The Soccer Mom Vote

Governor Palin, I'm calling you out

When I first read about Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, I was intrigued.  She's one of only eight women running a state government, mothers five children, runs marathons, and manages to have approval ratings in the 90's.  As if that weren't enough, her name continues to be mentioned on the short-list of people being considered as McCain's vice-presidential nominee.  Regardless of whether you agree with her politics, you'd be an idiot not to be impressed by Gov. Palin's rise up the Republican ranks.

The 44-year-old governor gave birth to her fifth child in April.  Trig Paxson Van Palin was born in Alaska right after the governor returned from Texas, where she gave a luncheon keynote for an energy conference.  He made his arrival a month early, weighing in at 6 lbs, 2 ounces.

He also has a diagnosis of Down syndrome, a genetic condition caused by the presence of three -- rather than the typical two -- copies of chromosome 21.  By the family's report, Trig's condition was revealed during the fourth month of her pregnancy by prenatal genetic testing.  Both parents admit to being shocked and challenged by the news, but hold strong pro-life beliefs that made a termination of the pregnancy out of the question.  Like all parents, they view their son as precious and perfect and are willing to make whatever effort is necessary to help him reach his full potential.

Let me first say that I offer my sincere congratulations to the Palins on the birth of their son.  I am sure he is a joy and a blessing.

Further, I understand how this experience might have deepened the governor's pro-life convictions.  Her decision has not gone unnoticed -- the story has appeared on many pro-life websites and supportive comments from other parents of children with special needs have poured in.   While Gov. Palin's choice to continue her pregnancy was no doubt a personal one, it's given her incredible political power on this issue.  Vogue cover notwithstanding, say hello to the new poster child of pro-life politics.

Here's where I take issue with the governor: what about rallying around the health and educational needs of children with physical and cognitive disabilities? If there is going to be an issue that raising a son with special needs makes close to your heart, shouldn't it be more about the many years of his life, rather than the nine months of his prenatal development?

A recent study published by the Commonwealth Fund, a non-profit organization that specializes in health policy, ranked Alaska 42nd in measures of health care access, quality, costs, equity and health outcomes in children.  Included in the study were several indicators that related directly to children with special health care needs.  Of children aged 1-17 with an identified emotional, behavioral, or developmental problem, only 52% had received mental health care the last year (rank: 47).  For children with special health care needs needing referrals to specialty care, only 23% got them (rank: 32).  And while it doesn't apply specifically to children with special needs (but certainly affects their quality of care), only 38% of Alaskan children have a medical home (rank: 47).  Incidentally, all of these issues with access and quality of care exist despite the fact that Alaskans spend more out-of-pocket for health care than most Americans and have higher health insurance premiums.

Claiming the title of "pro-life" should obligate you to more than an end to abortion -- it should make you wish for and work for a high quality of life for the children who are already here.  By virtue of the family he was born to, Trig Palin will have access to high quality healthcare.  However, based on current data, his fellow generation of Alaskan children may not be so lucky.

Governor Palin, I have no doubt you'll take excellent care of your son.  Now, do what needs to be done for the rest of Alaska's kids.

[Photo: Jim Lavrakas, Anchorage Daily News]

   

She Should Run

Women in politics have seen some great victories in the last few decades.  There are more women holding elected offices now than ever before, and we have our first female Speaker of the House in Mrs. Pelosi as well as our first major-party presidential candidate in Mrs. Clinton.  There are sixteen women in the U.S. Senate, 70 women in the U.S. House, and nine women governors.  We've come a long way, baby.

And yet the number of women running for office is still surprisingly low.  There's no reason to believe that women have less interest or skill in politics, but perhaps we need a little push.  Maybe, just maybe, we need someone to ask.

That's the idea behind the organization She Should Run.   The aim of this program, part of the Women's Campaign Forum, is to gather a list of 1,000 pro-choice women who should run for public office.  Paired with training and endorsement, it hopes to launch more dynamic women into public office, for anything from the local school board to the federal government.

Yes, this particular program is limited to women who take a pro-choice stance on abortion, but it does not discriminate based on party affiliation.  When I asked their representative, Brad Levinson, about the rationale for supporting pro-choice candidates, I got this thoughtful response:

"The Women's Campaign Forum, similar to organizations such as EMILY's List, made the decision to be a pro-choice organization for this reason:  as the WCF's central mission is about women's empowerment, they're of the firm belief that women would not be where they are today if it wasn't for their right to have control over their own reproductive decisions."

