Wanted: 8 hours more sleep

[kyburg]

Whole house is snuffly now. Tell my boys to keep their fingers out of their mouths, yes I do. Now, both of them have colds - I think. Could still be allergies, but my money is on URI - transmission method shared. They've spent a lot more time together than I have as of late, so wherever they picked it up - they did at the same time.

Xander does NOT like me telling him - and reinforcing with a tap on the paw at times - to keep from nibbling, biting or sucking on fingertips. And if the shoes are off, and the fingers are sore - you got it. Even that got a 'OH HELL NO' from Jim.

This was present from the beginning, and since it is a clear sign of self-soothing, did nothing to curb it for the first month. Now, it's the first boundary being set. You need to keep your fingers out of your mouth.

Oh, such a mean Mommy. I also make you eat your breakfast and stop watching television. If you won't settle yourself to sleep, I swaddle and rock you until you drop off, too. AWFUL.

My last dose of antibiotics was this morning, and I'm not done - improved, but not done. I see a trip to urgent care for the entire family tonight.

Los Angeles Times Festival of Books was lean and mean, and it showed. No color-coded pennants flagging routes overhead (oh dear, they were missed), and I had one panel that was at least 33% overbooked for the facility it was in. (Turn away over 90 people - oh, I was not liking that one bit.) I need to drop an email with some more thoughts - to be blunt, I am happy we had an event at all, considering, and I said as much to people who asked 'why the cuts?' Keep it possible for us to have another one economy, k thanx bye.

The Mrs. Meyers Clean Day soap people had the best booth of the day, right next to Dodd Hall - HUGE bottle of soap, free samples, sign up for email goodies...and super people working there. WIN.

Air America was across the way - and the Ron Paul people crashed the event, brought placards and squatted under the trees. Welcome to UCLA. (They also did it across the way from the New Age Spirituality booths, which amused me as well. Want to be seen as a group of entitled, pinhead brats? Yeah, that.) People watching. Gotta love it.

Sunburned my arms and a bit of my face. The Fair's artwork/theme this year was done by Eric Carle, who illustrated the Hungry Hungry Catepillar, so my thank you present? Is a mug with the caterpillar on it - reading a book. WIN AGAIN.

I would have preferred the volunteer shirt - it is screaming pumpkin orange with yellow print on it that says 'BOOKS RULE' - the Bookworms (me) got a maroon t-shirt with a small logo on it that will go very well with the old Fanime ballcap from the year we did Security for them.

I *did* get to see Stephen Cannell, as he went in to the panel - and I have aged better. (Did get to say Good Morning, but he didn't look left or right, which is acceptable as you are rushed into the building, through the ticket lines. WRONG - and another thing for the email.) He's even gotten smaller (shorter?), thin and worn-looking. Hell, it's been 21 years. I'm still proud as hell of him for becoming a novelist - he's dyslexic almost to the point of illiterate, did you know that? And he *still* went into writing as a profession.

And that was about the entire fair for me. I did try to jump out and catch a few booths, but it was so packed and the booths near Dodd didn't have anything I needed, so nothing was purchased. Never did get near the Food Stage, or any of that - and the booths near the kids stage had *nothing* for Xander.

I was so tired I forgot about Pico Iyer. But it was a good tired.

Went home, found Jim about ready to hang kid from the rafters - suggested Chinese buffet and that was all win. Except for a kid who has decided it's okay to push us on 'I'm playing, not eating now that it's time and there's food in front of me.' Did I mention I'm a MEAN mommy?

Playing was okay until he started choking on what he had in his mouth - now, it's off the list. UH, three year old? And once he gets it that Mom's Serious, he eats just fine for me. He may need a little help putting it on the fork, but from there - all good.

The staff there must have all been Taiwanese (or nearly so) - they thought Xander was the best thing they'd seen all day, complimented us, complimented him and spoiled him rotten. Girl magnet.

Which is a nice way to introduce this little bit - has anyone else seen the Newsweek article about transracial adoption - done from the perspective of POC Parents/White Child?

