Friday, June 10, 2011
Sunday, May 29, 2011
HW # 59 - SOF Prom 2011 & DSPs
I have now read three good descriptions of prom experiences written by my classmates. My first reaction was that I’m glad that the skepticism promoted in our class about this “rite of passage” that seniors are expected to attend did not keep them from having a good time. (Score: students 1; Andy 0 – joke). Actually, it sounds like the healthy awareness they had from Normal is Weird contributed to their having a better time.
Arden:
“I wanted so badly not to care about prom I started a fight against getting involved. And the day of the event I lost that battle. The influence of the event is hard to overcome. So difficult to the point where I ended up with the very typical experience. Surprisingly I am ok with it. I like the classic awkward, and posed pictures. I enjoyed the limo rides and the dancing. A stereotyped, typical experience I was in the end very glad to be a part of.”
What this quote makes me feel is that by being hyper-aware of all the clichés, a prom goer can keep from getting dragged down by them. The awareness gives participants a perspective so they can think “Now here’s the part where I make my entrance and my parents go ooh and ah, and here’s where we have to pose for the photos,” and just see the experience for what it is so they don’t feel they have to rebel against it completely.
Omar:
“I definitely had a bit of cynicism towards prom prior to it…Although I was never against the idea of prom in any way I saw it as a stupid event put on by the school that people go to because, as is said with many things prom related, it is tradition…My views of prom changed slightly because the experience didn’t feel so fake, as is so often described or portrayed…The traditions may be silly but following them isn’t so bad…Seeing everyone dance together and laugh and simply talk was nice.”
Natalie:
“It is funny how for one night people want to be someone else entirely. While dancing there was the circle dance, but not necessarily with “the outcast” in the middle. Everyone was included in the dancing and it was nice to just let yourself go. Nobody cared about how you danced or with whom you danced. Our grade was definitely unified…”
Omar’s quote and Natalie’s quote make me think that SOF did a good job of putting on a
low-key prom that made it possible for most people to have a great time. It also sounds like the school’s efforts to make us all respect each other paid off. Of course it’s possible that some kids had a less good time. Maybe some girls felt they had to spend too much money getting ready than they could afford. Maybe some hated their dress because they couldn’t afford the one they wanted. Maybe some hated the way they looked in the pictures that will get sent to all the relatives. Maybe some guys felt awkward or uncomfortable wearing what they were wearing and wished they hadn’t come. Maybe a few people felt like “outcasts.” I hope not. The only good part about not having a good time at the prom is that your story will be more interesting to tell when you are older. There can’t be a non-boring book or movie about a prom that is 100% fun for everybody.
So – how do I feel now about not having gone? I think maybe I missed something. I was playing soccer the same night in a game that was important because it is almost playoff time. It was a great game that ended in a tie, and afterwards every part of my body hurt. There was blood and there were black and green bruises. In fact, I was in great pain having had both my wrist and my ankle operated on three weeks ago because of game injuries. There’s a physical and a social price to pay if you choose to play these pre-professional sports. I guess I must not mind paying it. I like to dance, but when I’m on a field I love to play more than anything else in the world.
Arden:
“I wanted so badly not to care about prom I started a fight against getting involved. And the day of the event I lost that battle. The influence of the event is hard to overcome. So difficult to the point where I ended up with the very typical experience. Surprisingly I am ok with it. I like the classic awkward, and posed pictures. I enjoyed the limo rides and the dancing. A stereotyped, typical experience I was in the end very glad to be a part of.”
What this quote makes me feel is that by being hyper-aware of all the clichés, a prom goer can keep from getting dragged down by them. The awareness gives participants a perspective so they can think “Now here’s the part where I make my entrance and my parents go ooh and ah, and here’s where we have to pose for the photos,” and just see the experience for what it is so they don’t feel they have to rebel against it completely.
Omar:
“I definitely had a bit of cynicism towards prom prior to it…Although I was never against the idea of prom in any way I saw it as a stupid event put on by the school that people go to because, as is said with many things prom related, it is tradition…My views of prom changed slightly because the experience didn’t feel so fake, as is so often described or portrayed…The traditions may be silly but following them isn’t so bad…Seeing everyone dance together and laugh and simply talk was nice.”
Natalie:
“It is funny how for one night people want to be someone else entirely. While dancing there was the circle dance, but not necessarily with “the outcast” in the middle. Everyone was included in the dancing and it was nice to just let yourself go. Nobody cared about how you danced or with whom you danced. Our grade was definitely unified…”
Omar’s quote and Natalie’s quote make me think that SOF did a good job of putting on a
low-key prom that made it possible for most people to have a great time. It also sounds like the school’s efforts to make us all respect each other paid off. Of course it’s possible that some kids had a less good time. Maybe some girls felt they had to spend too much money getting ready than they could afford. Maybe some hated their dress because they couldn’t afford the one they wanted. Maybe some hated the way they looked in the pictures that will get sent to all the relatives. Maybe some guys felt awkward or uncomfortable wearing what they were wearing and wished they hadn’t come. Maybe a few people felt like “outcasts.” I hope not. The only good part about not having a good time at the prom is that your story will be more interesting to tell when you are older. There can’t be a non-boring book or movie about a prom that is 100% fun for everybody.
So – how do I feel now about not having gone? I think maybe I missed something. I was playing soccer the same night in a game that was important because it is almost playoff time. It was a great game that ended in a tie, and afterwards every part of my body hurt. There was blood and there were black and green bruises. In fact, I was in great pain having had both my wrist and my ankle operated on three weeks ago because of game injuries. There’s a physical and a social price to pay if you choose to play these pre-professional sports. I guess I must not mind paying it. I like to dance, but when I’m on a field I love to play more than anything else in the world.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
HW # 58 - Prom Interviews
Interviews: People’s feelings about proms
My age group
1st person – soccer teammate
I am not going to my prom. There isn’t anyone I
I felt that strongly about inviting. The whole thing is too
organized for me. It’s also too expensive for what it is.
I am a more spontaneous type of person and don’t really like
getting dressed up.
2nd person – another soccer teammate
The day that was the deadline for going to the prom I asked a
girl if she wanted to go and she said, “Not really.” So that was
the end of that. I didn’t even feel that strongly about asking
that girl, and there wasn’t anyone else I wanted to spend that
much time with. A group of us are going to a movie and getting
something to eat afterwards instead.
People in their 20s
1st person
I went to my prom with a girl whose parents were friends of my
parents. My mother said that I should go or I would regret not going
later in my life. I can tell you that it was a long night and at the end
we drove to a beach on Long Island. The girl I was with got cold and
asked me for my jacket. Then when it was time to leave she couldn’t
find it. My mother was so angry about my coming back without my
jacket that she actually said that proms were a waste of time and money
and that I should never have gone. My answer was, “That’s what I said.”
2nd person
Like your brother I was the only minority guy in my class. There were two
“minority” girls so the teacher in charge of the prom informed me that I
should take both of them. Actually, this took the pressure off,
and we all laughed about what was expected of us for a long time.
Older people
Friend from my mom’s office
I did go but it was not a memorable evening. There was only
one black guy in my class, and there were three black girls. I
was one of them. It was expected that he would take one of us and
that probably the other two of us wouldn’t go. One of the girls was
way too hot for him, and there was no possibility of her saying yes.
The other girl was shy and serious so he asked me, but he told me that I
would have to buy my own flowers if I wanted them. I said I would think
about it. My mother was so mad at me for saying that. She said that I
had to go and have pictures taken or I would regret it later. At the party
another guy asked me to dance and we ended up on the floor on our knees
shaking our shoulders. My date said that what I did was really embarrassing,
and he hardly spoke to me afterwards. I took a taxi back home to the Bronx
by myself.
My dad
I was 6 feet six in high school and there was one girl who was 6 feet one. My
mother forced me to take Big Betty, as she was known, to the prom. Big Betty
did not dance, but she loved to eat. She didn’t mind my dancing with other people.
I remember her saying, “You go dance. I’ll just have a little more chicken.”
It seems to me that we should have dealt with the “prom” subject in Normal is Weird
before food, birth, and dying. If we had, I might actually have considered going. I think I’m beginning to understand that the reason it is important to go is for its storytelling
value in years to come. And the weirder or worse a time you have the better your story.