(links added by me)

If this is a statement you agree with, and you know some fabulous women who would make great leaders, consider adding their names to the list at She Should Run.  Check out their list of candidate resources.  They've even got a blog!  (Who doesn't?)

While you're there, consider adding your own.  There are many women in this Soccer Mom Vote community who would make outstanding elected officials.  Maybe it's time for you to take that possibility seriously.

accumulating small changes

Today, I'm joining in Blog Action Day, whose focus this year is on the broad and complex topic of the environment.

I'm not one of those people who has always been hip to the issues of environmentalism.  Oh, sure, I had a phase in high school where I became a vegetarian and protested animal cruelty in debate class, but I can't claim any title like "lifelong activist".  In fact, I have a confession to make: up until January, I didn't even bother recycling.

A trip to the desert sparked my conversion and I am happy to say that our household has adopted a number of changes that I'm proud of.  My husband calls me the "recycling Nazi" because of my diligence in recycling and reusing all that we can.  I buy and eat local and/or organic food often.  I carry a compact extra cloth bag with me when I'm running errands to avoid using plastic.  My daughter and I both use reusable cups for trips to Starbucks.  I've gradually switched out the cleaners in our house to more natural, eco-friendly options. We stopped buying bottled water.  I hang laundry to dry on the line when weather permits.  I try hard to carpool and combine errands when possible to reduce carbon emissions. 

There are two points that I'd like to make, however, about these changes.  One is that they are, individually, small.  It hasn't been hard to make them because I started with one change and it led to another.   Once I started recycling, a process that required me to sort by hand, I started paying attention to packaging when I was buying the grocery store.  That, in turn, led me to pay more attention to the food we were consuming.  Then I noticed the number of plastic bags that came home with in just a single shopping trip.  And so on.  I haven't done anything radical, I've just done things that made sense.  Once I started down the path, one thing led to another.

The other point I'd like to make is that I'm not doing all I can, and there are limits to what I'm willing to do to make our lifestyle more green.  Sometimes organic is too expensive.  I could join a CSA, but haven't.  I could compost, but don't.  I could have a whole stack of canvas or cloth bags for the grocery store (which I'm working on, but not there yet).  We use a lot of Method cleaning products because they work and they're easily accessible at Target.  If I had to buy everything at a health food store, I'd balk.  I don't have a bike.  I rarely walk.  I still drive a small SUV.

There are many others -- including some of the contributors to this site -- who are ahead of me on this issue.  I applaud them.  I admire their tenacity.  I find it amazing that they use glass straws to avoid plastic.  But I'm not there yet.  I might not ever be. 

I am, however, doing something. I'm hopeful that if we all do a little more something, we can make a difference.

What are you doing?  What makes you take action?  What prevents you from making change?

Women taking a stand

While I'm giving myself permission to post a thoughtful, well-researched piece just a little later this month, I thought I would chime in today to tell you about some great happenings elsewhere on the world wide web.

Catherine at Informed Voters has compiled a list of over 170 blogs written by women about politics.  I'm honored to see that we were included, and completely overwhelmed at the voices I have yet to explore.  Go find some new perspectives!

Cooper, co-founder of The Motherhood, e-mailed me to alert me to a new blog for moms interested in the issue of global warming.  They're just getting started, but click over to Cool It Moms and see what they're talking about.  (For those of you interested in green issues, the blogroll there has a ton of great links.)

And our friends (or dare I say, family?) over at the League of Maternal Justice have posted a gorgeous photo montage of breastfeeding pics as part of the campaign against Facebook's censorship of the same.  Read more there, and click below to see lots of happy nurslings and mamas.

Don't let the SCHIP sink!

Soccermom Joanne alerted us to the debate happening last month in Congress over the state of the SCHIP, a federal healthcare program for poor and uninsured children.

The program was set to expire in September without any action from the legislators.  Both houses passed the bill to fund a $35 million dollar continuation and expansion of the program with a 61-cent increase in the federal tobacco tax.  By all reports, the support for the bill was largely bipartisan, and voter support for the measure is high.  Despite that, President Bush vetoed the bill this morning.  As a result, over 6 million children could lose coverage beginning in mid-November.

There are enough votes in the Senate to override the presidential veto, but the House is short by around 20.

Rallies are planned tomorrow to demonstrate to our lawmakers that we think taking care of children's health is important.  You can look for a gathering near you here.

Lisse's recent words ring true for me on this one.  "How can we possibly claim this is a 'Christian nation' when we have all but abandoned, by way of policy, the sick and the poor?"  (And, of course, the non-voting population of children.)

