# Oh. Oh no. Oh H.E.*.*. no.



## deuxceleste (Aug 19, 2006)

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=s110-1375

Don't know where else to put this.


----------



## MilkTrance (Jul 21, 2007)

I don't understand?


----------



## kdubs_mom (Feb 9, 2008)

This looks like good legislation...I think. I didn't read the whole bill.


----------



## akilamonique (Jun 22, 2006)

What's the problem? I didn't read the whole thing either(sorry, short attention span), but it seems good from what I read.
Could you fill us in a little better?
Thanks


----------



## Calidris (Apr 17, 2004)

The OP may be concerned about the potential for abuse, "interfering" with the mother especially a homebirther or UC?


----------



## Shianne (Mar 23, 2005)

I don't see anything wrong with this bill either. There have been quite a few mothers that I know that had PPD and had no idea what they had. This bill would actually allow those in their immediate care to asses the situation. I know the doctor I had certainly did not have any training as to determine PPD.
Providing information to new mothers and their families, funding for services and training of health care providers...I definately don't see anything wrong here.


----------



## wanderinggypsy (Jul 26, 2005)

Ew, it sure rubs me the wrong way. I would hate to have the government 'screening' me for ppd. You know it could very likely only be a matter of time before they'd want to lump it together with other 'screenings', and ultimately its just opening up families to government control. Plus, in my opinion it feeds the myth that women are 'fragile' and 'hysterical' and we need to be checked on. I mean yes, ppd is real, but no I don't think government screening is the most reasonable answer.

Of course, I'm in Canada anyways so I probably don't have to worry about this. But still... it gives me shivers.


----------



## chaoticzenmom (May 21, 2005)

I've been screened before when I was fine. It feels creepy. I went in to have my daughter's hearing checked for free, but what it really was was a ppd check. I felt so vulnerable afterwards. The hospital where I birthed offered a free hearing check at one or two weeks post partum. I agreed to have the hearing check done. I went in to have it done, but I had to endure about 30 minutes of questions about me...not her hearing! It was fairly obvious why I was really there, so I was pretty angry when I left. I kept wondering if I passed the test! The actual hearing test took less than 30 seconds.

I think that education is one thing, but screening is another. If I get screened for something, I want to be a willing participant.

I can see how this can be a bad thing.

Lisa


----------



## MilkTrance (Jul 21, 2007)

I can too, but OTOH, there are people like me who fall through the cracks and deal with PPD in a very severe way. ALONE.


----------



## mommyof3andcountin (Mar 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MilkTrance* 
I can too, but OTOH, there are people like me who fall through the cracks and deal with PPD in a very severe way. ALONE.

And this is exactly why I would not mind being screened. If it helps one woman who has severe PPD, then I'd endure it.

I think it's a good idea to bundle the screening with baby care. We all put our babies before ourselves, YK?


----------



## paquerette (Oct 16, 2004)

Sounds like a very convenient way for CPS to steal even more adoptable young infants.










Here's a good example of what happens when PPD diagnosis and treatment goes horribly wrong:


----------



## CherryBomb (Feb 13, 2005)

Ah yeah. No routine or forced screening or medicating. Yikes.


----------



## maymorales (Dec 9, 2006)

i'm on the fence about this.
screening bothers me especially the way pp was screened. maybe that's to not alarm a mom with ppd and send her into deeper abyss of depression.
how about better support system for the family? longer paid leave for the partner/husband/father? longer hospital stay. subsidized postpartum doula care along with bf and bw consultants. and i'd love to see a bill that gives a family a whole month of delivered prepared meals after the birth of a baby. idealistic. i know.

otoh, i fell through the cracks too. that feeling of not able to care for my baby was...just horrible. but that's because i was sent out into the 'real' world 2 days after a difficult birth. i'd love for someone to ck up on me more often than that only 4-week postpartum checkup. by that time, i was way too depressed to even want to go to the doctor's office.


