T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1055.1 | happened to me | TLE::RANDALL | | Tue Jul 30 1991 11:32 | 4 |
| I didn't see the show, but during my last pregnancy I was once
refused an alcoholic drink at a local establishment.
--bonnie
|
1055.2 | Thinking aloud | KAOFS::M_FETT | Schreib Doch Mal! | Tue Jul 30 1991 12:52 | 15 |
| Not having seen this episode, I can only guess at what the discussions
covered; could it be that these establishments were concerned less
with morality and more with legality ? Like, "gee, if that woman
has trouble with birth or with the health of the child, will she
sue us for not posting signs??"
You're definitely right that it's a sensitive topic. I'd also like
to suggest that it is a cultural one too. This kind of "minding someone
else's business" is culturally exceptable behavior in other parts of
the world and probably wouldn't anger the pregnant woman as much.
Just thinking out loud on this one,
Monica
|
1055.3 | saw some of the show | SCARGO::HIGGINS_C | | Tue Jul 30 1991 12:53 | 8 |
|
I did get too see some of the show. It seemed to me that everyone in
the audience wanted too talk but, didn't want the guests to do any
talking. In my own opinion I would rather see a pregnant woman take a
drink then too see her do DRUGS!!!
carol
|
1055.4 | Swimming | DUCK::LYNGA | | Tue Jul 30 1991 13:42 | 13 |
| When I was six months pregnant I mentioned to a friend that I was
looking for a maternity swimming costume so I could go to the local
pool. She made no attempt to disguise the fact that she thought the
idea of a pregnant woman going swimming was obscene and embarrassing to
other people. I was also told by someone else that it was dangerous
for me in case I got kicked or hit accidentally by another swimmer.
I don't think either person was concerned for my health - just that
they personally couldn't cope with the idea of seeing a pregnant woman
in a costume. I, of course, ignored them both and swam regularly.
Ali
|
1055.5 | REALLY! | TANNAY::BETTELS | Cheryl, Eur. Ext. Res. Prg., DTN 821-4022 | Wed Jul 31 1991 05:07 | 15 |
| I can't believe anyone would be upset seeing a pregnant woman in a bathing
suit.
I was in a pool a couple of weeks ago. There was a young family there, a
father a small child of about 2 and the mother who was about 7-8 months
pregant. She was wearing her normal bikini.
Good lord! Are we supposed to stop living just because were pregnant? My
doctor said I could do anything I did when I wasn't pregnant except horseback
riding and deep sea diving (no problem there :-).
At least here we don't have to worry about nursing in public. It is absolutely
natural. No one would look twice.
ccb
|
1055.6 | | USOPS::GALLANT | Nice bookends! | Wed Jul 31 1991 14:01 | 34 |
|
RE: .0
Yup... I saw the episode. But I remembered it a bit
differently - not that it makes much of a difference, but...
>bottle to the table, put the bottle warning label to the woman and said
>something to the effect that "I hope you know what you are doing to
>your baby".
If I remember it correctly, (and I'm not sure that I do, so
please correct me if I'm wrong) the waitress brought the
drink to the table with something that had the contents listed
on it (warning label, whatever) but she said "In case you
were wondering..."
Now on one hand, I can see where she'd get upset. If she
ordered a drink and the waitress informed her of it's
contents she got the "it's my body, I know full well what
I'm doing" and exploded to the manager. But to play
devil's advocate, she also could've chosen to merely say
"thank you" and let it go at that. I don't believe her
entire dining experience should've evolved to what it
did - so much so that it got the waitress fired.
It sounds to me that she was somewhat guilty about HAVING
the drink in the first place and when the waitress informed
her about the alcohol content - she exploded and made
a mountain out of a molehill.
(I didn't really pay much attention to the second woman)
Just my two pennies.
/Kim
|
1055.7 | ALCOHOL IS A DRUG!!!!!!!!!!! | MCIS2::DUPUIS | Love is grand, Divorce is 20 grand | Wed Jul 31 1991 14:01 | 3 |
| re .3
|
1055.8 | Pregnant Mother's Rights vs. Embryo/Fetus Rights | CSC32::DUBOIS | Sister of Sappho | Wed Jul 31 1991 15:36 | 17 |
| Yes, alcohol *is* a drug. Most people seem to forget this.