Personally, I'm getting pretty tired of a president who thinks he can veto legislation that has bipartisan support in Congress and huge voter support.  (Stem cell research, anyone?) 

It's time to remind our lawmakers that they are here to serve the needs of the people.   Get out and attend a rally with your family.  E-mail or call your members of Congress expressing your support for this bill.  Let's be the voice for the children whose lives are impacted by this power play.

 

the people in your neighborhood

It always shocks me to read statistics about childhood sexual abuse.  Approximately one in four women and one in six men have reported retrospectively that they were sexually abused as children.  Sixty-seven percent of victims of sexual assault are under the age of 18. Almost all victims (~95%) know their perpetrators, and the "average" sex offender (quotes mine) molests over 100 children, most of whom never disclose the abuse.  It goes without saying that, as a parent, I want to do everything in my power to protect my children from this crime. 

You may already be aware that your state has a sex offender registry.  Thanks to the Megan's Law legislation passed in 1996 by President Clinton, all states must register sex offenders and must provide access to information to the public.  For a decade, no unified online database was available, until President Bush signed the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act in 2006.  This legislation resulted in the creation of a searchable online directory for all 50 states and the District of Columbia.  You might also find it helpful to cross-reference it with the data provided by Family Watchdog, an advocacy group.  Their site will pull up a map with the homes and workplaces of offenders, which makes it a bit easier to narrow it down.

I recently moved across states and realized that I should probably check the registry for my new neighborhood.  There were 68 hits in my zip code alone.  Two were within spitting distance of my house.  And I live in a "nice" middle class neighborhood, where people still sit on their porches in the evening to wave hello as I pass by with my preschooler on an after-dinner walk.

I wrote down the addresses of both of the men in the area, and made it a point to drive by those houses the next day.  There wasn't anything special about them.  (Well, one had plastic flowers 'planted' in the yard, but that's not exactly a sign that says "Sex Offender Lives Here.")  Nonetheless, I felt empowered.  I knew who these men were.  I knew where they lived and what they looked like.  I knew what offenses they'd been convicted of and when.  One man was convicted of a peeping Tom violation in 1977.  He's less of a concern to me than the other neighbor, whose conviction is recent and involved sexual abuse of a 10 year old.  Good to know.

State laws vary widely on the information collected, the penalties for non-compliance, and ease of access to information.   For example, while my home state of South Carolina, non-compliance with registration is only a misdemeanor violation for the first two strikes, and while the database is available online, no notification process is in place to provide continual updates.  Our neighbor Georgia has made non-compliance a felony violation on the first offense, and provides a free e-mail notification services for when new offenders move into the neighborhood.  You can see where your state stands here.

This information can be used to make a difference.  One mother in a nearby neighborhood used the database to locate offenders, and realized that the school bus stop was directly in front of one offender's house.  She used the information to petition the school to move the school bus stop and her request was readily accepted.  Another friend relayed the story of a father who went outside to find a strange man standing outside his daughter's bedroom window.  Using the databases available, he identified the man and reported the information over to police.

There's a lot we can't control about safety for our children, but this is one area where it pays to be informed.  Check the links above to find out who, exactly, is living in your neighborhood. 

rock and a hard place

The story of Sametta Heyward hit me first via the local news, as the tragedy happened in my new home state of South Carolina.  Apparently she left her children, ages 4 and 1, in a car with fans, food and drinks while she worked an 8 hour shift because her babysitter canceled at the last minute.  Both children were found the next day in her home, dead. 

Heyward has since been charged with two counts of homicide by child abuse.

My first reaction to the story was a mix of anger and sadness, begging the question How could any mother do that?  However, as I heard additional information about this case, the picture wasn't quite so simple.  It rarely is, here in this world we like to call 'real life'.

It seems Ms. Heyward had recently given birth and put the baby up for adoption.  She'd just moved with her two children into an efficiency apartment.  She was supposed to pull a double shift at work and was afraid to call in for fear of losing her job.  There is some question whether the children were alive when she returned to them that night, and if so, why she failed to seek medical attention.  She has needed psychiatric care in the past, according to family members, and there is speculation that she was suffering from post-partum depression.  Authorities say that she had composed a suicide note found when the home was searched to find the children; she remains on suicide watch in jail. 

Interestingly, I can't seem to find any information about the children's father, except that he didn't attend their funeral.

I think it's easy to vilify this mother for making an awful, deadly choice.   And yes, I think she should be held responsible for her actions.  Yet I struggle with the difficulty of her situation.  There isn't anyone to care for her children, but if she calls in, she risks losing her job.  No alternative childcare was available to her.  Her mental health was questionable, yet she had to make a choice between having a job to care for her children and risking their lives. 