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

This bill is very dangerous. The part about ensuring that new mothers will be screened for symptoms is invasive and gives people way too much power over women's lives. I'll be writing to my senators, and I'll be passing the info on to everyone I know.

Thanks paquerette for the video link.


----------



## ElkMtnsMama (Feb 26, 2008)

OK, I did read the whole bill, and one HUGE problem I have with it is the section where certified midwives appear to be required to provide these screenings to women having homebirths, just as all birth centers will be required to provide them before women are "allowed" to leave.

The bill provides no mechanism for enforcement of this requirement, but I think there would probably be a danger of misguided hospital or birth center personnel calling CPS if a mother refused to comply.

We need to oppose this dangerous bill! Please,everyone read the entire text, then consider calling your congressman.


----------



## thefragile7393 (Jun 21, 2005)

I've read the whole thing several times. Digested it slowly. I see absolutely nothing wrong with it, I truely don't.


----------



## paquerette (Oct 16, 2004)

If you see nothing wrong for it for yourself, get screened all you want. But I don't appreciate that you think I ought to be forced to be screened, too. Do I get to start making your medical decisions, too?


----------



## ElkMtnsMama (Feb 26, 2008)

Yeah. That's my big problem with it, also: the force issue. Just because something may be a good idea for some people (or even most, or all, it really doesn't matter) does not mean that it is appropriate, right or just to have a law that compells people to participate against their will. The screening is a great option for moms who choose to do it, but it should always remain an option, never a requirement as this law would apparently make it.


----------



## llamalluv (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ElkMtnsMama* 
Yeah. That's my big problem with it, also: the force issue. Just because something may be a good idea for some people (or even most, or all, it really doesn't matter) does not mean that it is appropriate, right or just to have a law that compells people to participate against their will. The screening is a great option for moms who choose to do it, but it should always remain an option, never a requirement as this law would apparently make it.

It doesn't FORCE a woman to submit to screening.

It requires states which receive funding to train health care professionals to provide education and information and to OFFER screenings to postpartum women.

Quote:

.....REQUIREMENTS- A State that receives a grant or contract under subsection (a)(1) shall ensure that postpartum condition education complies with the following:

.....licensed health care professionals within the State who provide prenatal and postnatal care to women shall also *provide education to women* and their families concerning postpartum conditions to promote earlier diagnosis and treatment......

.....`(C) SCREENING AND REFERRAL- *A State that receives a grant* or contract under subsection (a)(1) *shall ensure that new mothers,* during visits to a physician, certified nurse midwife, certified midwife, nurse, or licensed healthcare professional who is licensed or certified by the State, within the first year after the birth of their child, *are offered screenings* for postpartum conditions......


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thefragile7393* 
I've read the whole thing several times. Digested it slowly. I see absolutely nothing wrong with it, I truely don't.

And what happens when a woman chooses an alternative therapy - one that the doctor doesn't agree with? What happens with a woman tries the therapy recommended and has a bad reaction such as the woman in the video and tries something different against her doctor's recommendations?

I called my senator and voiced my opposition.


----------



## llamalluv (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ColoradoMama* 
And what happens when a woman chooses an alternative therapy - one that the doctor doesn't agree with? What happens with a woman tries the therapy recommended and has a bad reaction such as the woman in the video and tries something different against her doctor's recommendations?

I called my senator and voiced my opposition.

Except that the woman in the video is blaming Zoloft for making her babies hair stand up.


----------



## amyleigh33 (Nov 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
Except that the woman in the video is blaming Zoloft for making her babies hair stand up.









Is that some sort of (really inappropriate) joke?


----------



## Danelle78 (Dec 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
It doesn't FORCE a woman to submit to screening.

It requires states which receive funding to train health care professionals to provide education and information and to OFFER screenings to postpartum women.

Oh yah, the way OB's "offer" prenatal care? How long to you think it'll take insurance companies to say, "YEAH, more money for us, make it a mandatory offering and here's our billing code." Last time I was in an OB's office, it was not an "offer" of a sonogram. (I'm supposed to be in charge of my health care right?!?!) And my wanting to put it off or totally skip it was "tying his hands" and I was dooming my baby.

