Well, i am so glad that her precious baby is "perfect" despite her stupid irresponsible behaviour.
What a moron.
Maybe possibly she NEEDED a c-section for medical reasons, and the story just didn't read like it.
-Haylee (trying to hold on to her last remaining shreads of faith in humanity).
I knew a woman who was induced 4 weeks early because "I'm uncomfortable, and ready to get this guy out of me"
Nice, really nice.
Mamato Ruby Violet (6 with autism) and someone who should make him/herself known sometime in the next month.
Even if she had a reason to have a c-sec I don't understand why they wouldn't have waited closer to her due date.
Some people really lose perspective on crap like this. I know someone who induced because she wanted her new baby in the family christmas photo.
What is even sicker than pregnant women wanting things is Drs. that suggest and or agree to do them.
The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it. We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.
What's the point of having the first baby of the year if ANYONE could just go and do it this way? I sure hope the mom who was trying for the first baby and ended up second is pissed.
I also hope someone gave birth at home even before the first c-sec baby and that it gets in the paper.
why does this article state that "most likely" the other birth was c-section? anyone happen to know if that birth was cs or v? YES, agreed here that the ignorant media could do itself & the rest of us great good by NOT spending time researching & writing about CRAP stories like this one.
"oh, more useless info, how cool." me - when i catch titles like that article's
|Originally posted by kama'aina mama
I would love to see them (whoever THEY are that give a damn about this stuff) refuse to acknowledge cheaters like this. If I had a years supply of Pampers to award someone, or whatever... I wouldn't give it to these people. I would write the offer in such a way as to not exclude a C-birth that honesty just fell at that time but eliminate plotters like this in favor of spontaneous birth.
Yeah, but how do you weed out the inductions, augmentations and planned cesareans nowdays? Geez, in the hospital, that makes up the majority of births.
|Originally posted by kama'aina mama
On a positive note, my morning paper had a story this AM about the first baby born this year in Hawai'i. Born at 1:35am and she had been in labor since Monday. So Hurrah for a letting it happen naturally rather than turning it into a scalpel race and Hurrah for the staff at Queens Medical Center for not timing her out at 24 hours!
That IS great! Thanks for posting it.
what is that supposed to mean?
In the pacific time zone? in Oregon?
I think somebody closer to the Date Line gets to claim the title of 'first baby of 2004'.
And who cares? Like, I see the reason to care for first baby of the millinium (& give him/her paper diapers and fake milk), but not first of 2004!
and FRANKLY, the mom & OB shouldda gone for LAST baby of 2003. (Or maybe they were trying for that but the doc got waylayed during the incision.)
Besides, it's easy to get free formula - just tell American Baby Magazine and Motherhood Maternity that you're exclusively breastfeeding on demand and they will send you a case!
If I won, it would probably be paper diapers, fake milk and a bunch of baby appliances to keep my child occupied so I wouldn't have to hold them!
A few years ago it was a big deal... must have been the 2000 baby.
BTW... believe it or not, this poor mom had a c/s too.