It isn’t surprising that there are so many funny stories. The prom seems to have been started as a middle and lower class alternative to coming out society parties. Those parties no doubt were miserable for a lot of people too. In parts of the black community the prom really is considered a coming out into society as a respectable social person who can wear a suit other than to church. Thanks to pressure from mothers, teachers, and peers, many people go to their proms against their will but end up with a great story to use for the rest of their lives. It seems as though minority kids in a school have been expected to go with each other even if there are only two of them. Of course they should like each other that much. Or else they should be good sports and pretend that they do. Hearing about two people who are like each other going to the prom and having a great time has no good story value at all. Hearing about people being forced to pair up against their will has movie-making possibilities.
My age group
1st person – soccer teammate
I am not going to my prom. There isn’t anyone I
I felt that strongly about inviting. The whole thing is too
organized for me. It’s also too expensive for what it is.
I am a more spontaneous type of person and don’t really like
getting dressed up.
2nd person – another soccer teammate
The day that was the deadline for going to the prom I asked a
girl if she wanted to go and she said, “Not really.” So that was
the end of that. I didn’t even feel that strongly about asking
that girl, and there wasn’t anyone else I wanted to spend that
much time with. A group of us are going to a movie and getting
something to eat afterwards instead.
People in their 20s
1st person
I went to my prom with a girl whose parents were friends of my
parents. My mother said that I should go or I would regret not going
later in my life. I can tell you that it was a long night and at the end
we drove to a beach on Long Island. The girl I was with got cold and
asked me for my jacket. Then when it was time to leave she couldn’t
find it. My mother was so angry about my coming back without my
jacket that she actually said that proms were a waste of time and money
and that I should never have gone. My answer was, “That’s what I said.”
2nd person
Like your brother I was the only minority guy in my class. There were two
“minority” girls so the teacher in charge of the prom informed me that I
should take both of them. Actually, this took the pressure off,
and we all laughed about what was expected of us for a long time.
Older people
Friend from my mom’s office
I did go but it was not a memorable evening. There was only
one black guy in my class, and there were three black girls. I
was one of them. It was expected that he would take one of us and
that probably the other two of us wouldn’t go. One of the girls was
way too hot for him, and there was no possibility of her saying yes.
The other girl was shy and serious so he asked me, but he told me that I
would have to buy my own flowers if I wanted them. I said I would think
about it. My mother was so mad at me for saying that. She said that I
had to go and have pictures taken or I would regret it later. At the party
another guy asked me to dance and we ended up on the floor on our knees
shaking our shoulders. My date said that what I did was really embarrassing,
and he hardly spoke to me afterwards. I took a taxi back home to the Bronx
by myself.
My dad
I was 6 feet six in high school and there was one girl who was 6 feet one. My
mother forced me to take Big Betty, as she was known, to the prom. Big Betty
did not dance, but she loved to eat. She didn’t mind my dancing with other people.
I remember her saying, “You go dance. I’ll just have a little more chicken.”
It seems to me that we should have dealt with the “prom” subject in Normal is Weird
before food, birth, and dying. If we had, I might actually have considered going. I think I’m beginning to understand that the reason it is important to go is for its storytelling
value in years to come. And the weirder or worse a time you have the better your story.
It isn’t surprising that there are so many funny stories. The prom seems to have been started as a middle and lower class alternative to coming out society parties. Those parties no doubt were miserable for a lot of people too. In parts of the black community the prom really is considered a coming out into society as a respectable social person who can wear a suit other than to church. Thanks to pressure from mothers, teachers, and peers, many people go to their proms against their will but end up with a great story to use for the rest of their lives. It seems as though minority kids in a school have been expected to go with each other even if there are only two of them. Of course they should like each other that much. Or else they should be good sports and pretend that they do. Hearing about two people who are like each other going to the prom and having a great time has no good story value at all. Hearing about people being forced to pair up against their will has movie-making possibilities.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
HW # 57 - Initial Thoughts on Prom
I will begin my preliminary thoughts about the senior prom by saying that I am
not going to mine. Luckily, I don’t feel any pressure to go, and it’s because it seems like a pressured event that I don’t want to go. The pressure to try to fit into an event that lasts all night and requires getting dressed up is there because I don’t really have a relationship with anyone or any group in my class that would make a long formal event seem like fun. On the other hand, going to Six Flags with class members has great appeal. In fact, I can’t wait to go. What’s the difference? Six Flags doesn’t require getting dressed up, there are no social expectations, and the rides provide great entertainment requiring no other behavior except to have fun. Does a prom require other behavior except to have fun? I think it does.
My older brother said that he was not going to his senior prom or senior dance as it was called. He went to a private school on a scholarship. A teacher he liked very much talked him into taking a girl who wanted to go very badly and with him. The teacher told him that everyone should have the experience of going to their senior dance and that it was a rite of passage. He didn’t agree, but he didn’t want to let his teacher down. (She is still a great friend of his and went to his college graduation last year.) The trouble began when the girl’s mother called Reed a few weeks before the dance and told him that her daughter was going to wear a purple dress and she hoped Reed would wear a shirt and tie that would go with it. My brother the basketball player couldn’t believe this. Then her family arranged to take him to a store to pick out a tie and shirt to go with her dress. They were incredibly ugly in his opinion, but he bought them. Then when the day came, Reed went to the girl’s house. The grandmother met him at the door and took him to the bathroom and told him to take a shower. He said he had already taken a shower. She told him to take another one. She had heard that he had had a game earlier that day. Later, the father took a thousand (that’s how many it seemed) photos of his daughter and Reed. The dance lasted all night with breakfast included the next morning. Even though my brother loves to dance, he said it was the longest night of his life. Not that the girl wasn’t nice, it was just too long a time to be mainly with one person. When in college two years later he started dating a girl from his high school class who was at the dance. They are still together and still laugh about the senior dance which they both thought would never end.
My situation is worse than my brother’s was. At least he knew all the kids in his class really well. I don’t know anyone in my class outside the school day. I have always left immediately after 3 to go to dance class and then to soccer. On weekends I played soccer all year long and still do. It’s not that I don’t like dances. I love music and I really like to dance but not with any one person yet especially hour after hour. At BalletTech, my middle school, we had great DJs, everyone could dance, and we danced in groups. At Cornell recently, I went to a Lupe Fiasco concert and had an amazing time. I just don’t want to put myself in any pressured social position. School, dance training, and soccer training have been pressure enough. Let the people go to the prom who want to go, but I’ll see everyone at Six Flags.
Q # 1 - Why do people ask if you're going to Prom with a serioous look on their face?
Q # 2 - Why don't schools just have a great band for seniors so that everyone would want to go? (For example if Lupe Fiasco were going to perform, I would be there.)
Q # 3 - Is not going to the prom worse for girls than it is for boys?
not going to mine. Luckily, I don’t feel any pressure to go, and it’s because it seems like a pressured event that I don’t want to go. The pressure to try to fit into an event that lasts all night and requires getting dressed up is there because I don’t really have a relationship with anyone or any group in my class that would make a long formal event seem like fun. On the other hand, going to Six Flags with class members has great appeal. In fact, I can’t wait to go. What’s the difference? Six Flags doesn’t require getting dressed up, there are no social expectations, and the rides provide great entertainment requiring no other behavior except to have fun. Does a prom require other behavior except to have fun? I think it does.
My older brother said that he was not going to his senior prom or senior dance as it was called. He went to a private school on a scholarship. A teacher he liked very much talked him into taking a girl who wanted to go very badly and with him. The teacher told him that everyone should have the experience of going to their senior dance and that it was a rite of passage. He didn’t agree, but he didn’t want to let his teacher down. (She is still a great friend of his and went to his college graduation last year.) The trouble began when the girl’s mother called Reed a few weeks before the dance and told him that her daughter was going to wear a purple dress and she hoped Reed would wear a shirt and tie that would go with it. My brother the basketball player couldn’t believe this. Then her family arranged to take him to a store to pick out a tie and shirt to go with her dress. They were incredibly ugly in his opinion, but he bought them. Then when the day came, Reed went to the girl’s house. The grandmother met him at the door and took him to the bathroom and told him to take a shower. He said he had already taken a shower. She told him to take another one. She had heard that he had had a game earlier that day. Later, the father took a thousand (that’s how many it seemed) photos of his daughter and Reed. The dance lasted all night with breakfast included the next morning. Even though my brother loves to dance, he said it was the longest night of his life. Not that the girl wasn’t nice, it was just too long a time to be mainly with one person. When in college two years later he started dating a girl from his high school class who was at the dance. They are still together and still laugh about the senior dance which they both thought would never end.