Yes, she made the wrong choice.  It just breaks my heart to think that there wasn't another option -- affordable emergency childcare, a more flexible workplace, better community resources -- anything that would have made it possible for her make it to work while being secure in the fact that her children were cared for, or to stay home without fear of losing a job and being left without the money to pay the bills.  To me, there are parental mistakes evident in this case, but I'll offer that it also demonstrates a number of gaps we have in allowing people to work and survive while assuring that their children are safe.

What is your take?  Is this case of bad parenting, bad community, bad policy?  How might we prevent other children's lives from ending in such a tragic way?

Xamon Song

Where is this happening?:  A multinational corporation made a deal with a the government of a small, poor country to pay good cash in order to take advantage of the natural resources.  Everyone was fine until the corporation pushed harder into land occupied by natives, who then pushed back with a rebellion.  Now, the government's siding with its corporate bedpartner, nearby countries have sent in "security" forces, and the corporation, impatient to continue their profitable rape of the land, has hired private paramilitaries to silence the rebellion -- by whatever means necessary.

Guesses?

In this particular case, this political backdrop provides the set-up for a work of fiction.  The country is Xamon, a place that doesn't exist anywhere and yet certainly exists.  Told from the perspective of a young man who enlists in the military and finds himself confused by the politics of the conflict while plunked down firmly in the center of it.  Eddie, a recent high school graduate with aspirations of making it big in the music business, guides us through the story with a unique voice -- a little reminiscent of Salinger's Holden Caufield, but without anywhere near the adolescent angst (or all the cussing).  He could be any G.I, from any town, probably a C student with a lot of social awkwardness, who learns in basic training that he has exceptional sharp shooting skills and the patience and stealth to gather intelligence. 

Eddie and his buddy Mike volunteer for service together and find themselves paired for security duty in Xamon.  Rumors are flying about who is really supporting whom, and their force receives word that human rights activists are also patrolling the area, with reports of mass killings of local villagers occupying land wanted by the corporation.

What happens to them is predictable: Eddie and Mike cross paths with a young woman one day in the middle of an otherwise routine patrol.  Digna is young, passionate and idealistic, and she's there with two other human rights' activists, looking for evidence of foul play in the local villages.  When she and the young soldiers backtrack to the village she'd fled from, they find a massacre of the place.  Men, women, children -- civilians -- pulled from their homes and shot down in the middle of an open field.

The scene, and the resulting discussion among the characters, as well as their actions, is what serves to make this novel worth reading.   The characters recognize that they are bearing witness to actions that are unjust and morally despicable.  The question, for them, and for all of us is, What next?

Human Rights Watch lists its current campaigns for ending human rights violations, ranging from the crisis in Darfur, to Burma's use of child soldiers, to the use of the death penalty in the U.S.  Amnesty International does the same. Many (but not all) of the most flagrant abuses happen beyond our borders, and much of it occurs to vulnerable groups -- ethnic or religious minorities, children, women, the poor.  This isn't about partisan politics, it's about agreeing that all the human beings on this earth deserve basic rights -- freedom from slavery and torture, recognition under the law, fair treatment in the justice system,  freedom to marry and have a family, to live with reasonable health and well-being and pursue work and education. 

Are we willing to say that these people matter too?

In the words of the character Digna, "It has to matter...And someone has to do something.  And even if they don't, I have to do something, I have to at least try to get the word out."

* * * * *
We've got two autographed copies of Xamon Song to give away to Soccer Mom Vote readers, courtesy of the author, Adam Stone, and his wife Shannon (who just happens to be a regular reader and commenter here!). 

To enter, simply leave a relevant comment with a valid e-mail address.  I'll pick two winners at random on Wednesday, July 11.  Winners will be notified by e-mail. 

    

mothers and babies, here and elsewhere

I'm going to be frank: I easily tire of the breastfeeding versus formula feeding debates that rage across any forum for Western parents on the internet.  Breast is best!  Formula feeding is fine!  We all have our opinions and make the choice that is most reasonable for each of our families.  In the land of plenty, we can at least agree there's a choice -- even if we continually feel compelled to justify which choice we've made.

