Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal
Sign in to follow this  
picklepizzas

CDC on women drinking alcohol - MERGED

Recommended Posts

picklepizzas

So the CDC apparently came out and advised that any woman of childbearing age not currently on birth control shouldn't drink. ever. not because you are pregnant but because becoming pregnant is not outside the realm of possibility. I saw this and immediately thought this sounded like something our fundie friends would say. bc not only is a pregnant woman's body merely a vessel for the child she's carrying, but all women's bodies are potential vessels and are thus rightly at all times subject to the scrutiny and control of others. what??? 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/02/02/cdc-urges-young-women-avoid-all-alcohol-unless-theyre-using-contraception/79701890/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shiny

That recommendation seems reactionary and unnecessary. 

Edited by Shiny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrsaztx

Eh, seems valid. They didn't say "unless you're on the pill" they said "if you aren't using birth control" so you're having completely unprotected sex. That means there is a pretty good chance you might conceive. I suspect it's much like their "no drinking at all while pregnant" rule, most doctors will say a bud light once or twice during your pregnancy won't make you have a flipper kid, but some idiot women assume "light alcohol consumption" means "only 4 shots a night" because they usually drink 8. It's easier to just say "none" because you can't misinterpret 0. If you are trying to get pregnant with your spouse and have a glass of wine at dinner and go home to try to make a baby it surely won't hurt anything but if you're a jersey shore cast member who doesn't like the pill because it made you gain weight and condoms feel gross, stop drinking to excess and having unprotected sex. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AnywhereButHere
Quote

Still, Filer acknowledged telling young women to completely abstain from alcohol could be a tough sell. Alcohol plays a role in many conceptions, after all, even among married couples.

While I'm sure whoever this is was going for humor here, it just comes off as condescending and rude.  While there is nothing wrong with reiterating and educating that alcohol is harmful to a fetus' development (and necessary - it should be part of a discussion with your doctor), there would be something very wrong with forbidding women of a certain age to drink.

I don't think the CDC is going to be sponsoring any laws anytime soon, but the tone of the article is a bit judgmental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docmom

So what CDC actually said (from the CDC webpage):

Quote

Women can:

Talk with their health care provider about their plans for pregnancy, their alcohol use, and ways to prevent pregnancy if they are not planning to get pregnant.

Stop drinking alcohol if they are trying to get pregnant or could get pregnant.

Ask their partner, family, and friends to support their choice not to drink during pregnancy or while trying to get pregnant.

Ask their health care provider or another trusted person about resources for help if they cannot stop drinking on their own.

Which I don't think is either controlling or judgmental but actually right in keeping with what an institution dedicated to public health should say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
December
6 hours ago, docmom said:

So what CDC actually said (from the CDC webpage):

Which I don't think is either controlling or judgmental but actually right in keeping with what an institution dedicated to public health should say.

What struck me most about the CDC statement is that about half of all pregnancies in this country are unplanned. Considering the current political climate in the US... if the CDC were to make a complementary recommendation that all women of childbearing age and their partners consistently utilize some form of contraception, enough people and commentators would probably flip out to make it a scandal like the ongoing one with PP.

The real problem is that women in the US are systemically being denied access to affordable, reliable forms of contraception (and, if the situation warrants and the woman chooses it, abortion). Until that's fixed, I think the CDC statement is realistic and in line with its purpose to help prevent and/or control health issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Terrie

The estimated occurrence of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders is 1 in 100. Not all of these are children born to addicts. In many cases, it's a result of women not realizing they were pregnant. Because of the complexity of the factors involved (mother's weight, how fast she drinks, how often, stage of pregnancy, single vs. multiple fetuses), there is no way to develop a formula that says "This drink is safe, that drink is not safe." The one thing the CDC can know for sure is that no drinks=no FASDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
clueliss

My knee jerk reaction to the thread title is - of course.  Specifically Dominionists.  Probably falls under the 'seven mountains of culture' - government being one of them.  