My situation is worse than my brother’s was. At least he knew all the kids in his class really well. I don’t know anyone in my class outside the school day. I have always left immediately after 3 to go to dance class and then to soccer. On weekends I played soccer all year long and still do. It’s not that I don’t like dances. I love music and I really like to dance but not with any one person yet especially hour after hour. At BalletTech, my middle school, we had great DJs, everyone could dance, and we danced in groups. At Cornell recently, I went to a Lupe Fiasco concert and had an amazing time. I just don’t want to put myself in any pressured social position. School, dance training, and soccer training have been pressure enough. Let the people go to the prom who want to go, but I’ll see everyone at Six Flags.
Q # 1 - Why do people ask if you're going to Prom with a serioous look on their face?
Q # 2 - Why don't schools just have a great band for seniors so that everyone would want to go? (For example if Lupe Fiasco were going to perform, I would be there.)
Q # 3 - Is not going to the prom worse for girls than it is for boys?
Thursday, May 19, 2011
HW # 56 - Culminating Project Comments
For Omar
I like the way you relate the high cost of funerals in this country to our economic system of capitalism.. You don’t blame the funeral directors who are just acting on
the “profit motive” which is everybody’s motive in this country unless they work for a nonprofit organization. Spending so much money on funerals is a great example of “normal is weird” because it makes no sense to spend more than you can afford honoring
dead people who should feel better about your using the money for their grandchildren’s education (as an example) and would probably would not want to be harming the environment if they knew they were doing that. Even if they did want a big send off, they will never know what you did, and you can always feel good about the fact
that you made them be a part of doing things a better way. As you said, people are easy victims when they are in mourning. There needs to be a cheaper and better alternative
to embalming, wakes, and burials in coffins and vaults that people know about and that
is available where they live. I really liked what you wrote.
For Ben
I think you did a great job showing that when it comes to making decisions about what to do with dead bodies, there are complications with all the options. Signing an organ donor card sounds like a great thing to do, but if you only want your organs used to save someone else’s life, you have to find out more about who is getting your organs. Your report makes me wonder about what control a person can have over what happens to his or her organs after signing the organ donor form. I wonder if you can specify a certain hospital or transplant doctor to get your organs. This could be a lot of work. I leave my heart to__________, my liver to _______________, and my eyes to ________________.
Stiff makes the case that parts are needed for research too, and when I saw the BODIES exhibit at South Street Seaport, I understood how helpful once live bodies can be for
teaching and learning. It’s not as though your name is attached to them. And if your family gets a free burial out of it, it’s worth considering.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From AbdulM
Your blog seemed to be about this idea that all humans are going to end up rotting no matter what so why don't we stop being selfish and give back to the earth in a "greener" way. Instead of making the decomposition process longer than it should be why don't we just get it over with and give back, even though this may be hard for some of us Americans.
One aspect of your post that I particularly valued was that you provided five alternative to a a typical burial(slow burial). This is more than I learned in my care of the dead unit book. I guess I should have just waited for you to post this amazing blog and just not have read the book. You took the time out to research and not only state but you explained each alternative which is what I greatly appreciated.
Your project matter to me because these are alternatives to our dominant social practice which as we found out in all of the units is more dominant than we would like. These alternatives all have their pro-s and cons,but it seems as though they all outweigh the dominant social practice. I'm not sure if our dominant social practice will change though it appears as though cremation is next on the list to take over which would send us more in the direction of Japan as far as care of the dead is concered. When you think about that isn't to bad since America doesn't seem to know what there doing with issues like oh I don't know food, illness and dying, birth, and care of the dead. Overall great job best work in the class( as hard as that is to admit to myself) I expect nothing more from Mr. Class of 2015 Cornell.
From Omar
You do a very good job of stating the current situation and evaluating the faults. The alternatives you provide are very insightful not only on a very literal level but they say a lot about our society. There are other reasonable option out there for us yet we hold our selves too basically only two. We are so influenced by tradition thee is no progression. I also really like your last paragraph where you talk about in a bigger picture kind of way. The entire post was strong you stated, analyzed, and critiqued the situation. The alternatives were clear your progressive view on care of the dead was also made very clear. Overall, great job
From Dmitry
Great idea picking Kirk Nowitski and Kevin Garnett to tell us about burial options and recommend the cheapest one even though they could afford a Tutankamen-type tomb. I thought this was a really good summary of all the ways to dispose of our bodies. You should get this flyer printed.
From Mom
I did not know anything about the process of resomation or of promession and found it really interesting that there are better alternatives to cremation for the environment. You make a convincing case for a green burial, but since this has to happen right away and the ground could be frozen, that promession process sounds like the best alternative. Having the basketball players make the case for a better burial for the envionment was a really good idea. Someone should pick up on it! Maybe you should propose it.
I like the way you relate the high cost of funerals in this country to our economic system of capitalism.. You don’t blame the funeral directors who are just acting on
the “profit motive” which is everybody’s motive in this country unless they work for a nonprofit organization. Spending so much money on funerals is a great example of “normal is weird” because it makes no sense to spend more than you can afford honoring
dead people who should feel better about your using the money for their grandchildren’s education (as an example) and would probably would not want to be harming the environment if they knew they were doing that. Even if they did want a big send off, they will never know what you did, and you can always feel good about the fact
that you made them be a part of doing things a better way. As you said, people are easy victims when they are in mourning. There needs to be a cheaper and better alternative
to embalming, wakes, and burials in coffins and vaults that people know about and that
is available where they live. I really liked what you wrote.
For Ben
I think you did a great job showing that when it comes to making decisions about what to do with dead bodies, there are complications with all the options. Signing an organ donor card sounds like a great thing to do, but if you only want your organs used to save someone else’s life, you have to find out more about who is getting your organs. Your report makes me wonder about what control a person can have over what happens to his or her organs after signing the organ donor form. I wonder if you can specify a certain hospital or transplant doctor to get your organs. This could be a lot of work. I leave my heart to__________, my liver to _______________, and my eyes to ________________.
Stiff makes the case that parts are needed for research too, and when I saw the BODIES exhibit at South Street Seaport, I understood how helpful once live bodies can be for
teaching and learning. It’s not as though your name is attached to them. And if your family gets a free burial out of it, it’s worth considering.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From AbdulM
Your blog seemed to be about this idea that all humans are going to end up rotting no matter what so why don't we stop being selfish and give back to the earth in a "greener" way. Instead of making the decomposition process longer than it should be why don't we just get it over with and give back, even though this may be hard for some of us Americans.
One aspect of your post that I particularly valued was that you provided five alternative to a a typical burial(slow burial). This is more than I learned in my care of the dead unit book. I guess I should have just waited for you to post this amazing blog and just not have read the book. You took the time out to research and not only state but you explained each alternative which is what I greatly appreciated.
Your project matter to me because these are alternatives to our dominant social practice which as we found out in all of the units is more dominant than we would like. These alternatives all have their pro-s and cons,but it seems as though they all outweigh the dominant social practice. I'm not sure if our dominant social practice will change though it appears as though cremation is next on the list to take over which would send us more in the direction of Japan as far as care of the dead is concered. When you think about that isn't to bad since America doesn't seem to know what there doing with issues like oh I don't know food, illness and dying, birth, and care of the dead. Overall great job best work in the class( as hard as that is to admit to myself) I expect nothing more from Mr. Class of 2015 Cornell.
From Omar
You do a very good job of stating the current situation and evaluating the faults. The alternatives you provide are very insightful not only on a very literal level but they say a lot about our society. There are other reasonable option out there for us yet we hold our selves too basically only two. We are so influenced by tradition thee is no progression. I also really like your last paragraph where you talk about in a bigger picture kind of way. The entire post was strong you stated, analyzed, and critiqued the situation. The alternatives were clear your progressive view on care of the dead was also made very clear. Overall, great job
From Dmitry
Great idea picking Kirk Nowitski and Kevin Garnett to tell us about burial options and recommend the cheapest one even though they could afford a Tutankamen-type tomb. I thought this was a really good summary of all the ways to dispose of our bodies. You should get this flyer printed.