Hey, co-sponsored by Barack Obama. And it looks like a year later it's still stuck in committee.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

** subbing cuz I'm out of time, will be back later **


----------



## MusicLadyToo (Feb 27, 2005)

scares me too for the same reasons as some of the others . . .what if I refuse the doctor's treatment. when i sign my refusal of treatment form will it be a direct line to DCF? shoot it scares me to refuse some of the vaccines I don't agree with because I'm always afraid that someone will tr to report medical abuse or something . . .

i think screenings for PPD are important but there has to be a better way without laws to get it done . . .


----------



## momo7 (Apr 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *paquerette* 
If you see nothing wrong for it for yourself, get screened all you want. But I don't appreciate that you think I ought to be forced to be screened, too. Do I get to start making your medical decisions, too?









: I totally agree. The government has no buisiness making my medical decisions for me. It's all about money with these ( the government and pharmaseutical companies) people. If you're not crazy before they get to you, you will be after.







:


----------



## evsmom (Apr 11, 2008)

I think the slippery slope is if screening becomes required or routine.

It's kind-of like vaccines... There are exemptions so you don't have to get your child vaccinated, but will that always be the case? I've heard of some scary stories recently where parents were jailed for not vaccinating. And I know in some areas it is difficult to get exemptions. People should be allowed to make their own health choices without the government policing every move.







:

I would be strictly opposed to routine screeing of PPD. It would feel like yet another case of the government getting too involved.

Just my opinion.


----------



## evsmom (Apr 11, 2008)

I think the slippery slope is if screening becomes required or routine.

It's kind-of like vaccines... There are exemptions so you don't have to get your child vaccinated, but will that always be the case? I've heard of some scary stories recently where parents were jailed for not vaccinating. And I know in some areas it is difficult to get exemptions. People should be allowed to make their own health choices without the government policing every move.







:

I would be strictly opposed to routine screeing of PPD. It would feel like yet another case of the government getting too involved.

Just my opinion.


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danelle78* 
Hey, co-sponsored by Barack Obama. And it looks like a year later it's still stuck in committee.

I missed that.


----------



## llamalluv (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danelle78* 
Oh yah, the way OB's "offer" prenatal care?

Yes, just like that.

Quote:

How long to you think it'll take insurance companies to say, "YEAH, more money for us, make it a mandatory offering and here's our billing code."
I'm thinking you don't understand how insurance works....it would COST insurance companies more money to cover screening and treatment, not MAKE them money.

Quote:

Last time I was in an OB's office, it was not an "offer" of a sonogram. (I'm supposed to be in charge of my health care right?!?!) And my wanting to put it off or totally skip it was "tying his hands" and I was dooming my baby.
It *was* an offer. The fact that you don't like the terms of the offer doesn't make it mandatory to comply with testing you don't want. You were free to walk out and find another OB or midwife who would treat you as a person, and not a widget or an infant.


----------



## CherryBomb (Feb 13, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 

It *was* an offer. The fact that you don't like the terms of the offer doesn't make it mandatory to comply with testing you don't want. You were free to walk out and find another OB or midwife who would treat you as a person, and not a widget or an infant.

Do you think a woman who got up and walked out after being "offered" screening for PPD would face no consequences at all?

Or do you think that maybe the act of declining in and of itself will send up flags to physicians?

I tend to think the latter.


----------



## Kleine Hexe (Dec 2, 2001)

Slippery. Offered screenings....ok *but* what does a screening consist of? What is this scale they are speaking of using? Who decides what the warning signs are and what the treatment will be? What is the woman's right to refuse screening?

I agree that women need more support postpartum. In some countries you are offered a nurse that will come to your home to help you out with household things and with any questions or physical concerns you have.

I remember just being offered the "Healthy Start" program when I was pg before and that weirded me out, but I do believe that program has it's place.

I need answers to my questions. The bill as it is written leaves to many unknowns.


