Menu

vborek@gmail.com

About vborek@gmail.com

Posts by :

20160417_070853

A Second Son, and the Ways of Womanhood

, , , , , , , , , , , , 0

The most remarkable thing to me about my second son’s birth, was how perfectly well things work when you’re able to simply let a process unfold. The first thing his father tells people was how awesome it was, and that the birth record states, “Managed by: Valerie.”

It is incredibly hard to surrender. But this is what birth, and motherhood, teach. It’s not always easy, and it’s not pain-free. It doesn’t mean you don’t have to work, because you do. Surrender isn’t a passive experience. It is active and willful and intentional. It’s about embracing what’s in front of you, giving it your all, and meeting it head on (birth pun intended).

The concept of feminine surrender has been bastardized, but once truly understood with a deeper, older, and spiritual meaning, it is clearly the most powerful thing a woman can do. It is no less than the power of creation. I suppose that is why a woman’s power to receive and surrender—the essence of sexuality and birth–has been curtailed, commodified and stigmatized in so many ways. When we see power, we fear it. We have been trained to think it must control or be controlled. We have accepted that “absolute power corrupts, absolutely,” and this belief is reinforced constantly by headlines and anecdotes. Perhaps, though, this is true only when the power is obtained, rather than original—when it is power OVER, rather than power WITH.

My new son helped me learn these lessons. Home birth and midwifery care allowed me the space to allow the transformation into motherhood-twice-over unfold into my life more fully. I believe pregnancy is an initiation, no matter how many children a woman is raising. I didn’t completely understand these thoughts or instincts with my first son, but I was surprised to find I held them strongly. With my second son’s pregnancy, the meaning of motherhood and of being female in this day and age, continued to unfold its mystery to me.

I was truly convinced my second son was a girl, in utero. So was my mother, and almost everyone else that offered an unsolicited guess. I had a name picked out, dictated by a dream vision. I spoke to her, assuring her my love wouldn’t diminish if she was a he. This second pregnancy coincided with the urge and opportunity to delve into study of sacred feminine spirituality. I believed I would be passing my growing understanding on to a daughter.

When my second son was born, his father asked: “are you disappointed he isn’t a girl?” I answered quickly, honestly, “No. Just surprised!” I looked at him in my arms in the dim light of dawn, holding him closely to my heart, “You tricked us all you little stinker!”

But I’ve skipped ahead to the end. One of the reasons is, my pregnancy and labor were unremarkable. Or, if they were remarkable, it was only in the sense that they were medically unremarkable—nothing medical happened, no physical condition needed management beyond my attention to, nurture of, and aware self-care of my body and baby.

When people asked how my pregnancy was, I would answer: Great! The silence would hang in the air after. There seems to be an expectation of complaints or complications. I had just about none. Entering my second pregnancy I was the healthiest I’d been in years. As with my first, I had a healthy pregnancy and worked to keep it that way. Only, second time around I had the experience of the first birth to know where I need to work to improve my chances for a good healthy birth.

Much of my work in pregnancy was mental. My first son’s birth at home was very painful, in more ways than one. From start to finish it was twenty-five hours of contractions, where I learned what it means to have “back labor.” It truly sucks. My partner remarked after that active labor—the part where he saw the baby emerge–must have been so painful. I honestly told him I would have done that for 25 hours instead of enduring the relentless pain at the base of my spine while our first son couldn’t make it around the cervical lip that wouldn’t resolve. Birth was a relief! I am so thankful to have labored at home—I have no doubt my second son’s birth would be a VBAC story otherwise.

My midwife for my first son’s birth happened to be trained by Karen, though I didn’t know the birth community at the time. I was simply happy to find a competent and compassionate provider I could relate to. She and her apprentice were long gone from the area at the time of my second pregnancy, having moved to states that actively recognize and protect the practice of midwifery. There was no question about who I would ask to midwife my second home birth. I’m so grateful Karen was available and willing.

At the end of my pregnancy I chose to get tested for GBS, and the test was positive. I was immediately supported and provided with information so I could make a decision about what would happen next in my prenatal care and in labor. I was scared. My pregnancy until this point was perfectly healthy. Pre-programed warnings sounded through my head: You must go to a hospital! You must have antibiotics! You must be monitored constantly! What if…….!