From Mom
I did not know anything about the process of resomation or of promession and found it really interesting that there are better alternatives to cremation for the environment. You make a convincing case for a green burial, but since this has to happen right away and the ground could be frozen, that promession process sounds like the best alternative. Having the basketball players make the case for a better burial for the envionment was a really good idea. Someone should pick up on it! Maybe you should propose it.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
xc - COTD3. Go to the "Bodies Exhibit"
After attending the BODIES exhibit at the South Street Seaport, I feel that I have a much greater appreciation of how lucky I am that I was born a human as opposed to any other creature on this earth. The trillions of tasks that occur each second can be mind- numbing (literally and figuratively). Specific parts of the exhibit that will stick with me are:
- Musculature. The skeletons with layers of muscles dribbling a basketball or
throwing a football
- Respiratory system. The section on lungs indicating that after smoking 1 pack of cigarettes, your life decreases by 3 hours and 40 minutes. There is actually a see- through container next to the exhibit where smokers are urged to chuck their cigarettes (already a foot high).
- Birth. Containers of week by week fetuses during the 9 month pregnancy showing the development of the skeleton for example
- Reaction speed. Skeleton throwing a baseball with statement that A-Rod has .458 seconds to identify the trajectory of a 90mph fastball and whether or not to swing.
- Sleep. Purpose may be so that we can process the day’s events and preserve long-term memories.
- Healing. Drugs soon to be tailored to our own specific genetic code. Stem cell research is helping us understand how the body heals itself and changing the way we think about fighting disease.
The controversy about the exhibit has to do with the fact that the bodies are all Chinese, and no one knows for certain how they died. The Chinese government says they were all unclaimed bodies, but this government locks people up and worse if they criticize it. I talked to one of the two doctors who were there to show visitors how to use machines to find out their blood pressure (118/58 for me) and body mass index (22.6 for me). He told me that the bodies belonged to the Dalian Medical University in China and would be returned there after the exhibit. He also said that the U.S. government does terrible things like the torture under the Bush administration, and that these bodies are at least being used for important teaching purposes.
I read that some people call the German scientist, Gunther von Hagens, who is responsible for the preservation of these bodies Dr. Frankenstein and think it is terrible that visitors go to “gawk” at them. This is ridiculous in my opinion. These bodies may be from individuals but they are now not individualized. They are all of us. They are me underneath, and they are fascinating because of the amazing way our bodies are put together and all the systems work. I learned a lot from this exhibit. Seeing diseased organs is upsetting, but having such dramatic evidence about what exercise and good health habits can help you avoid is a good thing.
This was a great extra credit assignment. I think everyone in the class would get a lot out of this exhibit.
- Musculature. The skeletons with layers of muscles dribbling a basketball or
throwing a football
- Respiratory system. The section on lungs indicating that after smoking 1 pack of cigarettes, your life decreases by 3 hours and 40 minutes. There is actually a see- through container next to the exhibit where smokers are urged to chuck their cigarettes (already a foot high).
- Birth. Containers of week by week fetuses during the 9 month pregnancy showing the development of the skeleton for example
- Reaction speed. Skeleton throwing a baseball with statement that A-Rod has .458 seconds to identify the trajectory of a 90mph fastball and whether or not to swing.
- Sleep. Purpose may be so that we can process the day’s events and preserve long-term memories.
- Healing. Drugs soon to be tailored to our own specific genetic code. Stem cell research is helping us understand how the body heals itself and changing the way we think about fighting disease.
The controversy about the exhibit has to do with the fact that the bodies are all Chinese, and no one knows for certain how they died. The Chinese government says they were all unclaimed bodies, but this government locks people up and worse if they criticize it. I talked to one of the two doctors who were there to show visitors how to use machines to find out their blood pressure (118/58 for me) and body mass index (22.6 for me). He told me that the bodies belonged to the Dalian Medical University in China and would be returned there after the exhibit. He also said that the U.S. government does terrible things like the torture under the Bush administration, and that these bodies are at least being used for important teaching purposes.
I read that some people call the German scientist, Gunther von Hagens, who is responsible for the preservation of these bodies Dr. Frankenstein and think it is terrible that visitors go to “gawk” at them. This is ridiculous in my opinion. These bodies may be from individuals but they are now not individualized. They are all of us. They are me underneath, and they are fascinating because of the amazing way our bodies are put together and all the systems work. I learned a lot from this exhibit. Seeing diseased organs is upsetting, but having such dramatic evidence about what exercise and good health habits can help you avoid is a good thing.
This was a great extra credit assignment. I think everyone in the class would get a lot out of this exhibit.
HW # 55 - Culminating Project - Care of the Dead
Go for Green
It’s time to take responsibility for our remains, a euphemism for our dead bodies, our cadavers, our corpses, our carcasses. We have nothing to lose by leaving this earth without hurting it, do we?
Big Problems
In this country most of us are still buried. The problems with burials are:
We are using up valuable land for cemeteries, and cemeteries are running out of space. In fact, there are some places where you have to be buried vertically to be near your relatives. Also, many cemeteries are treated with pesticides and herbivores, poisons, that damage the environment.
In this country most of us are still embalmed. The problem with embalming is:
Most embalming fluid contains formaldehyde, which is extremely dangerous for the mortuary workers using it and is suspected as a cause of cancer, ALS, and problems with the nervous system. It also destroys for a while the microbes that help decompose the body
In this country most of us are put in caskets. The problem with caskets is:
Most caskets here are made of steel, and a lot of them have wood
veneers. They are not biodegradable. The ones made of wood destroy too many trees. Manufacturing them uses a lot of energy.
In this country many of us are put in vaults. The problem with vaults is:
Vaults are made of concrete, which is obviously not biodegradable. A lot of energy is also used to make the vaults.
Cost
The cost of an average funeral is $7,000. This is a lot of money for most people (not including us). Don’t you have better uses for that much money?
All of the above are designed to keep us looking good for a while longer when we are already an empty shell and especially to keep the earth with its worms and other creatures from eating us. But here’s the thing:
We are going to rot no matter what so why not rot in an earth-friendly way and go back to nature without dragging out the decomposition?
Without adding to the loss of resources, the use of too much energy and other pollutants, there are other ways – green ways – to lose the bodies. Sorry. We meant that there are other ways to leave this earth with dignity.
Why do we, Dirk Nowitski and Kevin Garnett, care?
According to the statistics,* there are 22,500 cemeteries in the U.S. that use up each year approximately:
30 million board feet (70,000 m³) of hardwoods (caskets)
90,272 tons of steel (caskets)
14,000 tons of steel (vaults)
2,700 tons of copper and bronze (caskets)
1,636,000 tons of reinforced concrete (vaults)
827,060 US gallons (3,130 m³) of embalming fluid, which most commonly includes formaldehyde.
(*Compiled from the Casket and Funeral Association of America, Cremation Association of North America, Doric Inc., The Rainforest Action Network, and Mary Woodsen, Pre-Posthumous Society)
At 6” 11” and 6” 9” we are going to use up a whole lot of the above, and this does noteven take into account all the energy that would be used. We would be using more that our share in a country that already uses more that its share of resources. But no one should feel left out. You shorties will still be causing trouble if you choose a typical burial - just a little less than we will.
Alternatives to typical burials (slow rotting):
Sky burial
A Sky burial used to be a typical Tibetan ritual. The human corpse is placed on a mountaintop (of which there are a lot in Tibet), cut in certain places, and presented as a feast to birds of prey, especially vultures. Since most Tibetans are Buddhists, the former person is having a rebirth so his or her body can return to nature. This is also a practical form of burial since the ground is too rocky for graves to be dug, and there are few trees to be burned for a cremation.
Sky burial site, Yerpa Valley
Skeletal remains of body after Vultures have fed.
A sky burial is probably free.
Cremation
Cremation is better for the environment than a typical burial involving embalming, a non-biodegradable casket, and a vault. It is also much cheaper.