Quote

Experts identify two main schools of Dominionism: Christian Reconstructionists, who believe biblical law, including stoning as punishment for adultery and other transgressions, should replace secular law; and the New Apostolic Reformation, which advocates for Christians to "reclaim the seven mountains of culture": government, religion, media, family, business, education, and arts and entertainment.5 Facts About Dominionism

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polecat

The CDC is focused on public safety. Because there is no way of knowing what amount of alcohol is safe for pregnancy, saying no alcohol at all is erring on the safe side. If a woman is not currently using birth control, she's risking pregnancy. I think they're making it very clear to women that alcohol could equal FAS, and if you don't want a baby with FAS, you need to take steps to prevent it one way or another (either use birth control or don't drink). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 cats and counting

I'm a female of reproductive age that is not currently on birth control.  In fact I can't use birth control (I have a family history of blood clotting caused by the Pill, and an IUD is out of the question considering the horrible allergic reaction I got to earrings when I had pierced ears).

I'm single as fuck now, but I won't sleep with a guy without a condom.  Giving him a choice between a condom and 18 years of child support is a very convincing argument.

I do drink occasionally (I'm a social drinker) and this is not going to stop me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SpoonfulOSugar

This is a better analysis than I can do:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/02/03/the-cdcs-incredibly-condescending-warning-to-young-women/graphicb_1185px-1-791x1024.jpg&w=1484

As the author points out, seems to be missing a few steps.

Having too much to drink =/= risk of violence.

It's ham-handed and a bit Big Brotherish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrsaztx
13 minutes ago, 19 cats and counting said:

I'm a female of reproductive age that is not currently on birth control.  In fact I can't use birth control (I have a family history of blood clotting caused by the Pill, and an IUD is out of the question considering the horrible allergic reaction I got to earrings when I had pierced ears).

I'm single as fuck now, but I won't sleep with a guy without a condom.  Giving him a choice between a condom and 18 years of child support is a very convincing argument.

I do drink occasionally (I'm a social drinker) and this is not going to stop me.

But using a condom is using birth control, and I think the CDC is including that under "using birth control" and is therefore saying "if you are having completely unprotected sex (no condom, no pill, no planB, no IUD, no diaphragm, no gel, no sponge, no anything) then don't be drinking because, basically, you're going to find yourself pregnant in short order". And that's an accurate statement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 cats and counting

@Mrsaztx according to a former friend, a condom is not real birth control and I'm not taking responsibility for my actions.  I know that's bullshit but I still have that image in my head.   In her mind, the only forms of birth control are hormonal or IUD and she openly tells random people to get an IUD.  (She once told a mother of a toddler having a meltdown in Target to go on birth control).  

I like the concept of an IUD, but after battling infections from earrings, no way do I want metal inserted into that region.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polecat
2 minutes ago, 19 cats and counting said:

@Mrsaztx according to a former friend, a condom is not real birth control and I'm not taking responsibility for my actions.  I know that's bullshit but I still have that image in my head.   In her mind, the only forms of birth control are hormonal or IUD and she openly tells random people to get an IUD.  (She once told a mother of a toddler having a meltdown in Target to go on birth control).  

I like the concept of an IUD, but after battling infections from earrings, no way do I want metal inserted into that region.

Your former friend is wrong. When used correctly, condoms protect not just against pregnancy but also many STDs -- something no birth control pill or IUD can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nokidsmom
34 minutes ago, 19 cats and counting said:

<snip>  I like the concept of an IUD, but after battling infections from earrings, no way do I want metal inserted into that region.

This is why I didn't choose the IUD after I got married.  I got infections from earrings that incidentally started about six months after getting my ears pierced, oddly enough with the so-called surgical steel posts.  I hasn't chancing having the same thing happen "down there". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShepherdontheRock

http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/fasd/index.html

So, the CDC is, in an effort to curb fetal alcohol syndrome, advising women not to drink if trying to get pregnant.

But, they are also advising women not to drink too much, since apparently drinking to excess can cause you to become pregnant or get an STD.

So, apparently you should not drink unless on birth control or YOU'LL CAUSE YOUR BABY TO BE HARMED.