I chose to calm the heck down and view the news objectively. I talked through my concerns with Karen. I knew a little about GBS, but I now delved in. I looked at the news as a challenge for growth, and the shift in perspective helped. This was a flag, not a failure. It was a challenge, not end game for a home birth. I simply had to keep doing what I was doing—actively work to create a healthy body, and keep my monkey mind from letting fear stop me from providing my new child with as peaceful a birth as I can. I chose to proceed with home birth. I weighed the risks and benefits of the potential interventions, chose none of them, and was completely supported by Karen. The result was maximum health for me and my baby, physically and mentally.

My son chose to exit the womb at thirty-seven weeks. Since he is healthy there are no complaints here! I had Braxton Hicks contractions from the middle of my pregnancy. The evening his birth started I remember texting Karen about my emotional state-I was highly irritable and wanted to be alone. I sat in a tub, watching heat lightning pounce through the clouds. My water broke later that night as the family was sleeping, and I was texting Karen in the middle of the night, weeks earlier than expected. There were contractions, but they but subsided by Saturday morning. I went to breakfast at a local favorite and sat on a towel while I ate a huge meal. I didn’t think anyone would think twice because I was massively pregnant and the chairs there are really uncomfortable anyway. Karen provided herbs to try to get the contractions started again. This was my second birth, and it was the complete opposite from the first. I simply tried to stay calm, open, and love-centered mentally, and clean physically since my water had broken with a slow leak.

I was able to go to bed Saturday night, but woke up intermittently, actually cranky that labor was impending—I wanted more sleep! What a world of difference birth number two is. By 2:30 in the morning I was pacing and watching a hail storm. It was time, and I let Karen know. My instinct told me we had until dawn, and that turned out to be true. As I labored I embraced the pain. I shifted my mental perspective to know that each painful contraction was a positive experience getting me closer to meeting my new little one. My first son awoke around 4 am. The brother-to-be checked out what was happening and alternated between hanging out, watching, and playing in another room. I called my friend who was on-call to be there with him. My toddler would occasionally come by to offer words of encouragement—It’s okay mommy! Take your time mommy! At one point I did get loud and he rushed to tell his father (who had stepped out to appease the cats incessantly mewing for breakfast) that I sounded like a dinosaur. This is home birth.

I let my body move as it needed to. I tried different positions. Karen arrived, assessed, and receded, letting me do what I needed to do. She was a safety net. So I allowed myself to labor as if she wasn’t there, with the confidence from knowing that she was. I listened to the wind and thought about simply letting go and flowing with it, to allow the natural forces to take me where they may, trusting the process and my body to bring forth a new life. I admitted that it was simply really really painful, and accepted that. As the baby descended I was determined to not lose any ground. I simply stayed with the pushing, knowing the bone-splitting pain was progress, and focused on having a baby in my arms. When the baby crowned I felt his head and I knew he was a boy. As he entered this world I guided him to the floor and picked him up. I remember saying “What kind of baby are you?” and confirming with my eyes what I felt when I touched him with my hand for the first time. His father and Karen helped me to sit up and hold him immediately to my chest. He cried and then latched for milk. When the placenta was birthed my oldest son watched and shouted “That was awesome!” And it was. The whole thing.

I don’t have to tell you, if you’re still reading this long story, that none of this experience would have been possible in a hospital. Heck, I don’t even think it would have been possible in a birth center. There’s a need for settings like that, but it wasn’t for a pregnancy and birth like this one. People always react one of two ways when they learn I’m a home birth mom, and both come from fear—“Is it safe?” and “Gee, you’re brave.” I’d have to say exactly the same thing to each and every one of them when it comes to birthing anywhere but home, when you’re a healthy mom (and the vast majority of us are).

People are constantly commenting on how “zen” our new little one is. They tell me in awe that I’m lucky because he is so mellow, sleeps so much, and is growing so well. I won’t discount luck, but I also believe we have created our own. My second son was born at home, completely without interventions through pregnancy and delivery. I had no ultrasounds, took no medications. He is uncircumcised and unvaccinated. He latched within minutes of birth and breast feeding has been a blessed relationship. He sleeps in our bed and sleeps “through the night” because he eats on demand and wakes only to protest the interruption of a diaper change.  It is so perfect, I feel compelled to apologize for how amazing it is. It’s supposed to be hard! He’s supposed to be colicky! I’m supposed to have sore nipples! I feel afraid to mention this joy, because I’ve been trained to think I’ll jinx it, or “the other shoe will drop.” I feel like I’m expected to be more humble for my “good fortune.” But if I’ve learned anything through this second pregnancy, it is that fearing the joy I have in my life is pretty silly.