Cremation costs from about $700 to $1,000, and the cheapest box for the remains is $20. but it does have a “carbon footprint” because a significant amount of fossil fuel is used to create the high temperatures needed to turn a body to ashes. According to the Trust for Natural Legacies, “You could drive about 4,800 miles on the energy equivalent of the energy used to cremate someone – and to the moon and back 83 times on the energy from all cremations in one year in the U.S.” Also, cremation causes mercury to enter the air from the coal fires but also from the burning of fillings in teeth. The Trust for Natural Legacies states that from 1,000 to 7,800 pounds of mercury goes into the air every year and one-fourth of it enters the ground and water.
Green burial
In a green burial the body is not embalmed. It is put in a biodegradable container and laid approximately three feet below the ground – deep enough so that it won’t be disturbed but not so deep that there won’t be enough oxygen to speed up decomposition. A place in a green cemetery with burial fees included costs about $1,000, but if you go to a non-profit nature preserve, it could be chaper. Ideally, it’s nice to be buried in a nature preserve because it is a protected habitat for plants and animals, and there won’t be any chemical fertilizers used or wasteful watering as is the case in cemeteries. Although a dead body has bacteria and viruses, they disappear for the most part soon after death. It would take many dead bodies near a water source to affect the safety of the water. As a precaution bodies are not buried near streams. In a natural green burial, bodies usually decay completely in 10 to 12 years. The climate and the soil affect how quickly decay happens.
Resomation
Resomation is a form of cremation that is friendlier to the environment because it uses 1/8 of the heat of a crematorium. The body is put into a steel chamber with potassium hydroxide and the high pressure applied turns the body into a powder. The dental remains can be removed so no mercury enters the air or ground or water. Usually the body powder is put into a coffin for the funeral. Resomation is more expensive than cremation because there are only resomators in six states, and they cost $440,000 each.
Promession
Promession is another form of cremation that is even friendlier to the environment than resomation. It involves freezing the body and then putting it into liquid nitrogen. It was developed by the Swedish biologist Susanne Wigh-Masak and is described in the book Stiff by Mary Roach. The body becomes extremely brittle, and when vibration is applied, it turns into an organic powder. Magnetism gets out the mercury from the dental remains. The powder is clean and has no smell and will turn into compost in 6 to 12 months. It costs about the same as a cremation.
Of all the greener alternatives to death, we favor plain and simple green burials. No embalming and no wake. We figure we can have passed out pictures of ourselves when we were at our best – not puffed up with embalming fluids so people can say how peaceful we look. When did we ever want to look peaceful?
The Sky burial has its appeal… But even though pictures aren’t allowed, someone in a helicopter would probably get a video of a bird eating our liver and put it all over You Tube.
It’s better not to be part of human wastefulness when going out of this world. Going back to nature and helping a plant or a tree grow, especially a tall tree, that’s the way to go.
Sources
“Green Burial: Choose to be Buried the Natural Way.” The New Ecologist June 16, 2010. May 14, 2011.
“The Green Death: Funerals for the environmentally Conscious.” May 14, 2011.
Roach, Mary. Stiff: The Curious Life of Human Cadavers. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2003.
Sprey, Karen. “Resomation and corpse-composting :green alternatives to cremation and burial.” July 5, 2010..
“What we do – Conservation Cemeteries.” Trust for Natural Legacies, Inc. May 14, 2011.
Evaluations
After reading this flyer by Dirk and Kevin, I have to admit that a green burial sounds more appealing to me now than being cremated, and being buried in a nature preserve sounds better than being buried in a cemetery. If it’s winter and the ground is too hard, my second choice is to be frozen into organic powder by promession. I actually learned a lot from reading this.
Reed Morgan (brother)
Members of my family always get buried. I was planning to break the mold with cremation, but now I like the idea of a simple green burial (like the kind we gave our dog). I like the way you had Dirk Nowitski and Kevin Garnett write this. I wonder if they will end up having really expensive coffins when they die.
Gabe (friend)
It’s time to take responsibility for our remains, a euphemism for our dead bodies, our cadavers, our corpses, our carcasses. We have nothing to lose by leaving this earth without hurting it, do we?
Big Problems
In this country most of us are still buried. The problems with burials are:
We are using up valuable land for cemeteries, and cemeteries are running out of space. In fact, there are some places where you have to be buried vertically to be near your relatives. Also, many cemeteries are treated with pesticides and herbivores, poisons, that damage the environment.
In this country most of us are still embalmed. The problem with embalming is:
Most embalming fluid contains formaldehyde, which is extremely dangerous for the mortuary workers using it and is suspected as a cause of cancer, ALS, and problems with the nervous system. It also destroys for a while the microbes that help decompose the body
In this country most of us are put in caskets. The problem with caskets is:
Most caskets here are made of steel, and a lot of them have wood
veneers. They are not biodegradable. The ones made of wood destroy too many trees. Manufacturing them uses a lot of energy.
In this country many of us are put in vaults. The problem with vaults is:
Vaults are made of concrete, which is obviously not biodegradable. A lot of energy is also used to make the vaults.
Cost
The cost of an average funeral is $7,000. This is a lot of money for most people (not including us). Don’t you have better uses for that much money?
All of the above are designed to keep us looking good for a while longer when we are already an empty shell and especially to keep the earth with its worms and other creatures from eating us. But here’s the thing:
We are going to rot no matter what so why not rot in an earth-friendly way and go back to nature without dragging out the decomposition?
Without adding to the loss of resources, the use of too much energy and other pollutants, there are other ways – green ways – to lose the bodies. Sorry. We meant that there are other ways to leave this earth with dignity.
Why do we, Dirk Nowitski and Kevin Garnett, care?
According to the statistics,* there are 22,500 cemeteries in the U.S. that use up each year approximately:
30 million board feet (70,000 m³) of hardwoods (caskets)
90,272 tons of steel (caskets)
14,000 tons of steel (vaults)
2,700 tons of copper and bronze (caskets)
1,636,000 tons of reinforced concrete (vaults)
827,060 US gallons (3,130 m³) of embalming fluid, which most commonly includes formaldehyde.
(*Compiled from the Casket and Funeral Association of America, Cremation Association of North America, Doric Inc., The Rainforest Action Network, and Mary Woodsen, Pre-Posthumous Society)
At 6” 11” and 6” 9” we are going to use up a whole lot of the above, and this does noteven take into account all the energy that would be used. We would be using more that our share in a country that already uses more that its share of resources. But no one should feel left out. You shorties will still be causing trouble if you choose a typical burial - just a little less than we will.
Alternatives to typical burials (slow rotting):
Sky burial
A Sky burial used to be a typical Tibetan ritual. The human corpse is placed on a mountaintop (of which there are a lot in Tibet), cut in certain places, and presented as a feast to birds of prey, especially vultures. Since most Tibetans are Buddhists, the former person is having a rebirth so his or her body can return to nature. This is also a practical form of burial since the ground is too rocky for graves to be dug, and there are few trees to be burned for a cremation.
Sky burial site, Yerpa Valley
Skeletal remains of body after Vultures have fed.
A sky burial is probably free.
Cremation
Cremation is better for the environment than a typical burial involving embalming, a non-biodegradable casket, and a vault. It is also much cheaper.
Cremation costs from about $700 to $1,000, and the cheapest box for the remains is $20. but it does have a “carbon footprint” because a significant amount of fossil fuel is used to create the high temperatures needed to turn a body to ashes. According to the Trust for Natural Legacies, “You could drive about 4,800 miles on the energy equivalent of the energy used to cremate someone – and to the moon and back 83 times on the energy from all cremations in one year in the U.S.” Also, cremation causes mercury to enter the air from the coal fires but also from the burning of fillings in teeth. The Trust for Natural Legacies states that from 1,000 to 7,800 pounds of mercury goes into the air every year and one-fourth of it enters the ground and water.