As Yale historian Matthew Frye Jacobson has asked: "Why is it that in the United States, a white woman can have black children but a black woman cannot have white children?"

That question hit home for the Ridings in 2003, when Terri's mother, Phyllis Smith, agreed to take in Katie, then 3, on a temporary basis. A retired social worker, Phyllis had long been giving needy children a home—and Katie was one of the hardest cases. The child of a local prostitute, her toddler tantrums were so disturbing that foster families simply refused to keep her. Twelve homes later, Katie was still being passed around. Phyllis was in many ways an unlikely savior.

Twelve homes before she was Xander's age. Yeah, my temper would be 'disturbing' too by then.

Having been working this subject for over five years, I know those families are out there - this is not the only one, but it's entirely true that the ratio against POC Parents/White Children is rare, uncommon and so on. Frankly, I'm delighted to see this. It's a gimme with folks who claim that transracial adoption is just another priviledge grab (Co-opt my culture, take my kids, take it ALL, and then toss it in the trash when you get tired of it being 'strange'), and for some cultures? There's a real expectation some of the race priviledge will rub off. And that makes it okay - not that the kids need homes, this is a lucky situation because you get 'better' parents (ie, white) this way.

It feeds into the whole 'be grateful' mentality - and what I think of THAT isn't printable.

The truth is, kids need homes with good parents. And both sides come in all colors. Why make it even harder to get the kids mated up with parents by trying to match them like socks? (Think of it. But when it's clearly NOT HAPPENING, do what these guys did. Drop it.)

It's pointless to try to hide the adoption, guys.

Thinking about it, we got plenty of race training in all parts of our education provided by both DCFS and Heartsent - if it's banned, I wouldn't have known it. Heartsent, in addition - urged us to join Families with Children from China, and that group is ALL about integrating, celebrating and educating with regards to race and culture. We listen to the Korean adoptees, because they have a lot to say about what To Do and what NOT To Do. (You've heard about 'Adopted: The Move?' 'Daughter From Danang? (Vietnam Baby Airlift)' ?)

The magazine also has a nice piece that warms my heart - if you know me, it's obvious why.

Dillon is marching with a group called Catholics United who carry a banner that says: "CONGRESS: SUPPORT PREGNANT WOMEN AND REDUCE ABORTIONS NOW!" This is the first time that Dillon has seen any mention of abortion reduction; the battle has always been about Roe and bans. "We need to start thinking in practical terms: what can we do now to reduce abortions?" she says. "And I think that is very pro-life, if we can lower the numbers," she says.

Heresy. It just isn't as much fun to work at reducing numbers instead of getting together with your friends and hating on implied abortionists (those who know you can't keep a woman from having an abortion, you can only try to make it possible for her to chose NOT to have one). I'm old enough to remember - and had a mother in nursing, a father in pharmacy - years before Roe. Abortions were NOT stopped because it was illegal. Work at something that actually WORKS, k thanx bye (again).

Supporting women. What a concept. *eyeroll*

Your Monday, now in progress.

Comments

[bitpig.livejournal.com]

It is not the federal government's job to support women. It's the Church's job -- which it does admirably A pregnant woman can knock on the door of any Catholic church in our diocese and she and her child will be taken in and cared for. The same is true all around the world.

The government's job is to protect the lives of its citizens, including the ones not yet born.

[dracowayfarer.livejournal.com]

Is the church also going to care for her and help her raise her child for 18 years?

What if she's not Catholic? Or if she doesn't trust the church and their views on medicine?

[bitpig.livejournal.com]

Th job of the Church is to care for the poor, sick, and helpless. It does this for however long is necessary. Race, religion, social status is irrelevant. Those who hate or distrust the Church are welcome, but for those whose hatred and/or mistrust is an obstacle, other social and religious organizations exist with similar intents and purposes.

I repeat. It is not the job of the federal government to support women (or men), raise children, feed the poor, or enforce equality (except in federal facilities, activities, etc.). The job of the government is to safeguard the borders, make and enforce laws, guarantee contracts, fund infrastructure, and safeguard the national patrimony.