 

**Published also on my awesome midwife’s page: http://www.womanwisemidwife.com/birth-stories/2016/7/19/silas-minerva-ferrells-birth-story

pope vaccine

The End of Religious Exemptions at Catholic Schools

, , , , , , , , , , 0

Your son or daughter’s school calls you and says they’re not welcome back. No there aren’t disciplinary issues. Yes, the grades are fine. Oh, what’s wrong? Your child has a religious exemption to vaccines, and unless you vaccinate, the doors are closed.

Catholic schools in the US have been making these calls and sending these letters more and more over the last couple of years. Schools are turning away students who provided valid exemptions for years. Is it legal? And if not, is there anyone who will enforce the laws?

Aborted fetal cells in vaccines?

Catholics are pro-life. Surprises no one.

The Vatican OK’s use of vaccines derived from aborted fetal cell lines. Surprises many. Many Catholics feel betrayed and confused, and the congregation is divided. But is this position really surprising?

Are there pieces of aborted fetus cells in vaccines? It depends on who you ask. Nine out of ten doctors agree (while smoking their Camels) the answer is no, with the caveat, if any material made it to the end product, it is generations removed from the source, and extremely negligible in amount. But trace amounts are important, and even if there is nothing at all, some still take issue with products directly utilizing aborted fetal cells. That’s logical. It’s the same logic that leads some people to veganism or to stop buying leather. In a free market economy, dollars speak. The message when rejecting products using morally questionable sources in any capacity is, we will not tolerate commerce derived from these sources. Find another way.

The Vatican has acknowledged the sources of two of the most oft used fetal cell lines for “tainted” vaccines, WI-38-and MRC-5, originated from voluntary abortions. WI-38 was derived from an abortion due to the family already having “too many kids,” and the MRC-5 came from a mother who had an abortion for “psychiatric reasons.”

The Vatican Speaks: Official Policy
​
The official Vatican policy on vaccinations created from aborted fetal cell lines is lawful cooperation in evil. Okay, I’m paraphrasing. The Vatican called their policy “passive material cooperation.” They acknowledge abortion is evil, and hint at the idea that those deriving profit from research using products from the same is evil, but those purchasing those products are far enough removed from evil to get a pass. “Proportional reason,” which amounts to choosing the lesser of two evils, justifies passive support of abortion through vaccinating, over the possibility of proliferation of infectious disease by abstaining.

Once Upon A Time In a Galaxy Far Far Away

In 2003, Mrs. Debra L. Vinnedge, wrote to His Eminence Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, asking for clarification on church policy for Catholics objecting to vaccinations created from aborted fetal cell lines. Catholics around the country were being hassled and challenged when asserting religious exemptions to vaccines grown using products of abortion. Ms. Vinnedge waited two years for a reply, but the answer did not create the clarity she was seeking.

The City State and Political Machine called the Vatican

The Vatican is a fascinating and highly organized socio-political entity. It is a City State with its own police, courts and flag. The “Holy See” is the jurisdiction of the Catholic Church, under which you find the Roman Curia-the governance of the church. This includes the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith. The Sacred Congregation is a propaganda machine that promulgates and defends “official” Church policy. It was founded in 1542 to “spread sound catholic doctrine and defend those parts of Christian tradition which seem in danger because of new and unacceptable doctrines.” Clearly this was the authority to tackle Ms. Vinnedge’s question about the new technologies of immunization.

The Vatican Speaks

The Sacred Congregation released their official policy statement on “tainted” vaccines on June 9, 2005. Recommended reading if you’re looking for an exercise in logic (I drew a diagram to follow it), and a vocabulary lesson (I love that the Church used the word “licety” in 2005). The argument supporting the Vatican position to not oppose “tainted” vaccines boils down to this: Some things are evil, like abortion. In relationship to an identified evil, people can share evil intent, which is formal cooperation, or not share evil intent, which is material cooperation. Material cooperation can be direct or indirect (active or passive). If active, the aid can be proximate or remote. If you’re still with me, the sum is, accepting “tainted” vaccinations is deemed passive material cooperation because end users do not intend to have abortion or profit from them. Clear as mud, as my Irish Catholic grandmother used to say.

In an interpretation of the Vatican’s 2005 Policy, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia clarifies, in their new “Immunization Policy Rationale” of 2013: since the intention of vaccination is not to procure an abortion, there is no formal cooperation in evil. The user’s intent is to “benefit from something derived from the aborted fetuses,” so “their use would be morally permissible on a provisional basis.” In other words, it is okay to suspend your moral code and cooperate with identified evil there is a specific reason the Church has deemed less evil than something else. In this case, it is less evil to support abortion than it is to get the chicken pox or measles.