Green burial
In a green burial the body is not embalmed. It is put in a biodegradable container and laid approximately three feet below the ground – deep enough so that it won’t be disturbed but not so deep that there won’t be enough oxygen to speed up decomposition. A place in a green cemetery with burial fees included costs about $1,000, but if you go to a non-profit nature preserve, it could be chaper. Ideally, it’s nice to be buried in a nature preserve because it is a protected habitat for plants and animals, and there won’t be any chemical fertilizers used or wasteful watering as is the case in cemeteries. Although a dead body has bacteria and viruses, they disappear for the most part soon after death. It would take many dead bodies near a water source to affect the safety of the water. As a precaution bodies are not buried near streams. In a natural green burial, bodies usually decay completely in 10 to 12 years. The climate and the soil affect how quickly decay happens.
Resomation
Resomation is a form of cremation that is friendlier to the environment because it uses 1/8 of the heat of a crematorium. The body is put into a steel chamber with potassium hydroxide and the high pressure applied turns the body into a powder. The dental remains can be removed so no mercury enters the air or ground or water. Usually the body powder is put into a coffin for the funeral. Resomation is more expensive than cremation because there are only resomators in six states, and they cost $440,000 each.
Promession
Promession is another form of cremation that is even friendlier to the environment than resomation. It involves freezing the body and then putting it into liquid nitrogen. It was developed by the Swedish biologist Susanne Wigh-Masak and is described in the book Stiff by Mary Roach. The body becomes extremely brittle, and when vibration is applied, it turns into an organic powder. Magnetism gets out the mercury from the dental remains. The powder is clean and has no smell and will turn into compost in 6 to 12 months. It costs about the same as a cremation.
Of all the greener alternatives to death, we favor plain and simple green burials. No embalming and no wake. We figure we can have passed out pictures of ourselves when we were at our best – not puffed up with embalming fluids so people can say how peaceful we look. When did we ever want to look peaceful?
The Sky burial has its appeal… But even though pictures aren’t allowed, someone in a helicopter would probably get a video of a bird eating our liver and put it all over You Tube.
It’s better not to be part of human wastefulness when going out of this world. Going back to nature and helping a plant or a tree grow, especially a tall tree, that’s the way to go.
Sources
“Green Burial: Choose to be Buried the Natural Way.” The New Ecologist June 16, 2010. May 14, 2011
“The Green Death: Funerals for the environmentally Conscious.” May 14, 2011
Roach, Mary. Stiff: The Curious Life of Human Cadavers. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2003.
Sprey, Karen. “Resomation and corpse-composting :green alternatives to cremation and burial.” July 5, 2010.
“What we do – Conservation Cemeteries.” Trust for Natural Legacies, Inc. May 14, 2011
Evaluations
After reading this flyer by Dirk and Kevin, I have to admit that a green burial sounds more appealing to me now than being cremated, and being buried in a nature preserve sounds better than being buried in a cemetery. If it’s winter and the ground is too hard, my second choice is to be frozen into organic powder by promession. I actually learned a lot from reading this.
Reed Morgan (brother)
Members of my family always get buried. I was planning to break the mold with cremation, but now I like the idea of a simple green burial (like the kind we gave our dog). I like the way you had Dirk Nowitski and Kevin Garnett write this. I wonder if they will end up having really expensive coffins when they die.
Gabe (friend)
Friday, May 13, 2011
HW # 54 - Independent Research B
I interviewed Reed Bye, Ph.D., who teaches English at Naropa University , which has a strong association with Buddhism. I sent him the following questions about Buddhist thinking regarding death and what happens next, and he inserted his answers.
1. How does a Buddhist prepare for death during his/her life? Right at the end of his/her life?
The Buddhist view is that moments and states of being come and go all the time; life can change very suddenly, as we know. Death is one of those moments. In life we work with not grasping onto things, which will inevitably change anyway. That is the practice of meditation.
2. Do Buddhists ever say they have memories of former lives? Have any former lives ever been documented?
Some so-called "realized" people, ones who have understood the true nature of mind and reality, and want to help others understand it too (they are called "bodhisattvas" in the Mahayana Buddhist tradition), are said to be able to remember details of former lives.
3. Is the next life on earth something you worry about?
I worry a little that if I died with a lot of anger at someone or something, or really stupidly unconscious, that that mental state would influence the rebirth.
4. Could you lead a good life and be reborn as an animal?
A bodhisattva could, it is said; if he chose a situation like that to help other beings. Aside from that, anything can happen, esp. (as in the question above) if the mind is confused one way or another when it dies.
5. Do you have the sense you could reach Nirvana? Is heaven different from Nirvana?
Nirvana is the other side of confusion, a kind of awakened state, but different from most ideas of heaven. In the Buddhist view, nothing really exists ultimately, only relatively, so the idea that "I" will be reborn as "me" in a happy state somehow is delusion. It is really just stubborn mental habits that carry on, just like they do in life. If we can free ourselves from these mental patterns that tend to make our lives automatic, then the true nature of our mind expresses itself as clarity and awareness at death.
6. How are Buddhist cadavers treated? Is it true that no one should touch the corpse for a period of time so that the spirit can go into a better life?
Something like that, I hear. The body is said to die in stages, not all at once. And mind and body are not separate as long as the body is alive, so it is good if the body can rest undisturbed for awhile. (About three days I have heard is good).
7. How can you get out of Hell?
First, I think you must realize you are in it. Then, look into what you do that keeps you there.
8. Do Buddhists always choose cremation to dispose of their bodies? Would this new technique of freeze drying and becoming compost be all right?
Cremation seems common, but once the body is dead, there probably would be no problem with freeze drying and composting.
I asked Reed Bye about the “stubborn mental habits” that keep us from getting to Nirvana. He said that these are our ideas about ourselves including our memories and our needs and greed for things in this world that give us our sense of self. This is what we are afraid of losing when we die. We are afraid of becoming nothingness, and we don’t understand that Nirvana is nothingness. He suggested that I have a look at a book called Shambhala: The Sacred Path of the Warrior by Chögyam Trungpa, which is about Buddhist concepts of self-knowledge being the way to solve the problems in the world. I found this quote that describes the “stubborn mental habits” in a way that I understand them.
At the root, fear means the fear of death which means simply the death of “me”. Ego is the name for all the ideas, images, and feelings we have about who we are or want to be. It is also the root of fear. Stepping out of the cocoon of “me” is a slow process of learning about fear. What I think I understand is that the less we are obsessed with ourselves and the more unselfish we become, the better the next life our spirit is born into will be. We have to keep dying and being reborn until we don’t want anything for ourselves anymore and get rid of our egotism and our fear of not existing as ourselves. Then we have enlightenment and will be in Nirvana.
I found this explanation of how to get ready to die as a Buddhist in an essay online called “Buddhist View on Death and Rebirth” by Ven.Thich Nguyen Tang:
The Buddha urged us to prepare for death, to prepare for that journey by cleansing the mind and not being so attached to things, to be able to let go and release ourselves for needing to be, from needing to have. Through this we will not suffer so much as we pass through the final stage of the present life, we can let go, be grateful for what we had but not clutch to it, not try to ensure permanency and cause ourselves to suffer more than we need to. This way we can end the cycle and leave forever, obtaining nirvana and release from the cycle of death and rebirth. (www.urbandharma.org/udharma5/viewdeath.html )
Obviously, it is not so easy to let go of our idea of ourselves or else we would all be Buddhas in Nirvana. Reed Bye said it is the hardest thing to do in the world and that is why people who practice Buddhism do meditations which get harder and harder progressively. For people who don’t meditate we can try to take good actions in our lives and not cause suffering for others. (This sounds like existentialism to me., doing good deeds and then being part of the universe.) Then at least we have a better chance of being born into a good life the next time.
1. How does a Buddhist prepare for death during his/her life? Right at the end of his/her life?
The Buddhist view is that moments and states of being come and go all the time; life can change very suddenly, as we know. Death is one of those moments. In life we work with not grasping onto things, which will inevitably change anyway. That is the practice of meditation.
2. Do Buddhists ever say they have memories of former lives? Have any former lives ever been documented?
Some so-called "realized" people, ones who have understood the true nature of mind and reality, and want to help others understand it too (they are called "bodhisattvas" in the Mahayana Buddhist tradition), are said to be able to remember details of former lives.
3. Is the next life on earth something you worry about?
I worry a little that if I died with a lot of anger at someone or something, or really stupidly unconscious, that that mental state would influence the rebirth.