[dracowayfarer.livejournal.com]

Is that the job of the church? Where is this stated? And how well does it fill that role? Does the church establish a place for the needy to live, feed them, clothe them, and help them pay their bills? Does the church have doctors and medical facilities on their exclusive payroll? Not that I've seen.

Is it not the job of the government to look after the well being of its citizens? Or should the government say "Well, we gave you roads. Too bad you can't afford to buy food, much less buy a car to drive on the roads we gave you. That's your problem."

And where does the funding come from for these social organizations that you mention? I don't think they're all privately funded.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

That's your neighborhood. I went looking in mine, not that long ago.

If you're under 21, you're out of luck. There are no 'teenage unwed mother homes' left. I checked.

And it was the age that tipped me off. Under 21, you're still the property of your parents, for all liability issues. Yup. Liability - plain and simple. If you're someone else's problem, you're someone else's solution.

Even if well - it's not.

(Good on your diocese. It's RARE.)

[sal_amanda]

I like how pro-choice people get represented as people who are just out there trying to make everyone have abortions. Really, we also want a reduction in abortions, but we know that making it illegal is not going to make that happen. Providing support to women, educating people through comprehensive sex education, and providing access for the means to stop unintended pregnancy from happening in the first place has been proven to be much more effective.

As for the comment above, the same is absolutely not true all around the world, or even all around the country. Anyone who believes that hasn't been around much.

Changing subjects now, my brother is Korean and I definitely learned a lot about what not to do from my family's experience. I pass this on to the families I work with who are interested in a transracial adoption and I intend to utilize that knowledge for myself. The issue with POC adopting white kids isn't so much that it's not acceptable as that it's uncommon because the numbers aren't there. There's a shortage of foster parents who are minorities, but more of the kids "in the system" are minorities. So there's a lack of balance there.

In my work doing home studies, the vast majority of my clients are white and they want white babies. And they wait a lot longer because there are more couples wanting a white baby than there are white babies that get placed for adoption. Sometimes the prospective parents are okay with Asian because that's the "more acceptable minority." There's even less availability for Asian babies, though, at least at my agency, in terms of domestic infant adoption. One couple had been fine with Hispanic, but not African American until I educated them to the fact that Hispanics are not all light-skinned. I certainly don't want anyone adopting a child outside of their culture if they're not comfortable with it, but I can't deny that the lack of openness sometimes frustrates me.

[gallo-de-pelea.livejournal.com]

I have to admit that totally boggles my mind, especially if the prospective parents in question had "want to give a loving home to a child in need" as their top priority - "a child in need" can be any color. :/

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

In a lot of cases, people come to adoption after failing to conceive their own, plain and simple - and have not come entirely to terms with their own infertility.

Annnnd want to find a kid to fill the gap. Less questions that way, and all that.

I've known a number of white PAPs who truly believe a child of color will grow up to hate them, particularly as you go up the scale - just because that's 'what they do.' Seriously.

Those folks - are just fine waiting. Really really.

[sal_amanda]

That's it exactly. 99% of the people who come to my agency have tried every fertility method available before going the adoption route. My agency, until recently adding international adoption, has been for those seeking domestic infant adoption. The white couples who come in want healthy white babies. And yeah, they wait as long as it takes for a birth parent to pick them. When people come in who are open to race and are well educated on what that means, they generally received a placement very, very quickly. And sometimes if there are no waiting parents that are open to race, my agency has to go outside of our clients to find a placement for that child.

[bitpig.livejournal.com]

I like how pro-integration people get represented as people who are just out there trying to make everyone integrate their lunch counters. Really, we also want a reduction in segregation, but we know that making it illegal is not going to make that happen.

[sal_amanda]

Really? That's the absurd argument you're going to use?

Listen. I'm not the kind of person who goes along with arguments with random people I don't know on the internet, especially on a post on someone else's personal journal. She doesn't deserve to put up with that.

Judging from your comment to another comment above, you and I have extremely different opinions on politics. I'm going to just leave it at that.

[bitpig.livejournal.com]

Here's my opinion: human life is sacred; every fertilized human egg is a human life; and deliberately killing innocent human beings is wrong and should be illegal.

