about strangers touching a pregnant woman's abdomen: from your experience, are the people who do this generally men, women, or an even split?
That's odd. You would think that women especially would know better than to touch another pregnant woman uninvited. I wonder what's going on there.
Healthy Baby Manitoba
Only advice I ever give if someone asks, is "if you want a girl, and you don't care whether she's cis or trans, research suggests you should spend the second half of the first trimester loading up on sweet potatoes, tofu, non-alcoholic beer... anything phytoestrogenic. Just then, not the whole pregnancy... don't want her to end up straight. :P" But again, your mileage may vary. I'm happy for you two.
On general personal boundary terms I'd agree. However would you still say to that to the bartender(who could just as easily also be a woman and a woman with kids at that) who's been told that if she does serve a pregnant woman a drink, she will lose her job? Should somebody have to sacrifice themselves(and possibly have trouble feeding her own children) in the name of a strict defense of the customer's personal autonomy?
Other than the booze issue, however, I'm unequivocably with you, and would say that if servers do refuse a pregnant woman a drink, they should be required to do so in a way that withholds any sense of personal judgment and simply points out that they're following the policy of the establishment.
What jurisdiction has a law that states pregnant women cannot drink alcohol?
On second thought, I'm not sure if there are actually laws about serving alcohol to pregnant women(granted there would be no way to actually enforce a legal ban on drinking while pregnant). I've amended the previous post to delete that sentence, pending future research. Apologies.
'kay thanks.
It would be offensive for a bartender to have the responsibility of staring at each woman that asks for a drink to decide if she may be pregnant. Offensive on a few levels.
For those in some kind of crisis about wanting to impose their advice on women who are expecting a child consider this:
The baby you are thinking of -- its most important advocates and care givers will be the mother and perhaps a father. The baby will rely on the mother's judgement, her empowerment, her committment and her caring. Without those things, whatever you think you might be able to offer in that little moment of interference you think is yours to impose, will be meaningless, a drop in the bucket. Ultimately to trust and empower the mother is all that is available for those decisions are hers to make and the baby is reliant on how she responds not on some paternalistic drive-by.
Once this is fully appreciated one also can have a better understanding of what choice and reliance means and what that special relationship between a mother and child means.
I think if mothers had more power over their environments and their lives rather than less we would have more healthy babies rather than fewer. Of course this means social power, economic power etc. but that is a drift I guess.
I think bartenders should refuse to serve middle aged men with flushed complexions. But only for their own good of course.
The alcohol while pregnant issue is a tough one for me. My sister is an alcoholic and other various substance abuser. She had 5 babies. Two died shortly after birth. The one she after a stint in Narcotics Anonymous had minor health problems and the other two are on the FASD spectrum. They are both significantly intellectually challenged, and one nearly died shortly after birth.
So while I support a woman's autonomy, I've got a long-term and personal view of the harm that can occur. I might not say anything to a pregnant woman having a drink, but I'm going to have a little shudder because we don't know how much or not or at what point. We just don't know. Personally, my experience led me to abstain entirely from alcohol and caffeine and to be madam health freak. I don't expect other women to do the same by any means.
I had great pregnancies and loved being pregnant, but didn't like people touching my belly uninvited. I was in an elevator at work one day when a (male) co-worker reached over and rubbed my belly "for luck". I told him that if he ever touched me in any way ever again for any reason I'd break his fucking arm. Yes, he made out like I was over-reacting, so I told him that over-reacting would be breaking his fucking neck and to be happy we weren't going there just yet. Nobody at work attempted to touch my belly after that.
There was the case of the intervention at the gym... I was an avid runner in my second pregnancy, and continued to run up to my eighth month - letting up a little on speed and distance as my weight went up, and only quit when the change in centre of gravity started giving me shin splints. One day at our indoor fieldhouse track, a bunch of older ladies who used the walking lanes were watching me intently. When I went to the change room to get ready to go, they cornered me to tell me how I was robbing the baby of oxygen and damaging myself by running while preggers. It was actually kind of funny, in an awful and inappropriate way. I did tell them it wasn't any of their beeswax, but my midwife and GP both thought it was okay for me to run as long as I felt like it.
I only address pregnant women I don't know to tell them how wonderful they look. And I never rub a belly for luck!
I disagree. Well... sort of.
I do believe that the woman is within her rights to do whatever she wants with her body, but I also believe that people have the right to refuse any service they provide, for whatever reason they deem legitimate. So basically, the same part of my belief system that mandates people should have the freedom to do what they want with their bodies, also means that people can do whatever they want with the services they are providing. If you disagree, you have the right to go to a different establishment that will serve you.
Such as..... choosing to not serve people of colour? Aboriginal people? Gays and lesbians? Because such folks can always go elsewhere?
Sorry to burst your bubble but we have this silly little document called the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Canada ain't no libertarian fantasy. At least, not yet.
Yeah, Chauchat, well the thing is, that level of thoughtful discrimination doesn't seem to get applied to red-nosed, sweaty round men with liver conditions. How many bartenders do you know have read up on exactly how alcohol affects pregnant women? And what makes you think that these bartenders care more about her baby's health than she does? The answer to those questions should show that refusal to serve pregnant women has nothing to do with health concerns and everything to do with ideology.
I'm not a doctor (except for teeth) and I haven't read up on how alcohol affects pregnant women, but if I were working as a bartender and pregnant woman came up and ordered liquor, I'd certainly feel pretty uncomfortable. Legally, I don't think I'd have any option but to serve her, however. Certainly, in my smoking days, if a pregnant woman asked me for a cigarette (and it was clearly for her to smoke), I wouldn't give it to her. Personally, the day I found out my wife was pregnant was the day I quit smoking and during her pregnancy, I made a point of not drinking alcohol around her, given that she had given it up and I wanted to be supportive.
I don't think the analogy to the "red-nosed sweaty round men with liver conditions" necessarily holds since such people are only damaging their own health, not somebody else's. On the other hand, if you work at McDonald's and a parent brings their severely obese child in and orders a double mac and super-size fries with a gallon of coca-cola for them, is that really any better than having a glass of wine or cigarette when pregnant? I don't know. Again, I'm not an MD.
But, again if i were a bartender, and somebody I knew to be a recovering alcoholic came up to ask for liquor, I'd be very uncomfortable giving it to him, while also knowing that I had no legal right to refuse service.
Thing is, a woman is the sole judge of what is good for her body and the life it carries. Women who are addicted can be pointed to programs and clinics that might help, but that's pretty much all that's rightful and appropriate. Offering a pregnant woman a cigarette? It might be the first one she's had in six months, or maybe she's cut back on tobacco as much as she can during her pregnancy, or maybe not at all. You don't know, so you have no right to judge, only the right to withhold your tobacco product.
Alcohol? We don't know how much is too much, though the effects of a mother's alcoholism has been well-documented. Again, refusing a glass of wine to a pregnant woman is wrong, unless she is already so intoxicated that you wouldn't serve her even if she weren't pregnant. Making the comparison between a pregnant woman and a man who is obviously suffering the health effects of alcoholism is a valid one. With the latter, you figure it's his life if he wants to drink himself to death. With a pregnant woman, the life she carries is a part of her body, so it's her decision to make. Yet the discrimination exists. It's not about health. It's still about controlling women and what they do with their bodies.