4. Could you lead a good life and be reborn as an animal?
A bodhisattva could, it is said; if he chose a situation like that to help other beings. Aside from that, anything can happen, esp. (as in the question above) if the mind is confused one way or another when it dies.
5. Do you have the sense you could reach Nirvana? Is heaven different from Nirvana?
Nirvana is the other side of confusion, a kind of awakened state, but different from most ideas of heaven. In the Buddhist view, nothing really exists ultimately, only relatively, so the idea that "I" will be reborn as "me" in a happy state somehow is delusion. It is really just stubborn mental habits that carry on, just like they do in life. If we can free ourselves from these mental patterns that tend to make our lives automatic, then the true nature of our mind expresses itself as clarity and awareness at death.
6. How are Buddhist cadavers treated? Is it true that no one should touch the corpse for a period of time so that the spirit can go into a better life?
Something like that, I hear. The body is said to die in stages, not all at once. And mind and body are not separate as long as the body is alive, so it is good if the body can rest undisturbed for awhile. (About three days I have heard is good).
7. How can you get out of Hell?
First, I think you must realize you are in it. Then, look into what you do that keeps you there.
8. Do Buddhists always choose cremation to dispose of their bodies? Would this new technique of freeze drying and becoming compost be all right?
Cremation seems common, but once the body is dead, there probably would be no problem with freeze drying and composting.
I asked Reed Bye about the “stubborn mental habits” that keep us from getting to Nirvana. He said that these are our ideas about ourselves including our memories and our needs and greed for things in this world that give us our sense of self. This is what we are afraid of losing when we die. We are afraid of becoming nothingness, and we don’t understand that Nirvana is nothingness. He suggested that I have a look at a book called Shambhala: The Sacred Path of the Warrior by Chögyam Trungpa, which is about Buddhist concepts of self-knowledge being the way to solve the problems in the world. I found this quote that describes the “stubborn mental habits” in a way that I understand them.
At the root, fear means the fear of death which means simply the death of “me”. Ego is the name for all the ideas, images, and feelings we have about who we are or want to be. It is also the root of fear. Stepping out of the cocoon of “me” is a slow process of learning about fear. What I think I understand is that the less we are obsessed with ourselves and the more unselfish we become, the better the next life our spirit is born into will be. We have to keep dying and being reborn until we don’t want anything for ourselves anymore and get rid of our egotism and our fear of not existing as ourselves. Then we have enlightenment and will be in Nirvana.
I found this explanation of how to get ready to die as a Buddhist in an essay online called “Buddhist View on Death and Rebirth” by Ven.Thich Nguyen Tang:
The Buddha urged us to prepare for death, to prepare for that journey by cleansing the mind and not being so attached to things, to be able to let go and release ourselves for needing to be, from needing to have. Through this we will not suffer so much as we pass through the final stage of the present life, we can let go, be grateful for what we had but not clutch to it, not try to ensure permanency and cause ourselves to suffer more than we need to. This way we can end the cycle and leave forever, obtaining nirvana and release from the cycle of death and rebirth. (www.urbandharma.org/udharma5/viewdeath.html )
Obviously, it is not so easy to let go of our idea of ourselves or else we would all be Buddhas in Nirvana. Reed Bye said it is the hardest thing to do in the world and that is why people who practice Buddhism do meditations which get harder and harder progressively. For people who don’t meditate we can try to take good actions in our lives and not cause suffering for others. (This sounds like existentialism to me., doing good deeds and then being part of the universe.) Then at least we have a better chance of being born into a good life the next time.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
HW # 53 - Independent Research A
“The Dead Tell a Tale China Doesn’t Care to Listen To”
www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/world/asia/19mummy.html
In the Xinjiang region of China there have been over 200 extremely will preserved mummies discovered over the past couple of decades, and the oldest one is 3,800 years old. They are one of the greatest archeological discoveries of recent times, but the Chinese government doesn’t want researchers going near them. The reason is that Xinjiang is a rich oil province, and there is a strong nationalist movement of 9 million Turkic-speaking Uighurs, who are Muslims, living there, and they would like to separate from China. The Chinese government likes to think that Xinjiang has been part of China for many centuries, but the mummies, who are not Chinese and come from the west, a mix of Uighurs and people who were Indo-European and also from Iran, show that others were there way before the Chinese.
“Dead Join the Living in a Family Celebration”
www.nytimes.com/2010/09/06/world/africa/06madagascar.html
In Madagascar it is a custom for people to dig up the remains of their ancestors from time to time and dance with their bones in a big celebration. Some believe it is possible to ask the dead for good health and wealth and that their spirits will grant requests, and others just use the occasion to tell younger family members about their ancestors. The event is called a famadihana, and the one being reported on was requested by a widow hose husband had died 16 years earlier and who had just saved enough money ($7,000) to buy a crypt for him.
In both of the above stories the remains are thought to have a useful purpose by the living. If the bodies had been cremated, then there would not be mummies to show who was around long ago or bones to dance with in order to feel close to the formerly living. Do these burials make me think that cremation (or composting) is not such a great idea because ashes don’t leave a record historically and aren’t easy to dance with? No, I don’t feel that way. There are so many people on earth, and there will always be many who are buried. We can’t afford the space to bury everyone, and for many people burial is too expensive. It makes me think that a few mummies should be made in every generation in desert climates, where they seem to last best.
www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/world/asia/19mummy.html
In the Xinjiang region of China there have been over 200 extremely will preserved mummies discovered over the past couple of decades, and the oldest one is 3,800 years old. They are one of the greatest archeological discoveries of recent times, but the Chinese government doesn’t want researchers going near them. The reason is that Xinjiang is a rich oil province, and there is a strong nationalist movement of 9 million Turkic-speaking Uighurs, who are Muslims, living there, and they would like to separate from China. The Chinese government likes to think that Xinjiang has been part of China for many centuries, but the mummies, who are not Chinese and come from the west, a mix of Uighurs and people who were Indo-European and also from Iran, show that others were there way before the Chinese.
“Dead Join the Living in a Family Celebration”
www.nytimes.com/2010/09/06/world/africa/06madagascar.html
In Madagascar it is a custom for people to dig up the remains of their ancestors from time to time and dance with their bones in a big celebration. Some believe it is possible to ask the dead for good health and wealth and that their spirits will grant requests, and others just use the occasion to tell younger family members about their ancestors. The event is called a famadihana, and the one being reported on was requested by a widow hose husband had died 16 years earlier and who had just saved enough money ($7,000) to buy a crypt for him.
In both of the above stories the remains are thought to have a useful purpose by the living. If the bodies had been cremated, then there would not be mummies to show who was around long ago or bones to dance with in order to feel close to the formerly living. Do these burials make me think that cremation (or composting) is not such a great idea because ashes don’t leave a record historically and aren’t easy to dance with? No, I don’t feel that way. There are so many people on earth, and there will always be many who are buried. We can’t afford the space to bury everyone, and for many people burial is too expensive. It makes me think that a few mummies should be made in every generation in desert climates, where they seem to last best.
Monday, May 9, 2011
HW # 52 - Third Third of the COTD Book
Precis:
Chapter 9 of Stiff begins in 1795 with Dr. Guillotin, the French doctor who lobbied for the use of the guillotine as a humane execution option, reading a letter that called it a form of torture. The reason that was given was that since the brain is the “seat of consciousness,” it is aware of its situation just after the big chop. This possibility led to a lot of experiments with recently severed human heads, with dogs’ heads and even to the grafting of a monkey’s head on to the neck of another monkey. At the end of the chapter we find out that there have not yet been any human head transplants. Not yet. Chapter 10 deals with cannibalism beginning with a 12th century Arabian custom of feeding an old man only honey before he dies and then preserving him in honey for a 100 years until pieces of him can be eaten to cure broken arms and legs. The honey recipe comes from a 16th century Chinese medical document that also had a recipe for “powdered human penis” to “ease the pain and put a shine on your mood.” It also talks about the artist Diego Rivera who said he ate fresh killed humans with friends for a month as an experiment, and they all felt great. Chapter 11 describes a Swedish woman’s development of an ecological burial that involves freeze drying the body so it can be used
as compost. A circle of life approach. In Chapter 12 I think about what to do with my own remains. Should I become a laboratory skeleton (getting the meat off is too disgusting), have my brain kept in a jar (more likely that it would be cut up in pieces and put in a refrigerator), or have plastination to preserve my body for 10,000 years (costs $50,000 and I would be naked). I decide that it is really the family members who
should decide because they are the ones who have to live with whatever has been done
with the person they have lost.
