my lettter to the new york times - Page 2

[Sk8ermaiden]

Originally Posted by PPaul

I just want to add here, and I may have mentioned this earlier, but in response to MeganMarie: I would have loved to have offered more examples and more of the positive side, but please do not underestimate the restrictions of word count. This story was drastically cut as it is. There was a lot more to say. Yes, I am lucky to be able to write places like Time and the NYT, but the space limitations are such that stories need to be tightly focused and are always edited for space. Truly, the only place to write more freely is in blogs and in books, and I try to do so with both. I have started blogging at HuffPo, and I also have a book coming out next month that is an expose of the commercialization of parenthood in which I go into some of these issues at more length. And there is always more to be said....

Again, with best wishes,
Pamela

As someone who's been in journalism as both a writer and a copy editor (generally responsible for cutting articles for length) for over 10 years, I would like to say that there is no way a balanced article gets edited into this without someone involved having a very strong agenda. When cutting an article, copy editors are very conscious of trying to cut equally from both sides of the balance.

For an article on conflict between doulas and hospital staff not to even mention that doulas are often hired to fight mom's battles for her is journalistically irresponsible.

I'm sorry, but the "cut for space" argument does not serve as an answer for the gross one sidedness of this piece, nor for including a quote from ACOG (who said nothing) but not the AAP (who would undoubtedly have said something), or the inclusion of the ridiculous Arkansas "study" as something scientifically valid.

[yamilee21]

Originally Posted by PPaul

... personally am considering getting a midwife the next time around, but as many of you know, options are severely limited in NYC as they are in many other areas. ...

Actually, in New York City, we are fortunate enough to have quite a few midwives who are willing to assist VBACs, though most are homebirth midwives, so our are options are not as limited as in other areas.

[PPaul]

quick response

Hi there,

Another quick reply and I'm sorry if I can't continue more with this later. But I did want to address Sk8ermaiden's comments. You wrote:

For an article on conflict between doulas and hospital staff not to even mention that doulas are often hired to fight mom's battles for her is journalistically irresponsible.

Actually, I did mention this in my opening anecdote. This is precisely why Myers hired her doula.

Secondly, I wanted to note that the Alabama study mentioned there was hostility between doulas and hospital staff, but did not blame doulas for this. In fact, as explained later in the story by Penny Simkin, she and other doulas have felt that the hostility comes from the hospital staff before she even begins working. Clearly, this can be a mutual or coming from either side.

Lastly, I want to be clear that I am not blaming my editors for the length of the story. I also was restricted by word count in terms of how much I could include. I had to make tough choices, in order to relay the news story at hand. It's not easy and I'm not saying the results are always perfect, but it is a limitation.

Wishing all of you the best, and thank you again for participating in this discussion with me.

Yours,
Pamela

[*MamaJen*]

Originally Posted by PPaul

I think some of the misunderstanding here arises from how journalists (at least responsible ones) work or try to work. I'm not saying I'm perfect, but if I write a story about conflicts with doulas and LCs, it is not with an agenda in mind but with an intention to document a phenomenon that is occurring.

Pamela -- thanks for coming on and joining in the debate. I think that's a valid point and again, the story seemed fairly balanced to me.
You know what I'd really love to read in the NYT? A story about why women choose to have homebirths. Not a shock-based article about crazy pregnant hippies who will probably die if they give birth without an OB on hand, but a thoughtful, fact-based story on the many valid reasons that influence us to give birth at home. In my experience, women who choose homebirths are an amazingly intelligent, informed, and educated bunch.
And by the way, if you see A.O. Scott, tell him he's the bomb.

[PPaul]

on a related topic

Mamajen, and thanks to you. I am also a ***huge*** fan of AO Scott...

Btw, on a somewhat related topic, and b/c I think many of us are probably on the same page on many subjects motherhood-related, I thought you might enjoy this, just up:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pamela...s_b_89663.html

All best,
Pamela

[yamilee21]

Originally Posted by *MamaJen*

... You know what I'd really love to read in the NYT? A story about why women choose to have homebirths. Not a shock-based article about crazy pregnant hippies who will probably die if they give birth without an OB on hand, but a thoughtful, fact-based story on the many valid reasons that influence us to give birth at home...

Wouldn't we all, but I feel fairly certain that this won't happen any time soon. Between the pro-formula op-eds, the very unbalanced, anti-co-sleeping articles, and the articles mocking/attacking stay-at-home mothers, not to mention numerous articles with a subtle, underlying theme of "whatever happened to the good old days of children being seen and not heard," it is quite clear that the NYT, as an organization, is anti-AP and anti-NFL, and sometimes I think just plain anti-family. I have actually subscribed to the NYT for about 15 years, but it got to be such a turn-off to read every day that I only get it on weekends now. But with all the articles that are negative towards my own lifestyle, I should really just cancel my subscription altogether - after all, I'm clearly not part of the demographic the company seeks to attract.

[AlexisT]

You know, I don't think the NYT is that bad overall--it's just the lifestyle articles, which pretty much everyone I know laughs at. They're always about "trends" that only affect upper class women in New York City.

