Why California Kicks Ass!!!

[Clodfobble]

Ah, okay--I admit I'm not informed on the subject in any way, I just remembered reading about midwifery recently being legalized.

[jinx]

I used a CNP midwife and delivered in a stand alone birth center (for $4K and I had my own jacuzzi tub). It was fine with me, but still a very medical event. Some women don't want all that.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Just in response to this small section; in the deep dark days before we all had schools (public or otherwise) everyone home schooled (as we all know). As communities grew, some parents got together and used what might be described as community facilities to educate their kids which then led to the parents electing perhaps one of the parents to teach all the kids which of course then led to the development of the public education system as we know it today.

Then, since college educated people were rare, they hired professional teachers, because they wanted their kids to be better educated than they, and most everyone in the town, were.

[Sundae]

Home births are technically aloowed in this country if it is the woman's preferred choice. However there is a terrible shortage of midwives, and often the woman has no choice but to come into hospital because a midwife cannot be spared from the ward.

The same thing happens with water births - you can plan it all through your pregnancy, but if one more woman than they have pools for goes into labour before you, you just have to get on with it on the bed.

I congratulate myself of steering clear of all these complicated decisions.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

The same thing happens with water births - you can plan it all through your pregnancy, but if one more woman than they have pools for goes into labour before you, you just have to get on with it on the bed.

The same thing happens with bed births. For our second, there was a planned induced labor, because the baby was past the due date and was getting pretty big. We showed up at our scheduled time, only to sit in the waiting room for 6 hours because there were no beds free.

[HungLikeJesus]

Originally Posted by Radar

Here's a few off the top of my head...

• ...
• The fact that I can proudly walk into a well-lit, clean, and professional establishment filled with a friendly staff that provides me with a menu of different types of marijuana and products that contain marijuana including food, lotions, etc.

...

But do you need to get drug tax stamps?

[Radar]

No drug tax stamp required.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Radar

. . . people who like George W. Bush or his insane war . . . Texas might not work out too well for me.

Somehow, you've just never been too happy about taking down totalitarian governments, have you? Supremely unlibertarian of you. Supremely totalitarian-friendly, which isn't consistent with libertarianism or its ideals, either.

The Republicans are the only ones succeeding at taking down tyrannies. The Democrats -- in a word, they're incompetent at it. For two generations, the Democrats have not won wars against the kind of foes we Americans fight. That's a hell of a record of failure.

Wars by democracies against tyrannies cannot, by definition, ever be insane. Sane people understand this. The ill-advised loudly and publicly don't, and hate the liberation process. The ill-advised love tyranny much too much. Radar, YOU love tyranny too much, as your behavioral inclinations here show. Take a lesson from me; I understand these things better than you, and there's no actual shame in that. But it may have offended your precious ego.

You'll notice I don't love tyranny even a little. Even radar can't complain about me on that score! He has to come up with some other silly excuse, generally springing from how very much I annoy and see through him.

Honestly, the way radar carries on about Republicans, you'd think he'd cut himself on one when he was little. He professes to prefer Democrats, for reasons that don't cut it with me.

I'll say nothing of barbeque except that Texans do it well.

[Grendel T. Troll]

Ok, to put this topic back on track, I offer this:
http://graphjam.com/2008/06/23/song-...-californians/

Hope this helps!

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by jinx

The trend has been towards making home births illegal. Since lay midwives and hospitals don't mix - that leaves the certified nurse practitioners and other trained medical professionals to play midwife. So yes - there are more and more midwives delivering babies in hospitals as a trend.

True statement, midwifes are becoming quite popular, not lay midwife's but CNM. We have had two of our kids delivered by them and it was a great experience. I could never recommend a home birth in this day and age. To many bad things can go wrong in a NY minute. But I do think they can improve the birth experience in the hospitals and many hospitals are moving in that direction. There are still many obstacles to overcome. The majority of states have all used CNM's but the question is can they work independently of the supervision of a physician. That is where the legal vs. illegal argument comes into play. It is this question of "direct supervision" which hampers many advanced practice nurses from contributing better health care at a lower cost to areas in need. Most "pass through" hospitals allow a larger role for the APN than the bigger areas. The more ideal and cosmopolitan a location is, the greater the influence and control that physicians will assume in dictating how and by whom care is delivered. It is all about money at that point.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Somehow, you've just never been too happy about taking down totalitarian governments, have you? Supremely unlibertarian of you. Supremely totalitarian-friendly, which isn't consistent with libertarianism or its ideals, either.

The Republicans are the only ones succeeding at taking down tyrannies. The Democrats -- in a word, they're incompetent at it. For two generations, the Democrats have not won wars against the kind of foes we Americans fight. That's a hell of a record of failure.