“May” becomes “Mandate”

The 2005 Pontifical Academy statement is extremely controversial amongst congregants in the Catholic Church. Some believe it is being used to justify compulsory vaccination, where the document was only meant to say parents had a choice to vaccinate or not, and vaccination would not be considered an offense to their faith. So how did the position that a Catholic may vaccinate without offending their faith turn into a mandate?

Welcome to America.

Until recent years, Catholic school diocese in the US were accepting religious exemptions in states where they were provided by law. In 2010, all the Florida diocese jointly requested an opinion on diocesan vaccine policy from the US National Catholic Bioethics Center. This culminated in a stated opinion as well as a meeting with the NCBC president, Dr. John M. Haas. He interpreted that religious exemptions should not be allowed because the “use of vaccines [is] licit if no others are available.” A logical leap from Vatican policy, to say the least. The US Conference of Bishops, Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities agreed also with the National Catholics Bioethics Center and Catholic Medical Association positions.

The US Catholic interpretation of Vatican policy seems unconcerned with the U.S. Constitution. Under the Constitution, a person does not have to agree with rhetoric or doctrine of their subscribed faith to exercise a valid exemption. In states where that exemption is provided, it is Constitutionally protected. American government was structured on ideals of protecting independent thought and minority opinion (even if nowadays that kind of thing is discouraged).

Interestingly, the National Catholic Bioethics Center goes on to say “Parents would, therefore, have to obtain a conscience exemption rather than a religious one.” I interpret this to be a direct assault on Constitutional law, because it is essentially saying a parent can object but their reasons can’t be religious because the Archdiocese has forbidden it. So in theory, a Catholic School in America would be in line with Catholic doctrine by refusing religious exemptions but granting philosophical. Less than half of U.S. states provide for a conscious exemption, and even if they do it is not considered constitutionally protected so a school could very comfortably choose not to acknowledge such a law without fear of challenge. According to the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, some school districts are allowing a “conscious exemption.” Googling archdiocese policies reveals that many school districts are not.

The sound logic of the NCBC continues in a scathing judgment of a theoretical parent who chooses not to subject their child to the MMR. The MMR is is the only way to get the Rubella vaccine, and unavailable in the US without use of a fetal cell line. The NCBC identifies Rubella as a “considerable danger” if a pregnant woman has contact with an unvaccinated child, even briefly, because they [the unvaccinated child] could be carriers of the virus, which could cause “grave congenital malformations in the fetus….In this case, the parents who did not accept the vaccination of their own children become responsible for the malformations in question, and for the subsequent abortion of fetuses when they have been discovered to be malformed.” So the US Catholic Church position is to hold a parent morally responsible for causing abortions undertaken by third parties if they choose to avoid injecting their child with a product developed using products of abortion. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t!

I’m Calling Bull Sh*t

The Pontifical Academy claims parents are being forced to inoculate with “morally unacceptable sources” and pharmaceutical companies are engaging in “moral coercion of the parents, who are forced to act against their conscience or otherwise to put the health of their children and of the population as a whole at risk.” Shame on them, right? The Vatican is saying “our hands are tied!” What are we going to do? If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em, right?

So the Vatican is victim to BigPharma, just like the rest of us? Sure. One of the largest and wealthiest institutions on the planet, which has fought wars on behalf of its doctrine, conquered and converted empires for centuries, is victim to some scientists who can’t come up with another way to do things? Sounds legit.
​
The 2005 document explains that Catholics have a “duty” to put pressure on pharmaceutical manufacturers to create less evil products. I’m calling bullsh*t. If the Church truly wanted to put pressure on pharmaceutical manufacturers, they would have used their massive stores of wealth and 1.2 billion congregants to boycott the products utilizing fetal cell lines. They would have funded research for new vaccines, which they could have even done in-house by electing vaccine research scientists to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which boasts dozens of Nobel Laureates. That would have been pressure. How quickly would the wheels of science have turned then?

The Vatican doesn’t want change. The Vatican is one of the only institutions on this planet with more wealth than the pharmaceutical industry. If anyone could have tried to address this unacceptable moral coercion of Catholics, it would have been the Vatican. You can’t tell me they didn’t see that. You can’t tell me the Sacred Congregation didn’t consider this: Gee, what happens if we say the Vatican is opposed? What would happen if we said vaccines derived from aborted fetal cell lines are reprehensible to Catholic Doctrine?