Just because the law says somebody's not human doesn't mean that they're not human. It means that the law is wrong.

[sal_amanda]

People will still seek out illegal, back-alley abortions and women will die from them. So abortions won't be stopped AND people will die.

I'm sure you mean well, but you seem to have a very utopian view of society that isn't the truth in this world. I am a social worker in the 2nd poorest city in the U.S. and believe me, even with there being a Catholic church on every corner and social programs aplenty, it's not enough to really help women who are poor and on their own with a pregnancy they didn't plan. No one provides the full-time support that they really need. Walking a mile in their shoes is a very eye opening perspective that I would recommend to you.

Also, and I really do mean no offense by this, you're a guy and many women will pretty much automatically discount your opinion on the matter anyway.

[bitpig.livejournal.com]

People will still seek out illegal, back-alley SLAVE TRADERS and AFRICANS will die from them. So SLAVERY won't be stopped AND AFRICANS will die.

Good thing we never outlawed slavery. After all, an institution as old as the human race can't be stopped by mere force of law. If we'd made slaveholding illegal, those back-alley slave markets would be everywhere by now.

"America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father's role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts -- a child -- as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters"

And, in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners.

Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign." (Mother Teresa -- "Notable and Quotable," Wall Street Journal, 2/25/94, p. A14)

[dracowayfarer.livejournal.com]

Laws work for some things. Two can play this game.

People will still seek out illegal, back-alley ALCOHOL and BOOTLEGGERS will die for selling it. So DRINKING won't be stopped and many SOCIALITES will die.



Prohibition was supported by many religious groups, too.

[sal_amanda]

Sigh. I can see we're not going to have an intelligent debate about this.

Perhaps Mother Teresa didn't realize that women were exposed to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or sexual partners long before Roe v. Wade.

Look, we're actually after the same outcome, that being as great a reduction in abortions as is humanly possible. A total elimination would be nice, but isn't realistic. In any case, in order to do that, we need to eliminate the need for it. That is more likely to be achieved by providing widespread comprehensive sex education and greater access to the means to prevent unintended pregnancy. And the kind of support for women, especially poor women, that you seem to naively believe is already in existence, but truly is not. You seem to be concerned with racial equality. Gender equality is just as important and still as distant from actually happening in this world.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

UH.

WHUT.

Uh, we did outlaw slavery, Bruce. Some time ago.

Mother Teresa, bless her heart, has a very different POV on the human condition to begin with - from lifestyle on up. It's an opinion, based on observation and a life's work dealing with the fallout. Not first hand experience (and that's not a bad thing).

[dracowayfarer.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic about slavery.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

He tried.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

I wish every fertilized egg had a place to go when the responsible party can't complete the pregnancy. It's that simple - parents are responsible for their children, at every stop along the way, and this is no different. We insist that they decide what happens to their children -

And if they can't even complete the pregnancy, there you go.

It's the potential for a human life - until birth, that's the only definition available until the technology improves.

And to be blunt, I see NO - NONE - NADA - ZIP motivation on anyone's part to develop such technologies when it is simply easier, cheaper (and expected, be honest) that if you can't even afford health care to complete a pregnancy on your own, you're expected to terminate it. You don't deserve to breed.

If people pity you, make you a life lesson and a group project, that's another thing.

For my peace of mind, it's simple. You don't believe in abortion, don't have one. Take the steps to enable someone considering one to choose something else (and I don't mean harassing them - enable. That usually involves time and $$$). People make better choices when they have plenty of options to pick from.

Women choose abortions when the options indicate it as the best conclusion. Make it possible for something else, and something else will happen.

(But that's WELFARE and that's EBIL. Yeah, yeah, yeah.)

[moropus.livejournal.com]

I've read about Katie and her family in a few places. I understand she was practically feral when she was taken away from the woman who gave birth to her. Bloggers may have exaggerated for effect, but not by much. I applaud her family for undertaking years of racism for adopting a child with nowhere to go.