----------



## paquerette (Oct 16, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
I'm thinking you don't understand how insurance works....it would COST insurance companies more money to cover screening and treatment, not MAKE them money.

Insurance companies will not lose money. They'll just raise premiums to offset the costs of all these fabulous new programs, plus a little extra for their trouble.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
It *was* an offer. The fact that you don't like the terms of the offer doesn't make it mandatory to comply with testing you don't want. You were free to walk out and find another OB or midwife who would treat you as a person, and not a widget or an infant.

Sure, you're free to refuse OB "offered" services. And they're free to call social services and have them send people to your house every day to knock on your door and ask you why you're trying to kill your unborn baby. I'm pretty sure there's someone around MDC who can tell a good tale about that.


----------



## Danelle78 (Dec 29, 2005)

that higher prices for everyone. And there was no reason for me to leave the office in tears because of his nastiness. It was not an "offer" for a sono, and he made that plainly clear.


----------



## tayndrewsmama (May 25, 2004)

Definitely a slippery slope. This is sort of old, but does pertain. I'd be curious to hear from someone in IL regarding all of this.

Quote:


July 28, 2004

Posted 12:56 AM Eastern

NewsWithViews.com

This past spring, the Illinois General Assembly passed a new bill requiring compulsory mental health screening for children and pregnant women; it was signed into law by Governor Blagojevich. This program will require all pregnant women and children through the age of 18 be tested for mental health needs.

Quote:

Trainor went on to state, "Since psychiatric involvement in education, SAT scores have gone down for the past few decades. Evaluating mental conditions is not based on scientific evidence, it's subjective. What if they find a student has a math disorder, a reading disorder? Would that be a mental health disorder, one that would cause the parents to put their children with a drug for a condition they may or may not have?" Trainor asked.
Isn't it interesting that no men are required to have any testing?


----------



## llamalluv (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *paquerette* 
Sure, you're free to refuse OB "offered" services. And they're free to call social services and have them send people to your house every day to knock on your door and ask you why you're trying to kill your unborn baby. I'm pretty sure there's someone around MDC who can tell a good tale about that.

You're sure that someone can tell a story about that? IOW, you are making that scenario up?


----------



## tayndrewsmama (May 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
You're sure that someone can tell a story about that? IOW, you are making that scenario up?









What does IOW mean?


----------



## Danelle78 (Dec 29, 2005)

It's been well documented through the press, that parents CAN be usurped by the courts when it comes to the treatment of their children. Why in this political arena would you think otherwise? Do I personally know of specific cases? No, not first hand. Do I think it would happen, absolutely. Medical advice is no longer being seen as just "advice".

But I did find in Florida that you have a right to file a DNR UNLESS you are pregnant because the state may have an interest in the fetus. (1984 Right to Decline Life Prolonging Procedures Act)

Apparently in Utah and other states you can be arrested for refusing a C-section:
http://advocatesforpregnantwomen.org...e_medicine.php

Slippery slope. PERIOD.


----------



## Danelle78 (Dec 29, 2005)

We could also discuss how pregnant women are treated by the system when they have drug problems. We live in a culture of "PROTECT THE FETUS" at all costs.


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tayndrewsmama* 
Isn't it interesting that no men are required to have any testing?

Well, interesting is one word - not the word I would have chosen, but I probably would have gotten a nice little message from a moderator to edit my post if I would have put down the word I would have chosen!


----------



## tayndrewsmama (May 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ColoradoMama* 
Well, interesting is one word - not the word I would have chosen, but I probably would have gotten a nice little message from a moderator to edit my post if I would have put down the word I would have chosen!

















That pretty much why I just used 'interesting'.


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tayndrewsmama* 







That pretty much why I just used 'interesting'.

















Yes, I figured.


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *amyleigh33* 
Is that some sort of (really inappropriate) joke?

Yes, I'd like to know to.


----------



## UnassistedMomma (Jan 24, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Danelle78* 
We could also discuss how pregnant women are treated by the system when they have drug problems. We live in a culture of "PROTECT THE FETUS" at all costs.