I did not know being drunk could get you pregnant. I guess I've been doing it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FundieFarmer

@ShepherdontheRock, I'm betting you're trying to be tongue-in-cheek about this, but the problem is, there's a lot of truth in what you're saying, so it's not really coming off tongue-in-cheek. Drinking in excess can indirectly cause you to become pregnant or get an STD and it can directly cause a baby to be harmed. Frankly, I see where they're coming from. There are a lot of factors and aspects to this. It had to be said, and now matter how they said it, the CDC couldn't win. It would've come out misogynistic no matter how they phrased it. And they can't charge men with this yet, because a truly reliable or widely-utilized male birth control hasn't hit the market yet.

There are a lot of consequences to drinking to the point of excess, regardless of sex, but men don't always have another life at risk. But bottom line, it's good advice. If you know you are pregnant and you drink, honestly, you're stupid. There's so much literature to back that up we'd all be drowning in it if I posted it. If you're trying to get pregnant and you don't know you're pregnant yet but you are, your actions can still have consequences. The CDC said in the article that most women don't know for 4-6 weeks until after they're already pregnant, at which point damage is done. Why wouldn't you want to be aware of the risk of that? And if you're not on birth control, you run the risk of accidentally getting pregnant when you don't want to, and all of the decisions and aspects that come with that. And sure, good things can come from that, but the CDC isn't here to talk about that. They're there to warn against making decisions that can ultimately harm lives, which irresponsible drinking can do. 

So while I do think it's far-reaching, and while I definitely do think it will be largely ignored, I think the word of warning makes sense and I see where they're coming from. And ultimately, having seen and experienced them first-hand, fetal alcohol syndrome and all of the other consequences of drinking while pregnant are nothing to be scoffed about, so I think it's a good thing that the CDC is taking a stance about it- as old-fashioned as it may be coming across. I don't know, I guess while I get how it comes across as condescending, I'm willing to concede that there's no way it wouldn't have but that we need to know about it.

Edited by FundieFarmer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seahorse Wrangler

11 years ago, when I was 38 week s pregnant with DS..Dh, DM and I along with 2 DDs went across the border to Vermont simply so DM could say she had been to the States.

We stopped at a restaurant , DM ordered a glass of wine and DH a small beer but both had left the table when the drinks arrived, the waiter refused to put the alcoholic drinks on the table until DH and/or DM returned since I was pregnant and was "unable to consume alcohol without it affect my unborn child"...

Even though the waiter was aware I had ordered water..and was ready to pop...No alcohol allowed near me.

 

Not sure if the waiter was being an .....naughty word or if it was Vermont law at the time but it seemed like a stupid rule.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AmazonGrace

Well I don't see anything wrong with saying that women who are or might very possibly find out that they're pregnant very soon probably shouldn't drink alcohol. That is not alarming, it's just the public health perspective. 

This is the alarming part: 

 

Quote

About half of all pregnancies in the United States are unplanned, 

Biology lessons! Sexual education! Information! Books! Internet! Abstinence! Birth control! Condoms! Personal responsibility! Decision making skills!

 

No way these are all women who used birth control responsibly and it failed anyway, or women who got raped and had no choice. 

There's no  reason for one half of all pregnancies to be unplanned in a civilized country in 2016.  

Children deserve to be born to parents who thought about having kids a little beyond the next fuck. Am I able to take care of children?  Do I want any? Am I with a partner who wants kids? Can we afford it? Is this a good time? Do I need life saving cancer treatments that can't be given to pregnant women? If the answer to one or more of the above questions is problematic, there are plenty of options that are less likely to leave you with an unwanted pregnancy than having unprotected sex and hoping for the best. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polecat
2 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

sbm

There's no  reason for one half of all pregnancies to be unplanned in a civilized country in 2016.  

Children deserve to be born to parents who thought about having kids a little beyond the next fuck. 

sbm

 

3

Well, all three of mine fell into the "unplanned category." And I most certainly "thought about having kids a little beyond the next fuck."

We'd stopped trying to have a baby after multiple miscarriages and had gone back on birth control. So even though we'd desperately wanted a baby, he wasn't "planned." The pill failed (or I messed up with it). The latter two were also not explicitly planned -- we wanted more children, but because we'd had so many problems successfully conceiving/carrying the first, we didn't want to wait too long (I was already in my 30s at this point). So we didn't explicitly prevent even though we weren't actively trying. I was breastfeeding (and later tandem nursing) AND older, so I really didn't expect to get pregnant so easily. So voila! Three "unplanned" pregnancies on the record. Once we were definitely done, we were sterilized. No more "unplanned" pregnancies.