I have really mixed feelings about this. A woman I used to date is one of
the most active folks involved in California in protecting the pregnant
mother's rights. She was even in Time Magazine. I heard a lot about her point
of view, but I tend to go in the other direction. If a woman has chosen
to allow the embryo/fetus to grow into a baby, then I think she has the
obligation to make sure that it becomes as healthy a child as she can make it.
I don't want any of us (individuals/government) to nitpick exactly which foods
she should eat (have you had your 4 gms of spinich today?) or what exercise
she needs to have, or whatever. I do think, though, that she should not
do anything that may be directly harmful in any way to the child-to-be. I also
think that businesses are within their rights to refuse a particular service to
a pregnant woman if they think it would be harmful to the fetus (UNLESS the
woman has a doctor's permit, like for a hot tub).
Carol dB
|
1055.9 | | SUPER::WTHOMAS | | Wed Jul 31 1991 16:21 | 43 |
|
I think that one of my issues with this topic is that, yes indeed,
alcohol is a drug and the label has a warning for pregnant women *as
well as* anyone who operates heavy machinery (or on some who have
health problems).
This being the case, who is it for the restaurant to decide that
pregnant women should not drink? Do they show the label to whoever the
driver is at each table? Do they show the label to anyone who appears
to have some sort of liver dysfunction? Do they, for that matter, show
the label to *every* woman who orders a drink because they *may* be
pregnant and just don't know it? Just because a pregnant woman has a
very physical condition, why should she be treated any differently as a
customer? Some people seem to think that your brain cells go on
vacation when you get pregnant, for goodness sake, don't you think we
want the best for our babies? (yes, I know that there are some women
who abuse alcohol and drugs but they are not the issue right now)
This topic does indeed walk a fine line between the woman's rights
and the baby's rights. Women are currently being put in jail for
exposing their unborn babies to drugs, should they be put in jail for
exposing their babies to cigarette smoke? (there is a warning there as
well), to caffeine, to Nutrasweet, to artificial food colorings, to
preservatives?
I want the very best for my baby, but if I had ordered a drink at a
restaurant and had either been refused or had been treated differently
from the other customers who had ordered drinks, I know that I would be
*outraged*!
Who is someone else to tell me how to treat my body? (almost all
pregnancy books say that an occasional drink is permissible). Who is
someone else to make medical decisions for ME?
As an example, we were recently in a restaurant and when my husband
ordered a beer with his dinner, the waitress turned to me and said, you
know you can't have a beer but you can have a glass of wine if you'd
like. I wasn't planning on having any drink but geeesh, are we really
going to give the general (sometimes uninformed) public the authority
to make medical and waht is deemed as moral decisions for us?
Wendy
|
1055.10 | Lack of courtesy due to liability concerns? | TLE::MINAR::BISHOP | | Wed Jul 31 1991 17:20 | 19 |
| It seems to me that there are two consistent positions:
1. A fetus is a person, and so may not be aborted or
harmed by consumption of alcohol, etc.
2. A fetus is not a person, and so may be aborted or
harmed etc.
Either a woman has control over her body when pregnant or
she doesn't. People who assert some inconsistent mixture
of desires (e.g. alcohol is wrong and abortion is ok) are
possibly in error.
I can only forgive officious waiters, etc. in the current
context of crazy liability laws--courtesy would otherwise
require not making comments except in case of imminent serious
harm ("Pardon me Ma'am, but your hair's on fire.").
-John Bishop
|
1055.11 | Not with my wife you don't | LJOHUB::REILLY | | Thu Aug 01 1991 10:36 | 15 |
| If you allow a bar/restaurant or anybody else for that matter to stop
someone from having a drink because "THEY" believe she's pregnant and
"MAY" cause harm to the unborn child.......Then what happens when that
same person wants to purchase cigaretts??????? I guess from some
of the comments this would not be allowed????? OH and what about
2nd hand smoking??????????? If my wife who is now 10 weeks along
goes into a restaurant she can request that all folks who light up
must put all those cigaretts out......THEY are harming the fetus????