More like a political culture of CONTROL. This country is more than happy to terminate pregnancies freely _as long as_ it's done under government controls. If you try to _complete_ a pregnancy of your own will though, that must also be under their control.

It's all about CONTROL. Ultimately they don't truly give a crap about the woman or the child, they care about CONTROL.


----------



## dex_millie (Oct 19, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *paquerette* 
If you see nothing wrong for it for yourself, get screened all you want. But I don't appreciate that you think I ought to be forced to be screened, too. Do I get to start making your medical decisions, too?









:

Screening and interfering in my life would upset me to the point that I will think about it and be angry/bitter instead of enjoying my baby for a while. I hate when I am forced to do anything especially this type of thing. I am one that don't get PPD and would be pissed to have to undergo any screening.


----------



## GooeyRN (Apr 24, 2006)

I don't like the government saying I have to get screened. I had ppd with my first and choose to not get treatment. I didn't want any notings in my chart about it, for fear if cps was ever called and the ppd was discovered. I don't want CPS for have "ammo" if they ever get called for something else. (and then they find we don't vax on schedule, we co-sleep, etc. What an awful parent I must be in the governments eyes.) Sad, but true. I don't like laws saying I have to do something with my health. I don't think its a problem for providers to be required to offer screening/treatment, but I don't think we should have to consent to screening/treatment if we don't want to.


----------



## Danelle78 (Dec 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UnassistedMomma* 
More like a political culture of CONTROL. This country is more than happy to terminate pregnancies freely _as long as_ it's done under government controls. If you try to _complete_ a pregnancy of your own will though, that must also be under their control.

It's all about CONTROL. Ultimately they don't truly give a crap about the woman or the child, they care about CONTROL.

Never thought about it that way. So much for liberty, huh?


----------



## ZanZansMommy (Nov 8, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
You're sure that someone can tell a story about that? IOW, you are making that scenario up?

You're either very naive or you haven't read enough here on MDC.

I cannot post my dear friends story without her permission, but scary stuff does happen.


----------



## Individuation (Jul 24, 2006)

I was fired from a birthing center practice over mental health screening when I was pregnant. I have Asperger's syndrome. I was handed a form checklist that asked me to rate on a scale of 1-5 if I ever "felt helpless" or "disconnected." I don't answer emotional questions very well. I brought the form to the midwife, and politely told her that I have a psychiatrist, and I'd be happy to have him discuss things with her, write a letter, etc. but that she wasn't going to get a very good result from her screening form. SHe said "we have to have it--we receive federal money." THen I was told if I wasn't willing to fill it out, I could not receive care there.

Just thought I'd put that out there.


----------



## GooeyRN (Apr 24, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Individuation* 
I was fired from a birthing center practice over mental health screening when I was pregnant. I have Asperger's syndrome. I was handed a form checklist that asked me to rate on a scale of 1-5 if I ever "felt helpless" or "disconnected." I don't answer emotional questions very well. I brought the form to the midwife, and politely told her that I have a psychiatrist, and I'd be happy to have him discuss things with her, write a letter, etc. but that she wasn't going to get a very good result from her screening form. SHe said "we have to have it--we receive federal money." THen I was told if I wasn't willing to fill it out, I could not receive care there.

Just thought I'd put that out there.

Thats sad.


----------



## tayndrewsmama (May 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Individuation* 
I was fired from a birthing center practice over mental health screening when I was pregnant. I have Asperger's syndrome. I was handed a form checklist that asked me to rate on a scale of 1-5 if I ever "felt helpless" or "disconnected." I don't answer emotional questions very well. I brought the form to the midwife, and politely told her that I have a psychiatrist, and I'd be happy to have him discuss things with her, write a letter, etc. but that she wasn't going to get a very good result from her screening form. SHe said "we have to have it--we receive federal money." THen I was told if I wasn't willing to fill it out, I could not receive care there.

Just thought I'd put that out there.