The 2005 response to Ms. Vinnedege’s question mentions the church took “some time”-two years-to answer her question as they conducted a “careful examination of  ‘tainted’ vaccines…with the help of a group of experts.” Who were they? Who did they rely upon to create their official policy, which affects the decision of over a billion people worldwide on whether to accept many vaccines? Would influencing one-seventh of the world’s population have been pressure? The Vatican would consult with only the best, and to my understanding, the only people on this planet that are recognized as “experts” in vaccination by those who have the authority to say so, are people that directly profit from vaccine production.

The Vatican cries that their Catholic parents are being forced into “moral coercion.” This is classic misdirection. The Vatican is using moral coercion to promote vaccines as they are. If a parent wants to protect their pro-life position, they no longer have the support of the church, and their children are not welcome in Catholic schools. I’d say that’s direct and proximate material cooperation in evil, but that’s just my two cents.

Conclusion

My favorite part of the 2013 Philly Archdiocese letter to parents sums it up: “The Church is not trying to force parents to change their well-formed consciences on vaccinations…However they must accept the consequences. One such consequence is that their child cannot enrolled (sic) in a catholic school.” In other words, it is more important to the American Archdiocese to push vaccines than it is to adhere to US laws, or to educate children in Catholic values and doctrine, logic, morality, or human rights.

AAP vax waiver

What’s the Deal with the Vaccination Waivers?

, , , , , , 0

NOTE: In a former life, not so long ago, I was an attorney. I’ve since hung up my license (READ: NOTHING HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE, NOR AM I QUALIFIED TO GIVE IT ANYMORE), but I am still an activist, a parent, and an educated human, interested in health care rights of individuals and families.

So here goes.

Parents frequently ask: Can the Immunization Waiver be used against me? Why do doctors insist on it? What happens if I don’t sign it?

Let’s start with background. The stated purpose of the waiver is to “induce a wavering parent” to vaccinate, and to document the discussion when they won’t. In short, it is a recommendation from the American Academy of Pediatrics to induce a parent to follow the Immunization Schedule to a T, and for the doc to CYA if the parent will not. The AAP urges doctors to bring this up at every visit when the child is not on schedule, and to consult a local attorney.

Once you realize the AAP is “Dedicated to the Health of All Children,” a collective concern, it is not surprising the organization promotes a public health initiative like the one-size-fits-all Immunization Schedule, rather than supporting its members in ensuring individuals get the medical treatment that is right for them.

I know of NO signed vaccination waiver ever being used against a parent, other than as a threat. (If you have please share your experience!) There is no need to use the waiver for such a purpose. IF someone wants to create a case against you for refusal to vaccinate on schedule, the lack of any documented medical records to prove otherwise would suffice. They don’t also need a form to substantiate it. The only situation I encountered while working as an attorney where the waiver would be relevant would be in a custody dispute involving vaccination status. And here’s a secret: Those waivers could actually help in custody cases if the parent who suddenly wants to vaccinate had signed a waiver in the past. It won’t be endgame, but it will be a valid point of discussion about candor and intent toward the childrens’ well being, amidst all of the other facts of the relationship.

If you have signer’s remorse, can you get your documents back, or have them removed from the record? No. You can request copies, but the waiver won’t be removed from medical records. The medical record is legally owned by the provider that creates them, not by the patient. You can attempt to amend the medical record with a letter stating you’ve changed your mind, but even if you succeed in getting your note added to the record, the original waiver will remain in the record. That is how charting works. Health workers are trained on the proper way to change a medical record, which involves leaving the original note intact and read-able, and recording the change. The physician owns the record. You have a right to request the change be made, but there is no right to have it made.

Can you submit your own form? You can try. Good luck. It would be at the discretion of the provider to accept it, or tell you to leave the office. They are under no obligation to treat you or your child, or accept any forms from you. What incentive do they have to take your form over their own, or to amend their medical record?

If your concern is a record of your child’s vaccination status, you need to be thinking bigger than that waiver. For a start, find out about the CDC’s Immunization Information Systems plan, your state’s immunization registry and whether the state allows you to opt-out, and what your school district’s reporting requirements are.

