*seething right now*

I bet this also translates into "No way in HELL are we ever sterilizing you," too.

"New federal guidelines ask all females capable of conceiving a baby to treat themselves -- and to be treated by the health care system -- as pre-pregnant, regardless of whether they plan to get pregnant anytime soon." (Washington Post)

Among other things, this means all women between first menstrual period and menopause should take folic acid supplements, refrain from smoking, maintain a healthy weight and keep chronic conditions such as asthma and diabetes under control.

While most of these recommendations are well known to women who are pregnant or seeking to get pregnant, experts say it's important that women follow this advice throughout their reproductive lives, because about half of pregnancies are unplanned and so much damage can be done to a fetus between conception and the time the pregnancy is confirmed."

Oh, and by the way, you're supposed to avoid cat feces. I guess this means all women over the age of puberty that live alone aren't allowed to have cats?

Rebecca Traister also seethes. (Salon)

"Other recommendations, mentioned lower down in the Post piece, are that women stay away from cat feces and "discuss the danger alcohol poses to a developing fetus."

Why stop there? What about avoiding sushi, uncooked meats and unpasteurized cheeses? Perhaps women should only be allowed on planes once it has been determined, by routine pelvic exams administered at the gate, that they are not carrying a fetus that could experience trauma midflight.

What's this all about? According to the Post, "experts say it's important that women follow this advice throughout their reproductive lives, because about half of pregnancies are unplanned and so much damage can be done to a fetus between conception and the time the pregnancy is confirmed." So even when we're not pregnant, or have no intention of becoming pregnant, or have already been pregnant and are done having babies, we should make our theoretically possible but wholly imaginary fetuses our priorities."

Ditto Katya: (Salon)

"I think it's the word that I find so offensive. Apparently, I'm defined by the baby I might have, not by the life I do. My doctor wasn't supposed to counsel me to exercise, eat right, take my vitamins, quit smoking, and control my asthma for my own sake, but now is supposed to because someday I might have a baby? Really? I'm supposed to take care of my body, not so I could be healthy, but in case I get pregnant?

Here's a news flash: I'm not pre-pregnant. I'm just not pregnant. I'm not just a fertile uterus. I'm an adult woman, and I would like to be treated as such."

Jill jumps in (and hey, look, reciprocal linkage):

"Scaring women away from drinking moderately and having cats is just ridiculous. And it’s indicative of a profoundly fucked-up view of women’s personhood when we don’t see them as individuals, but as vessels for something else."

And Sheezelbub: 

"Can I drink if I get my tubes tied?  Should we all live like nuns just in case we ever, ever conceive?  Shall I refrain from caffiene in my newly-declared pre-pregnant state?"

And Amanda really gets into it: 

"The general gist of the article is that America’s high infant mortality rate is best addressed by scolding women for not acting like they are pregnant all the time or about to be. This is both more appealing from a misogynist point of view and spares the nation at whole from shouldering our rightful blame for not having universal health care. No, it’s not that our health care system is for shit, it’s that women dare own pets that shit.

Assume you’re pregnant all the time, ladies, because we’re just a few Supreme Court decisions away from when you will be.  As Rebecca Traister notes, treating all women like they’re always pregnant or always about to be smells quite a bit like just more of that social control BushCo is so fond of. And don’t think it passed my notice that the WaPo couldn’t resist a little dig at cat ownership as a freedom too great for women to have due to this new duty to believe ourselves forever pregnant.

So why did the WaPo misrepresent this report? Hell, they don’t even mention how important birth control is to this entire project except in passing at the bottom of the article. I think it’s because it’s a political hot potato to openly admit that the two most important steps towards reducing the infant mortality rate and improving the health of newborns in general is to get health care to every woman and to empower women with the knowledge and tools they need to get pregnant only when they want to.

As the first article I linked above demonstrates, accidental pregnancy is fetishized and romanticized in our culture, mostly because it’s a first rate way of controlling women’s behavior."

Comments

["The" Jess]

Wellesleyan T. Fargo!

That is SO disgustingly offensive! What if a woman has had heartbreaking miscarriage after heartbreaking miscarriage? She's not pre-pregnant yet has to explain why to every person about the agony of losing pregnancy after pregnancy . . .

I wish people would stop creating busy work for themselves by creating all of these labels people do not need. Too many managers changing the definition of words that don't need it.

I'm skittish we're at the verge of a Victorian era. Of course, those Victorian women seriously got their sexual revolution on with tons of affairs with hot young men and female friends. . . . :-)

[Brad]

I think Pandagon's post says it best. This isn't about the CDC's report... if you read the report, it isn't objectionable. This is about the Washington Post misrepresenting that report, resulting in a lot of people getting worked up over suggestions that are ultimately going to improve womens' health. More of my thoughts are in my blog.