Wow, that is bad. Really now, who can say that they haven't EVER had a time that they felt helpless or disconnected?


----------



## llamalluv (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ColoradoMama* 
Yes, I'd like to know to.

I am unclear as to what you two mean as "a joke" of any kind, appropriate, or not. Did I write "ha, ha" or use a laughing smilie?


----------



## tayndrewsmama (May 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
I am unclear as to what you two mean as "a joke" of any kind, appropriate, or not. Did I write "ha, ha" or use a laughing smilie?

Did you watch some other video or do you not believe the side effects of those drugs (which, BTW, weren't mentioned as anyone's hair standing up)?


----------



## llamalluv (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tayndrewsmama* 
Did you watch some other video or do you not believe the side effects of those drugs (which, BTW, weren't mentioned as anyone's hair standing up)?

You need to watch the videos again, and read the notes on the side. Not only does she blame the anti-depressant for her son's hair "standing straight up" she also blames it for hypnic jerks in BOTH her children (not just the one that she breastfed while on Zoloft), and when I pointed out that lots of people experience both those things, she said that my husband and I must be on drugs. I can PM you copies of her messages to me.


----------



## tayndrewsmama (May 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
You need to watch the videos again, and read the notes on the side. Not only does she blame the anti-depressant for her son's hair "standing straight up" she also blames it for hypnic jerks in BOTH her children (not just the one that she breastfed while on Zoloft), and when I pointed out that lots of people experience both those things, she said that my husband and I must be on drugs. I can PM you copies of her messages to me.

I am not seeing/hearing that in the video but I didn't read all the comments on that page though. I'll have to check. Saying that it's the cause of her kid's hair standing up is as misguided as the woman they interviewed here about raw milk who said it makes her hair curly too. I would be interested in reading what she wrote to you, if you don't mind.


----------



## RachelSerena (Aug 4, 2006)

I am seriously opposed to this bill.

I am sorry for the PP having been kicked out of her birth center because she wouldn't fill out the form. It makes me really sad.

As for the Illinois fiasco, you can refuse the screening just as you can refuse any other mandated health thing - but if you read the fine print at the bottom of the screening form, you'll read "PRIME-MD is a trademark of Pfizer Inc. Copyright 1999 Pfizer Inc".

Pfizer is the drug manufacturer. You'd better believe they'd want as many of those damn forms filled out as possible. Especially with those questions that remind me of the old "Do you still beat your wife?".


----------



## talia rose (Sep 9, 2004)

i see this bill as being very similiar to the screening they are requiring all school kids to undergo (there are trial programs now in place around the country) to screen for depression, ADHD, other physcological problems. 80 % of kids screened are being put on meds as a result.

not my kid. and not me....

sometimes i feel like the pharmicutical companies own and run the world....


----------



## talia rose (Sep 9, 2004)

for more info, check this out
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...px?PageIndex=1


----------



## RachelSerena (Aug 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *talia rose* 
i see this bill as being very similiar to the screening they are requiring all school kids to undergo (there are trial programs now in place around the country) to screen for depression, ADHD, other physcological problems. 80 % of kids screened are being put on meds as a result.

not my kid. and not me....

sometimes i feel like the pharmicutical companies own and run the world....









:

I think you are talking about TeenScreen.

FWIW, about 20 years ago my sister's teachers told my parents she had ADD and needed drugs. Her TEACHERS, not a doctor. My parent's said no way, the school said they would call social services...

Needless to say, we were all taken out of that school and homeschooled for the next 4 years.


----------



## talia rose (Sep 9, 2004)

go mom and dad!
on our co-op america group there is a parent whose school is trying to make thier kids go on drugs for adhd. it's pretty sickening. and your right, it's the teachers who are recomending it because they'd rather drug thier class than have to deal with it.


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
You need to watch the videos again, and read the notes on the side. Not only does she blame the anti-depressant for her son's hair "standing straight up" she also blames it for hypnic jerks in BOTH her children (not just the one that she breastfed while on Zoloft), and when I pointed out that lots of people experience both those things, she said that my husband and I must be on drugs. I can PM you copies of her messages to me.