Wars by democracies against tyrannies cannot, by definition, ever be insane. Sane people understand this. The ill-advised loudly and publicly don't, and hate the liberation process. The ill-advised love tyranny much too much. Radar, YOU love tyranny too much, as your behavioral inclinations here show. Take a lesson from me; I understand these things better than you, and there's no actual shame in that. But it may have offended your precious ego.

You'll notice I don't love tyranny even a little. Even radar can't complain about me on that score! He has to come up with some other silly excuse, generally springing from how very much I annoy and see through him.

Honestly, the way radar carries on about Republicans, you'd think he'd cut himself on one when he was little. He professes to prefer Democrats, for reasons that don't cut it with me.

I'll say nothing of barbeque except that Texans do it well.

Democracy is not synonymous with freedom and is not the opposite of tyranny. How funny that you want to take an armed force into other nations to FORCE your will upon them and to institute a form of government that YOU think they should have...and you think I'm the one who supports tyranny.

The only thing you understand better than me is how it feels to be an insane and mentally deficient person who is a laughing stock to those around him.

I am no fan of Democrats, but they are merely thieves, while the Republicans and insane people like UG are both thieves and murderers.

Given the choice of being robbed, or being robbed, murdering people, and having Americans be killed in unnecessary, unwarranted, unprovoked, and unconstitutional wars, I'll take the former.

UG not only loves tyranny, he insists that America practice it and hates those who are truly libertarians. If he were more intelligent or witty, he might be able to get under my skin. Luckily for me he's just not that important.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Somehow, you've just never been too happy about taking down totalitarian governments, have you? Supremely unlibertarian of you. Supremely totalitarian-friendly, which isn't consistent with libertarianism or its ideals, either.

The Republicans are the only ones succeeding at taking down tyrannies. The Democrats -- in a word, they're incompetent at it. For two generations, the Democrats have not won wars against the kind of foes we Americans fight. That's a hell of a record of failure.

Wars by democracies against tyrannies cannot, by definition, ever be insane. Sane people understand this. The ill-advised loudly and publicly don't, and hate the liberation process. The ill-advised love tyranny much too much. Radar, YOU love tyranny too much, as your behavioral inclinations here show. Take a lesson from me; I understand these things better than you, and there's no actual shame in that. But it may have offended your precious ego.

You'll notice I don't love tyranny even a little. Even radar can't complain about me on that score! He has to come up with some other silly excuse, generally springing from how very much I annoy and see through him.

Honestly, the way radar carries on about Republicans, you'd think he'd cut himself on one when he was little. He professes to prefer Democrats, for reasons that don't cut it with me.

I'll say nothing of barbeque except that Texans do it well.

Democracy is not synonymous with freedom and is not the opposite of tyranny. How funny that you want to take an armed force into other nations to FORCE your will upon them and to institute a form of government that YOU think they should have...and you think I'm the one who supports tyranny.

The only thing you understand better than me is how it feels to be an insane and mentally deficient person who is a laughing stock to those around him.

I am no fan of Democrats, but they are merely thieves, while the Republicans and insane people like UG are both thieves and murderers.

Given the choice of being robbed, or being robbed, murdering people, and having Americans be killed in unnecessary, unwarranted, unprovoked, and unconstitutional wars, I'll take the former.

UG not only loves tyranny, he insists that America practice it and hates those who are truly libertarians. If he were more intelligent or witty, he might be able to get under my skin. Luckily for me he's just not that important. The can annoy me only as much as a gnat buzzing around me might before I swat it to death.

[Aliantha]

In our public hospitals, most babies are delivered by midwives and if you want a home birth you can do that also, although you need to arrange your own midwife. Normally, if you go into labor and you're in the hospital and everything is proceeding nicely, you don't even see a doctor till after the birth.

Water birthing has become pretty huge here lately, but there aren't enough facilities to cope with the demand, so it's first in best dressed here too.

Actually, speaking of which, my cousins wife went into one of the new public hospital water birth facilities in the Royal Womens Hospital and the 'suite' as they're called was amazing. There's the big spa sized bath and those big excercise balls, and comfy armchairs and a queen sized bed so that your husband can stay overnight with you when you have your baby. I was amazed when I saw it. Very swish for a public facility.

[Sundae]

I think midwife means the same thing here as it does in Aus. Here we only see a doctor for complications too.

Re water births - in case you haven't seen this one. Rikki Lake. Not Safe for Workplaces because it's on a porn site (?) and shows nipples. But it's about the beauty of birth, not graphic, bloody screaming.
http://m90.org/video/54493/Ricki_Lak...irth_in_a_tub/

[spudcon]

It's on a porn site because Rikki Lake is in it.