I don't think abortion should be a first line birth control method, but there is a time and a place for it. Funny how it takes 2 to start a pregnancy, but I have been asked to drive women to the clinic because the male contributor had suddenly vanished.

Jesus did tell us to take care of widows and orphans and others in need and I don't care if its through the church, the government just so long as it gets done. The churches in my town have formed a cooperative that supports a home for unwed mothers who have no other means of support and tries to get them work after the birth. Work for mom after the birth is where pro-lifers fall down. They don't usually care what happens after the birth or for the next 21 years.

Even if you outlaw abortion and manage to round up all the back alley abortionists, I can name one herb off the top of my head that induces abortion and could Google for more. A plant you can pick up off the ground causes abortion.

If we outlaw abortion, are we going to educate women enough so they can make a comfortable wage for themselves and the child, including health care and babysitting which cost more and more all the time and support them until a job comes along? Or just put them on welfare for life so they can't afford education and the advances that come with it? Its fine to feel smug until you are the one with a problem. You can also Google the fact that pro-lifers have a tendency to take their pregnant wives and daughters out of town for an abortion so nobody knows about it.

[melodicblue.livejournal.com]

There is one thing only that worries me about regulations to reduce abortions. If a girl, over 18 or not gets pregnant by a guy in consensual sex, let's even make him her boyfriend, and decides she wants an abortion, but they only do abortions for rape victims (in this example), then in many cases, if they really want the abortion, they are obligated to say it was rape to have the abortion performed. In doing so, she is dooming the boyfriend (who might be a good guy, who might be an idiot) to the hell we create to punish rapists in this country, and idiot or no, he wouldn't deserve it.

I do have a question regarding this scenario though. If abortions only happen for rape victims, how do they verify it was rape? I know rape kits can be done in the first 24 hours or so of the incident, but if you don't find out your pregnant for 4 weeks, how do you prove to the clinic it was rape? Or do they just take your word for it? I would like to find a way to reduce abortions, but I fear that doing so will cause more harm in the process unless it's done very, very well.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

I don't believe you can enforce restrictions on medical procedures - I was working for a company that made monitoring equipment for women in labor in hospitals when the whole 'partial-birth abortion' issue first came up.

I had plenty of nurses and doctors who had attended every kind of delivery to ask about it. (I've told this story, right?)

I couldn't find anyone who 1) had seen it done, 2) knew anyone who would. I could only find ONE doctor who would even consider such a thing, and he had rocked back on his heels, put chin to hand and thought about it hard before answering 'I'd only consider it if the baby was already dead and the mother was dying.'

OH YEAH COMMON PRACTICE.

What tears me a new one on this whole issue is the blatant lying. I picked up a pamphlet on this issue in a church in Hawaii - IN A CHURCH - supposedly written by a nurse in Chicago who had worked in an 'abortion mill.'

You're a nurse (and she claimed she was an RN), you have licensure. I went looking for it. GUESS WHAT. And some bright penny left that in a house of God. (I think that's breaking a commandment. Yes, I'm sure of it.)

They just don't understand that I'm going to call them on it. You'd better be telling me the truth, guys. And to this day, the only actual 'partial-birth abortions' I've ever been able to confirm were those possibly done by the people listed in the court cases.

You want to see how a medical procedure is regulated, you only have to look at the actions being taken in response to Suleman. Has anyone been arrested? That's not how those things work - the law does not regulate medical procedures. It is usually on the purview of the Board, and then the Health Department. And after chasing the subject down with peers of several Boards, I'm confident that the whole issue was prime red herring and few, if any reasonable people would consider it.

Termination of a pregnancy is a medical procedure - and the real reasons for any one of them are none of my business, unless someone offers me the information. Just like anything else. And it is NOT in my purview to decide which ones are medically necessary.

I wouldn't add rape as a prerequisite to this isssue for all the tea in China.

(But for comparison, you might look at the criteria Switzerland has for allowing a pregnancy termination before 16 weeks, I think. There, no questions asked - but the woman does have to make a statement to the effect that she simply can NOT have this baby before they will proceed. After 16 weeks, you're having the baby.)