IMO....If my wife wants to have an occasional glass of wine or beer
She is intelligent enough to decide that for herself...and any place
that said she couldn't for that reason (pregnant) would hear from me at
that point in time (so would everyone in the place) and would never see
me there again..........
Bob
|
1055.12 | which expert? | TLE::RANDALL | | Thu Aug 01 1991 14:39 | 28 |
| Several years ago I read a very good science fiction story in
_Redbook_ about a woman in a technological society where every
aspect of her life was monitored. One morning when she was
brushing her teeth, the automatic scale in the bathroom told her
she had gained half a pound and had to be put on a diet, so when
she got to the kitchen she got dry toast and juice when she was
starving. The rest of the story is about her attempts to buy
something, anything, to eat, but the computer has her credit
locked up so she can't use it for food. (I mean, overweight's bad
for you, right? And we can't let you do something bad to
yourself.)
In the end it was all right because when she sat down at the
table for dinner, the all-knowing computer informed her she was
pregnant and gave her an extra serving of ice cream . . . but
still the story always gave me the creeps, because once you start
imposing that kind of restriction, where do you stop?
Poor nutrition is known to cause more problems for the baby and
the mother than an occasional drink or heavy caffeine use -- maybe
we *should* force pregnant women to eat spinach even if they hate
it. For that matter, which expert do you believe? The evidence
on caffiene is very mixed, most of it boiling down to, "Well, it
crosses the placenta and speeds up the baby's heartbeat, so it
must be bad." Which might or might not be correct, but who's to
say?
--bonnie
|
1055.13 | myob | TIPTOE::STOLICNY | | Thu Aug 01 1991 14:45 | 7 |
|
I can't get over this whole thing because I was advised *by my doctor*
to have a glass of wine on occasion (up to say, once a day) for
relaxation purposes. I'd be made as hell if someone wouldn't let
me buy a drink that was essentially "doctor's orders".
cj/
|
1055.14 | set flame /level=high | TNPUBS::STEINHART | Pixillated | Thu Aug 01 1991 17:09 | 32 |
| We're 7 years past 1984. It's not as dramatic as the book, but there's
a spooky "big brother knows best - and will enforce it" attitude.
Mandating seatbelt use for minors is one thing. Using public censure
to stop pregnant women from having one drink, or even a cigarette, is
quite another.
It's a sad dichotomy in the US where three out of five kids are growing
up in poverty, the infant mortality rate approaches Third World
standards, the urban hospital wards are filled with AIDS babies
that no one wants, and environmental hazards threaten future
generations. The worst fetal problems are not caused by a glass or
wine or beer with dinner at a restaurant. They are caused by poor
maternal nutrition, alcohol abuse, and drug abuse.
We have two standards here - nothing is pure enough for the privileged
class, and the others don't matter at all. But for those sheltered
children of the privileged class, what kind of world will they grow up
to live in? They cannot be sheltered forever. Will standard
equipment be electrified fences around homes, guns for self-protection,
filtered water, and oxygen masks? This is the US if things continue as
they are.
I pray that there is a shift in consciousness that we ALL may do the
right thing for ALL children, as the Native American wise women and men
advise us. They teach that we must make all decisions for the benefit
of the 7th generation.
I think a more apt literary description of the excesses of our times,
is the Handmaid's Tale.
Laura
|
1055.15 | | GEMVAX::SANTOS | | Fri Aug 02 1991 09:10 | 17 |
|
I am due on August 24. I have an occassional glass of wine with dinner
or on a Saturday afternoon. With my first son who is now two. I
stopped smoking and as soon as I found out. My doctor told me that
because I use to smoke that if I ever really got upset to go have a
quick smoke so that I would not upset the baby. That smoking the three
or four cigaretts that I smoked with him was not as harmfull as if I
had gotten completely upset. So, I dont think a pregant woman needs
to be reminded every time she goes somewhere what she is suppose to do
or not to do. That is why you go see a doctor when you are pregant.
Hopefully she has enough sence to care about her baby and listen to the
doctor.
Sorry for going on and on. I just get so upset when people say to me
should you really have a glass of wine and etc.