I looked through pages worth of comments, and the only thing I could find was that she felt it was causal and found it "odd." It was by no means the big problem she had with the antidepressant. Really, that part has nothing to do with this bill. If women are required to have PPD screening, there are going to be a lot of women who are forced onto drugs whether they want them or even need them. I was given a prescription for an antidepressant a few months after the birth of my fourth child. I took the sample pack my doc gave me, and then decided to never fill the prescription. My doctor is awesome. What if I'd have had a misogynistic, power hungry doctor? There are many out there who are. Who's to say that he wouldn't have turned me into CPS for not taking my meds? Some people don't have much of a choice in the doctors for many, many reasons. This bill is a slippery, slippery slope.


----------



## Turquesa (May 30, 2007)

Does anybody know who sponsored or lobbied for this initiative? Did our Pharma friends play any role in it?


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Turquesa* 
Does anybody know who sponsored or lobbied for this initiative? Did our Pharma friends play any role in it?

Pharma did not, according to this: http://www.postpartum.net/legislative-updates.html


----------



## theretohere (Nov 4, 2005)

Slippery slope.


----------



## maplesugar (May 24, 2005)

This kind of thing scares me. I don't support forced screening of any sort.







:


----------



## mamabadger (Apr 21, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *talia rose* 
sometimes i feel like the pharmicutical companies own and run the world....

Only sometimes?


----------



## Turquesa (May 30, 2007)

So . . . if I'm reading everything correctly, and I'm not missing any information, this measure doesn't worry me like it does PPs. And I'm all for routinely offering PPD screening.

What I'm wondering is, why this act to force doctors to do it? Is there a documented problem of them not doing their job? I was a clinical social worker in a medical clinic, and it was simply part of our protocol. We did it because we had to, it was a liability not to, and (by the way) I'm a nice person who doesn't want women to suffer from PPD







.

Don't get me wrong. I think that doctors do need legal regulation in a lot of areas, e.g. informed consent. But unless I'm missing something, this piece of legislation looks like a waste of time and resources.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

What exactly is a PPD screening? I mean...once my baby's out, I tell the truth or not to the doctors or nurses, depending on what they're asking and whether I feel that it's in my best interests to tell the truth or not. I have _never_ told them anything that I felt would cause a diagnosis of PPD...and I've had it with every child. I don't feel that it's in my best interests to tell them anything about my mental state.

I also object to the education crap. The "education" I get from the nurses every time I have a baby is a big part of why I hate hospitals so much...adding in a bunch more education about my mental health isn't going to help.

I'm in Canada, so I don't know if this kind of thing would apply to me or not, but I don't like the sound of it. Of course, I can - and will - lie, so I guess it's not a big deal.


----------



## Kajira (May 23, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llamalluv* 
You're sure that someone can tell a story about that? IOW, you are making that scenario up?

I can tell a story about being
1) Being told by my primary care doc I HAD to have a csection and I was risking my kid's life by not having one I wasn't even 8 weeks, and the OB practice she wanted to send me to said I had to have no one questions, I was just to fat to vaginal birth







: Since the hospital has a 50%+ c section rate I have no doubt if I had went with them I would have had one for what ever excuse

(found another pratice)

2) Refused care if I didn't do a hiv/std test altho I had test that were not even 6 months old- said screw that went with a homebirth midwife

3) her backup was a sneaky b, when I got my bill for almost 500 in blood test I asked for copies of everything, I was given EVERY test I declined! Was told that black women often don't know their HIV status and they do it for all of us







:

(left them too)

4) Having a ped try to bully me into shots 3 days in a row until I left the hospital infact she was the reason I spent an extra day







:

Yeah I can see this bill being used against me, I don't want to vax, I'm pissed off they keep sending meals I can't eat and they force me to spend yet another frigging night, ohhhh Mrs W you have PPD, shots for the baby meds for you! you're nuts


----------