So what do you do if you don’t want to sign the form? Tell the pediatrician just that. Or you can review the form and cross out the parts you don’t agree with, then sign. What if the pediatrician’s office gives you push back and insists you sign it, without alteration? Then your values and your pediatrician’s values are not in line. If the pediatrician refuses to see your child unless you submit to coercion at a well-visit, they have that right. You should realized the relationship will not get better from there. What do you think will happen the next time you disagree with your child’s doctor? Time to shop around. There are a growing number of physicians willing to respect your rights and choices for your family. You can also consider joining the growing number of families doing their due diligence with whatever medical visits are necessary, then seeking health and wellness care elsewhere (with naturopaths, chiropractors, herbalists, homeopaths, and midwives to name a few). It may take some homework, but it is well worth the effort to find a health care practitioner that respects the concept of consent, and has an open enough mind to have an honest discussion about vaccine choices without resorting to bully-tactics.

750CNF-470x260

Be an Agent for Change: My Introduction to Birthing Rights

, , , , , 0

This article was inspired by a post in a facebook group Pennsylvania Families For Safe Birth, by a midwife I hold a deep respect for. She shared this article: Becoming an Agent For Change: What to Do When Your Midwife Has Been Charged. Check it out. 

As a mom and a business owner, I know how busy we all are. One of the most profound lessons motherhood has taught me is how precious time is. But I’ve discovered, paradoxically, that making time for things that are important to you creates more space in your life. Shifting your focus can make you aware of opportunities you would never have seen, and it can change your life so you are no longer fighting time, as your passions infuse and enliven your every day. It’s easy to martyr yourself to motherhood, or to your job, or your partner, or whatever else is important in your life. But it’s empowering to make time for the things that call to your heart.

Here’s the story of how I was called to become and Agent For Change in maternity care in the U.S.

I sat in my midwife’s office over two years ago when she told me about the rally she was going to in a nearby state to support access to home birth. I thought, this is something I truly believe in and support; I cannot stay quiet. I went with her and it changed my life.

I will admit, I was nervous. I’d been to a few political rallies, but found anonymity in the abstract workings of representative democracy. Now, it was personal. The bill proposed in the MD legislature was about licensure of midwives, which had a bearing on access to care during a home birth. I was exercising the right to my choice of maternity care right then, sitting in that office. If I didn’t speak up now, when would I?

As I agreed to go, I had the hormonal rush and excited anxiety of first pregnancy as I considered important logistical questions: I wondered, will this be safe? Is it healthy to stand in the sun that long while pregnant? Will I be able to find a place to pee? My midwives assured me I would be okay, and I trusted them.

We drove together to the Capitol Building in Maryland. I had no idea what to expect as we walked from the car to the front of the building. We rounded the corner and my first glimpse was of a large crowd of people in dark grey and black suits and dresses, peppered with shirts and aprons in blues and purples-signature attire of the “Plain” people, for whom access to home birth care is a necessity. They moved as a group from one side of the courtyard to another and as they did I saw hundreds of other women, men and children. Many had signs, lots were wearing their babies, all were talking and watching out for the little ones as they played. My midwives and I merged with the group and joined the hub-bub. We were all tied together with a common purpose. We had all felt the pull to be standing in that spot on that day. We all shared the anticipation for news from inside those walls that drew us together like a gravitational force in the courtyard of that beautiful and historic building. Unfortunately there was no satisfaction that day, and Maryland families are still fighting for recognition of their rights.

I mingled that day, and as I did, I met a woman who was also an attorney who had started to network attorneys across the country through an email list, to enable them to work for positive change in maternity care, and protect those who have already suffered. That list lead me to learn of shocking and profoundly sad stories of women who were abused in body, mind, and spirit by a maternity system that should be supporting them.

One action lead to another and lead to another. My decision in March of 2012 to go to a rally to support rights of women in a neighboring state was the catalyst to finally hear the calling of my vocation. I had never heard the terms “Birth” and “Rights” in the same sentence before my pregnancy. I now use them on a daily basis, and do my best to educate others about their significance.

I was inspired to use my legal training to help make positive change in maternity care in the US. I provide assistance to pregnant women and midwives through my law practice. I helped found the Birth Rights Bar Association, launched this month in conjunction with the profoundly heartbreaking and inspiring #breakthesilence campaign fronted by Human Rights in Childbirth, Improving Birth and Birth Monopoly. (Please note some of the stories are quite graphic.)

Becoming an Agent for Change can be as simple as talking to people at a picnic or family gathering or while waiting for the bus. Every voice adds to the growing chorus of calls for awareness and change. The article that inspired this post has great recommendations for further action. Campaigns like #breakthesilence and “I’m Improving Birth Because” have been powerful and inspirational ways for individuals to become Agents for Change. Social Media is a great platform for education and outreach and can be as simple as linking a good article.

You never know who you are going to inspire. The simplest of words or actions can cascade into change.

2014