However, I find myself growing increasingly aware that the majority of the world's population doesn't live where clean water, adequate income and well-maintained sanitation are the norm.  Infants in these conditions clearly benefit from breastfeeding.  Period.  The World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life, and should continue to receive breastmilk in addition to solid foods for until age two or beyond.  They have good reason and good research on which to base this recommendation.  Where the water is dirty and sanitation is poor, a bottle of formula can cause a digestive infection that can quickly dehydrate and kill an infant.  Where families aren't able to pay the price for enough formula, parents may use a more dilute solution, causing malnutrition and slowing growth.  Where infections are common and medical care is limited, children clearly benefit from the additional immune protection afforded by breastmilk. 

Despite an international code of recommendations regarding the marketing of infant feeding products -- which in many countries has become law -- formula companies continue to promote their products to healthcare workers and parents in developing countries.  Their means of marketing, including gifts to new parents, samples, and campaigns targeting vulnerable populations increase the acceptibility of infant formula and have been shown to decrease breastfeeding rates.

The costs are great: children die, and the numbers aren't small.  A recent report from the WHO estimated that, globally, approximately 1.45 infants die because of suboptimal breastfeeding in developing countries.

One and a half million children. Every year.  To put this in perspective, that's the equivalent of the entire population of the metropolitan area where I live.

This doesn't sit right with me.  In fact, it makes me want to kick some corporate behind.  Preying on vulnerable populations to increase sales of a product that is unnecessary at best (with reasonable exceptions made for cases where formula is truly needed), and LETHAL at worst is unethical and injust.

The U.S. needs to take action to set a better standard for infant feeding practices.  According to the most recent IBFAN report (2006), the United States has not implemented the international code for marketing as law.  (In my own limited experience [n=1], formula samples were offered to me in addition to a free diaper bag in the hospital.  Such practices would be outlawed if the code were in effect.) 

In addition, the U.S. government needs to throw some of its financial and political strength into enforcing the rules for the large multinational corporations that profit from infant formula sales.  Nestle, whose website proudly pronounces it "the largest food and beverage company in the world, is historically one of the worst offenders.  And while there is an organized effort to boycott Nestle, this 30-year-old boycott has yet to be effective.  Something more needs to be done, and the most efficient way of enforcing ethical behavior is to hit the companies where it hurts: the bottom line.

While the debate boards at iVillage may rage on between who will breast feed and who will formula feed, I'm ready to look at the bigger picture.  How do our choices as individuals and nations of privilege affect those struggling to survive?  What model are we providing (and what misconceptions are we promoting) related to those choices? 

Brave Humans: I Am Not Afraid

I've been digging into some new, politically-focused blogs lately.  Witnessing the spin from both the right and the left provides hours of interesting reading and entertainment. 

But do you know how it is when you find a blog that simply resonates with you?  I hope you do.

Brave Humans is one of those for me.  Also a collaborative effort, these guys and gals manage to write and discuss big issues with intelligence, civility and compromise. 

Today I was poking around the site and found this poem by contributor Brian:

I Am Not Afraid

I am not afraid of bin Laden.
I am not afraid of Iran.
I am not afraid of North Korea.
I am not afraid of terrorism.

I am not afraid of Islam.
I am not afraid of Christianity.
I am not afraid of Atheism.
I am not afraid of faith.

I am not afraid of public schools.
I am not afraid of teachers.
I am not afraid of universities.
I am not afraid of education.

I am not afraid of evolution.
I am not afraid of stem cells.
I am not afraid of global warming.
I am not afraid of science.

I am not afraid of sexuality.
I am not afraid of color.
I am not afraid of ability.
I am not afraid of diversity.

I am not afraid of social security.
I am not afraid of social medicine.
I am not afraid of social services.
I am not afraid of helping others.

I am not afraid of capitalism.
I am not afraid of open markets.
I am not afraid of unions.
I am not afraid of fair trade.

I am not afraid of liberal media.
I am not afraid of conservative spin.
I am not afraid of talk radio.
I am not afraid of a free press.

I am not afraid of accountability.
I am not afraid of freedom of information.
I am not afraid of open government.
I am not afraid of balanced power.

I am not afraid of the UN.
I am not afraid of diplomacy.
I am not afraid of war.
I am not afraid of peace.

I am not afraid of the Geneva Convention.
I am not afraid of Habeas Corpus.
I am not afraid of banning torture.
I am not afraid of due process.

I am not afraid of Republicans.
I am not afraid of Democrats.
I am not afraid of fair elections.
I am not afraid of dissent.

I am not afraid of privacy.
I am not afraid of freedom.
I am not afraid of equality.
I am not afraid of the Constitution.

I am an American, and I am not afraid.

Brilliant, eh?  Go click around.  I promise you'll leave feeling brave.