The reason behind so many unplanned pregnancies, imo, is the way we track such things. (note: This may have changed since I had my children -- hopefully for the better.)

 

Edited by polecat
clarifying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
browncoatslytherin

i would be interested in how such things are quantified as "unplanned". i wasn't on b/c, only tracking my ovulation (which i messed up, obvs). while we weren't actively trying to conceive, we weren't concerned if we really did or not and we're extremely happy to be expecting. we definitely wanted kids, and we were actually going to start actively trying within a year, but it just so happened to happen before we started actively trying. i'm guessing ours would probably be counted as technically unplanned, even though it was very much wanted and just a little ahead of the schedule we had in our heads.

 

anyway, just my two cents on wondering exactly how they lump things into categories. it's easy to try to quantify certain things under certain categories, but then sometimes you get into the categories and find that there are more variables than expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AmazonGrace
1 hour ago, polecat said:

Well, all three of mine fell into the "unplanned category." And I most certainly "thought about having kids a little beyond the next fuck."

We'd stopped trying to have a baby after multiple miscarriages and had gone back on birth control. So even though we'd desperately wanted a baby, he wasn't "planned." The pill failed (or I messed up with it). The latter two were also not explicitly planned -- we wanted more children, but because we'd had so many problems successfully conceiving/carrying the first, we didn't want to wait too long (I was already in my 30s at this point). So we didn't explicitly prevent even though we weren't actively trying. I was breastfeeding (and later tandem nursing) AND older, so I really didn't expect to get pregnant so easily. So voila! Three "unplanned" pregnancies on the record. Once we were definitely done, we were sterilized. No more "unplanned" pregnancies.

The reason behind so many unplanned pregnancies, imo, is the way we track such things. (note: This may have changed since I had my children -- hopefully for the better.)

 

Yeah I guess it's a matter of definition.

I'm not really sure that I would categorize your last two pregnancies as unplanned. You wanted children, you made a conscious decision not to  use birth control, you got pregnant.  No real surprise there. It doesn't take active trying, it takes sex and two people who are both fertile. It may have happened sooner than you thought but it's very rarely that people can predict  the timing of their pregnancy exactly beforehand. Two of my pregnancies took nearly a year without birth control and I didn't expect to get pregnant any faster with the third one but  we got lucky the first month after stopping birth control. He was certainly a very wanted and welcome and in no way unplanned or accidental baby even though I couldn't predict that it would happen so fast.

I don't have any problem with that, but I have a huge problem with people who don't want children and take irresponsible chances.

Edited by AmazonGrace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polecat
2 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

Yeah I guess it's a matter of definition.

I'm not really sure that I would categorize your last two pregnancies as unplanned. You wanted children, you made a conscious decision not to  use birth control, you got pregnant.  No real surprise there. It doesn't take active trying, it takes sex and two people who are both fertile. It may have happened sooner than you thought but it's very rarely that people can predict  the timing of their pregnancy exactly beforehand. Two of my pregnancies took nearly a year without birth control and I didn't expect to get pregnant any faster with the third one but  we got lucky the first month after stopping birth control. He was certainly a very wanted and welcome and in no way unplanned or accidental baby even though I couldn't predict that it would happen so fast.

I don't have any problem with that, but I have a huge problem with people who don't want children and take irresponsible chances.

No argument there on that last sentence. 

And personally, I'd more or less consider mine planned, too. They were not expected, but we most definitely wanted and were prepared for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
browncoatslytherin

agreement on that all the way around.

 

and i swear if anyone were to ever refer to jellybean as an "oops baby", this momma is going to have a few choice words for them. he wasn't an "oops", he was a surprise. i think "oops" has a negative connotation like "well we weren't really wanting a kid but it happened anyway!". surprise is more like "we wanted a kid and it happened a little sooner than we thought" which is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FundieFarmer

I'm sorry, I just really struggle with seeing the problem with this recommendation. 

And as somebody pointed out upthread, birth control could be anything- condoms even. So I guess I just don't get the hoopla. Sure it comes off as condescending, but I feel like anything telling people to be responsible does these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.