The pro-formula column wasn't an editorial (in fact I think the editorial was in favour of the policy), it was an Op-Ed, and they publish all kinds of dissenting views in that.

[merry-mary]

Originally Posted by PPaul

I am sorry if this story came across as negative about either field; I think that making both these fields the best they can be is a shared goal all of us can aspire to.

I don't mean to beat a dead horse here, but I have been mulling over this article and the posts here on this thread since reading them over the past few days.

Unfortunately, regardless of your intent, your article did paint a very negative picture of doulas and LCs. I agree with you that there are extremes in the professions: just as there are unprofessional and/or unknowledgeable doulas and LCs, there are also unprofessional and unknowledgeable L&D nurses, OB-GYNs and midwives.

I felt that your article marginalized and highlighted doulas and LCs as potential DANGERS and BARRIERS to the parent-child relationship, and this made me incredibly angry and sad, as the professions, at least in my experience and estimation, are already marginalized enough. Furthermore, often, doulas and LCs are what SAVE natural birth and breastfeeding. Had I not worked with a doula during my child's birth a few years back, I am certain that I would not have had the incredible completely natural childbirth that I did end up having. Likewise, as a breastfeeding counselor, I can say without hesitation that a helpful, kind and knowledgeable LC can save a failing breastfeeding relationship. These professionals should be lauded for their efforts, not criticized for the extremes among them ... the extremes that can be found in ANY profession.

Given that so many of us (and so many in the natural birthing world) have pointed out that your article fell short of its goal to present a balanced view of these professions, will you do a follow-up story? Letters to the Editor are good and powerful, but nothing quite equals the words of the author herself.

I hope you will consider writing a follow-up or explanation about your story.

[Benji'sMom]

Originally Posted by PPaul

Hello again,



I think some of the misunderstanding here arises from how journalists (at least responsible ones) work or try to work. I'm not saying I'm perfect, but if I write a story about conflicts with doulas and LCs, it is not with an agenda in mind but with an intention to document a phenomenon that is occurring.

I guess that's the problem. Why right a story about "conflicts with doulas and LCs," why not just write an article about "Doulas and LCs," which may include something about conflict, but could potentially be a more positive piece overall? Choosing to write about conflicts sets it up to be negative on purpose, that IS an agenda. Makes me wonder how she got the idea that there was a conflict "phenomenon." Certainly not from reading the 2006 Alabama study which, as someone already mentioned before, only described the conflict with nurses, not with mothers. So where did she learn about this phenomenon of conflicts with mothers?

[Kontessa]

Doulas and LCs are clearly not the norm. Most people I know do not even know about them. I would be very sad if the first thing most people hear about them is such a negative article. Why not write about the more common conflicts between hospital policy and thier bottom line and a mothers fight to get good care?

I just do not understand....

[hipmummy]

Well written.

[DahliaRW]

Originally Posted by merry-mary

I don't mean to beat a dead horse here, but I have been mulling over this article and the posts here on this thread since reading them over the past few days.

Unfortunately, regardless of your intent, your article did paint a very negative picture of doulas and LCs. I agree with you that there are extremes in the professions: just as there are unprofessional and/or unknowledgeable doulas and LCs, there are also unprofessional and unknowledgeable L&D nurses, OB-GYNs and midwives.

I felt that your article marginalized and highlighted doulas and LCs as potential DANGERS and BARRIERS to the parent-child relationship, and this made me incredibly angry and sad, as the professions, at least in my experience and estimation, are already marginalized enough. Furthermore, often, doulas and LCs are what SAVE natural birth and breastfeeding. Had I not worked with a doula during my child's birth a few years back, I am certain that I would not have had the incredible completely natural childbirth that I did end up having. Likewise, as a breastfeeding counselor, I can say without hesitation that a helpful, kind and knowledgeable LC can save a failing breastfeeding relationship. These professionals should be lauded for their efforts, not criticized for the extremes among them ... the extremes that can be found in ANY profession.

Given that so many of us (and so many in the natural birthing world) have pointed out that your article fell short of its goal to present a balanced view of these professions, will you do a follow-up story? Letters to the Editor are good and powerful, but nothing quite equals the words of the author herself.

I hope you will consider writing a follow-up or explanation about your story.

ITA. So for example, a mom or a husband reads your article, and then talks their daughter or wife out of hiring a doula based on it since the doula would just "get in the way." Or someone gets a bad taste for LCs and doesn't seek one out when they have breastfeeding difficulties and then gives up breastfeeding? I just think it's irresponsible to paint such a negative picture of both professions. The piece really should have been more balanced.

FWIW, my most recent birth would have not been the wonderful experience it was without my doula. In a long labor, she was a Godsend to my dh and I and my dh, who was skeptical about hiring one at first, said we weren't paying her enough at the end of my birth! Now what if he'd read this article while I was pregnant and decided no way no how were we paying to have someone "interfere". That would have been a HUGE disservice.