Della
|
1055.16 | | WMOIS::REINKE_B | bread and roses | Fri Aug 02 1991 11:33 | 13 |
| When I was nursing my son, the pediatrician who was originally
from Germany, recommended that nursing mothers have a beer in
the evening to relax them and to encourage the flow of milk.
I think that we have to make a distinction here between an occasional
beer, or glass of wine and excessive drinking which will indeed harm
the baby.
In Europe women have been consuming beer or wine with their meals
during pregnancy and nursing for generations. The word here is
*moderation*.
Bonnie
|
1055.17 | | SUPER::WTHOMAS | | Fri Aug 02 1991 12:01 | 38 |
|
I absolutely agree that moderation is the key, but I just see the
swing in society to "we know what's better for your baby than you (the
mother) do".
I *personally* think that it is deplorable that women are being
sent to jail for taking illegal drugs while pregnant. I realize that
the baby has been harmed and has had to suffer but shouldn't we be
trying to help the mother (and child) (re-hab program) instead of
putting her in jail. Isn't this more of a moral crime than a civil or
federal crime? Shouldn't compassion instead of judgment be used? (I
realize that the argument of where is the compassion of the mother to
the unborn baby is valid, but apparently addictions are not easy things
to control and are sometimes life and death situations in themselves)
And just where will all of this lead to? Again, the questions of
smoking and "non-healthy" food arise. If a child is born with *some*
sort of impairment, will it be considered the mother's fault, for
whatever reason? Will the mothers be held at fault for not being able
to take better care of their (in utero) babies? (you didn't take your
vitamins everyday, your child could have had a higher IQ, that'll cost
you ten years in jail).
I realize that I'm presenting scenarios that seem highly unlikely,
but I also fear that if nothing is said against this "tide of moral
indignation" that the situation could theorectically progress to this
state at some time in the future.
I had forgotten about the Handmaiden's Tale (Handmaid?) but that is
a very frightening thought, isn't it?
I've had people come up to me and say things like "that cup of
coffee better be decaf" and the previous beer/wine example that I had
presented, as if they feel that they know what's better for my baby
than I do. It fills me with tremendous concern and I just wonder where
this social attitude will lead.
Wendy
|
1055.18 | | BUNYIP::QUODLING | I'll have some of what Marketing is Smoking... | Fri Aug 02 1991 12:07 | 26 |
| Beer, in particular Stout (Guiness et al), has long been a recommended
supplement for pregnant women for the reasons outlined in .16 .
The underlying problems here are 1. The Legitous nature of the American
Society. Because every one is always ready to sue the provider of goods if the
goods aren't used correctly, people have become complacent and no longer care
to think for themselves or consult a qualified expert (such a a doctor), as to
the appropriate use, and prefer to trust a 25 words or less label...
and 2. People do not understand the term moderation. Yes, drinking your self
into a stupor everynight will damage your fetus. Smoking 4 Packs a day will
destroy your lungs, but a good cuban cigar after an excellent meal is
wonderful... Equally, Digital needs to exercise moderation in it's expenses,
but the "masses" don't understand Moderation. Either you order/buy whatever
you need whenever you need it, or you freeze spending totally.
The general public is becoming too stupid to take a rational approach to
anything anymore... Sigh....
OF course, if you really want to see how bad it could become, watch "The
Handmaid's Tale" screening on HBO at the moment. Now there are some scary
pregnancy concepts....
q
|
1055.19 | OB said wine is OK | JAWS::TRIPP | | Wed Aug 07 1991 17:23 | 17 |
| Excuse me, but when I was only a few months pregnant we were going to
do our "annual" vaction in the Hudson Valley section of New York, where
there are Lots of wineries, and the famous Cullinary Institute, where
some excellent chefs have come from.
I informed the OB of our vacation plans and asked for advise since all
the wineries give tours and samples. His advise to me was go ahead, do
the tours, enjoy the wine, it'll probably do you more good than harm,
infact he said it would likely make me feel relaxed.
So I did, and the rest is history!
The good or bad part, whichever way you view it, was I could barely
handle half a glass of wine before becoming completely tipsy. For some
reason alcohol, and caffien for that matter, seemed to react quite
strongly when I'm pregnant.
|