Site Presented By
Tuesday, Nov 3, 2009
To establish at the outset my bona fides for commenting on this matter, I am a mother of three (grown) children and never experienced either a stillbirth or an abortion. I am also a committed pro-choicer, and in fact was President of the Westchester County (NY) chapter of NOW back in 1973 or thereabouts. Yet when I first read of this controversy in the SF Chronicle, my sympathies immediately went to the mother of the stillborn (even though I don't regard myself as ideally [excessively?]) maternal. I was surprised to learn that the objection was coming from the pro-choice side, and wonder if my pro-choice sisters might not be a bit too rigid in this case.
I can understand why the mother of a stillborn infant, who was able to see and hold the dead baby, might wish for a more dignified memorial than a death certificate. The birth certificate would acknowledge that she had indeed carried the fetus, with everything that that entails, and had intended for it to be born alive.
Since some states do issue birth certificates under such circumstances (a fact of which I was unaware), a precedent has been established, and I think my home state of California should follow suit.
I have grappled with abortion and miscarriages; I have not carried a child to term, though I long to do so. Oddly, for an abortion I didn't want at 19 I felt the need to name the child, and have been unable to let go of awareness of what that child might have grown to, even over two decades later. For miscarriages I felt no such self-punishing need, and wanted only to set them aside and keep on trying.
But it seems to me that the act of childbirth is such a profound event that one attempts to ignore it at one's peril. Dissociating oneself from the pain only pushes it out in another direction. Symbols and rituals help us cathartically grapple with emotional challenges; it may be that for this reason, some women discover a birth certificate helps them with this.
But there are some people who are very good at rerouting pain and other strong emotions (artists, etc.), and for these people a birth certificate may actually be a problem because it gives them an object that pulls them back into their pain, rather than an object that helps them acknowledge and set it aside. For those people a birth certificate could cause more harm than good.
Could this be optional? The woman's choice? A hard one to make, to be sure, but better than no choice at all.
"It's all about symbols: birth certificates that offer a symbolic token from the state that the mother really did give birth, a symbolic token in an argument that women are killing their babies when opting for abortion."
I cannot see how this has anything to do with abortion. The only people who see a link are those making a huge, huge logical stretch to fit their own personal agendas.
Mothers of stillborn babies do give indeed birth. They go through labor, or perhaps have C-sections, same as those who bear healthy, happy babies. I can't imagine how awful it would be to go through full labor knowing your baby is dead. And I can certainly see how a birth certificate would give, at least, some dignity to the dead baby.
In my state, the legislature is considering such a bill, and it has wide support, from adamantly "pro-life" and "pro-choice" lawmakers alike.
These birth certificates seem to be something that will offer some comfort, and no real harm. So Carol, pick your battles a little better.
The loss of a fetus is called a miscarriage before 20 weeks, and a stillbirth after 20 weeks. This is because after 20 weeks, you are close to viability which is generally considered to be 24 weeks. At the hospital I work at, the fetus is considered "medical waste" if miscarried before 20 weeks. However, the parents do have the option of naming as well as cremation or burial. The fetus does not get a death certificate. After 20 weeks, everything changes: the parents have to pick either burial or cremation. The fetus gets a death certificate (although parents are not obligated to name the baby) and if they have Apgars (any signs of life) they get a birth certificate as well. I'm not sure if it is an "official" birth certificate or not. If the baby is born dead, then they get a death certificate but no birth certficate. This seems reasonable to me, but as someone who is 24 weeks pregnant now, I totally understand the desire to have a birth certificate, even if there are no signs of life. I think it is appropriate once the fetus is at or near viability.
A woman who has carried a child within her body for 9 months and then have the child die for one reason or the other should be allowed to have a birth certificate for that child if she so desires. She will be receiving a death certificate but the two pieces of paper are entirely different in the information required. Another child after the stillborn child, as he or she gets older, may have questions about older siblings and to have a birth certificate can help. It also documents that there was another child in the family who died and other siblings would know this instead of having it hidden away. When doing genealogy, you want to know how many children a family had and a stillborn child is just as important as any other child who lived. It might also help future generations who might have medical questions when the same thing happens to them.
this isn't about respect for stillborn babies
This kind of initiative is intended to open the door to issuing death certificates for all human fetuses terminated early. A Tennessee state legislative representative has proposed that all aborted fetuses/embryos be issued death certificates as well. It's clear where that is leading: directly to the public's knowing which women have terminated pregnancies. Under the guise of "respect" for the babies, this kind of thing could potentially be aimed at identifying, shaming, and eventually possibly criminalizing all women whose pregnancies do not end in a live birth.
An Israeli columnist issues a scathing indictment of Israel and calls on the U.S. to apply pressure.
Even when government officials purposely subject an innocent person to brutal torture, they enjoy full immunity.
Hey, guys: Are adult films making you bad at sex?
What was once depicted as a grave act of lawlessness -- Bush's NSA program -- is now deemed a vital state secret.
The loony wing of the Republican Party prepares for a big day in Tuesday's elections
Salon headlines in your mailbox