Quotes:
Laborde didn’t typically spend so much time personalizing his subjects, preferring to call them (recently guillotined heads) simply restes frais. The term means, literally, “fresh remains,” though in French it has a pleasant culinary lilt , like something you might order off the specials board at the neighborhood bistro. (p. 203)
Chong describes a rather gruesome historical phenomenon wherein children, most often daughters-in-law were obliged to demonstrate filial piety to ailing parents, most often mothers-in-law, by hacking off a piece of themselves and preparing it as a restorative elixir. Examples for the Ming Dynasty were so numerous that Chong gave up on listing individual instances…In total, some 286 pieces of thigh, thirty-seven pieces of arm, twenty-four livers, thirteen unspecified cuts of flesh, four fingers, two ears, two broiled breasts, two ribs, one waist loin, one knee, and one stomach skin were fed to sickly elders. (p. 233)
Then one day I had a conversation with Phillip Backman, during which he mentioned that one of the cleanest, quickest, and most ecologically pure things to do with a body would be to put it in a big tide-pool of full of Dungeness crabs, which apparently enjoy eating people as much as people enjoy eating crabs. (p. 276)
Here’s the other thing I think about. It makes little sense to try to control what happens to your remains when you are not longer around to reap the joys or benefits of the control. People who make elaborabe requests concerning disposition of their bodies are probably people who have trouble with the concept of not existing. (p. 290)
Analytical paragraph:
The last third of Stiff continues to explore the usefulness of cadavers as proof that our consciousness or soul lives in the brain and dies when the brain dies, as food or ointments for injuries or to promote health (mostly in the past), or as compost to help the environment. The composting idea from the Swedish woman environmentalist has the author’s approval because it is non-polluting and cheaper than cremation, and it is organic. The little freeze dried pieces of us are organic unlike our ashes and have “nutritive value” when they are used to help a plant or a tree grow. This idea makes me think of the book Pushed which makes the point that the birthing process should be more natural and less controlled by man and technology. Even though freeze drying is a process, it is a more natural one than cremation and being able to use the remains to make a tree grow is much more appealing than having a body slowly rot in an expensive coffin.
Chapter 9 of Stiff begins in 1795 with Dr. Guillotin, the French doctor who lobbied for the use of the guillotine as a humane execution option, reading a letter that called it a form of torture. The reason that was given was that since the brain is the “seat of consciousness,” it is aware of its situation just after the big chop. This possibility led to a lot of experiments with recently severed human heads, with dogs’ heads and even to the grafting of a monkey’s head on to the neck of another monkey. At the end of the chapter we find out that there have not yet been any human head transplants. Not yet. Chapter 10 deals with cannibalism beginning with a 12th century Arabian custom of feeding an old man only honey before he dies and then preserving him in honey for a 100 years until pieces of him can be eaten to cure broken arms and legs. The honey recipe comes from a 16th century Chinese medical document that also had a recipe for “powdered human penis” to “ease the pain and put a shine on your mood.” It also talks about the artist Diego Rivera who said he ate fresh killed humans with friends for a month as an experiment, and they all felt great. Chapter 11 describes a Swedish woman’s development of an ecological burial that involves freeze drying the body so it can be used
as compost. A circle of life approach. In Chapter 12 I think about what to do with my own remains. Should I become a laboratory skeleton (getting the meat off is too disgusting), have my brain kept in a jar (more likely that it would be cut up in pieces and put in a refrigerator), or have plastination to preserve my body for 10,000 years (costs $50,000 and I would be naked). I decide that it is really the family members who
should decide because they are the ones who have to live with whatever has been done
with the person they have lost.
Quotes:
Laborde didn’t typically spend so much time personalizing his subjects, preferring to call them (recently guillotined heads) simply restes frais. The term means, literally, “fresh remains,” though in French it has a pleasant culinary lilt , like something you might order off the specials board at the neighborhood bistro. (p. 203)
Chong describes a rather gruesome historical phenomenon wherein children, most often daughters-in-law were obliged to demonstrate filial piety to ailing parents, most often mothers-in-law, by hacking off a piece of themselves and preparing it as a restorative elixir. Examples for the Ming Dynasty were so numerous that Chong gave up on listing individual instances…In total, some 286 pieces of thigh, thirty-seven pieces of arm, twenty-four livers, thirteen unspecified cuts of flesh, four fingers, two ears, two broiled breasts, two ribs, one waist loin, one knee, and one stomach skin were fed to sickly elders. (p. 233)
Then one day I had a conversation with Phillip Backman, during which he mentioned that one of the cleanest, quickest, and most ecologically pure things to do with a body would be to put it in a big tide-pool of full of Dungeness crabs, which apparently enjoy eating people as much as people enjoy eating crabs. (p. 276)
Here’s the other thing I think about. It makes little sense to try to control what happens to your remains when you are not longer around to reap the joys or benefits of the control. People who make elaborabe requests concerning disposition of their bodies are probably people who have trouble with the concept of not existing. (p. 290)
Analytical paragraph:
The last third of Stiff continues to explore the usefulness of cadavers as proof that our consciousness or soul lives in the brain and dies when the brain dies, as food or ointments for injuries or to promote health (mostly in the past), or as compost to help the environment. The composting idea from the Swedish woman environmentalist has the author’s approval because it is non-polluting and cheaper than cremation, and it is organic. The little freeze dried pieces of us are organic unlike our ashes and have “nutritive value” when they are used to help a plant or a tree grow. This idea makes me think of the book Pushed which makes the point that the birthing process should be more natural and less controlled by man and technology. Even though freeze drying is a process, it is a more natural one than cremation and being able to use the remains to make a tree grow is much more appealing than having a body slowly rot in an expensive coffin.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
HW # 51 - Second Third of COTD Book
Second Third of Stiff
Precis:
The second third of the book Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers tells how cadavers have been used to find the cause of airplane crashes. In the case of TWA Flight 800, which crashed in 1996, the fact that bodies were found in tact in the water with burns only on their backs caused by fuel catching fire on the water proved that the plane did not have a bomb (which would have blown up the bodies) and was not hit by a missile (which would have caused burns on fronts and sides). This part of the book also tells about cadavers being used for military studies like testing more humanitarian bullets that could stop enemy soldiers without killing them, improving chest armor, and testing boots to be worn when clearing land mines. There is a section about a doctor in the 1930s who “crucified” cadavers to try to prove that a cloth called the Shroud of Turin was the one Jesus was wearing when he died. Another doctor about ten years ago used live people instead of cadavers with leather straps instead of nails to disprove the other doctor’s theories. The last chapter in the third section is about a “beating heart cadaver,” which is one that can be used for transplants of the heart and other organs since the brain is dead. It also talks about the huge fear of being buried alive before the perfecting of the stethoscope, the debate about where in the body the soul is located, and the fact that it was only in 1974 that brain death (and not the stopping of the heart) was made the legal definition of death.
Quotes:
For Shanahan, the hardest thing about Flight 800 was that most of the bodies were relatively whole. “Intactness bothers me much more that the lack of it,” he says. The sorts of things most of us can’t imagine seeing or coping with – severed hands, legs, scraps of flesh – Shanahan is more comfortable with. “That way, it’s just tissue. You can put yourself in that frame of mind and get on with your job.” (p. 114)
Could airlines do a better job of making their planes fire-safe? You bet they could. They could install more emergency exits, but they won’t, because that means taking out seats and losing revenue. They could install sprinkler systems or build crash-worthy fuel systems of the type used on military helicopters. But they won’t because both these options would add too much weight. More weight means higher fuel costs.” (p. 125)
To allay patients’ considerable fears of live burial…eighteenth and nineteenth-century physicians devised a diverting roster of methods for verifying death…The soles of the feet were sliced with razors, and needles jammed beneath toenails…One French clergyman recommended thrusting a red-hot poker up…”the rear passage.” (p. 171)
Analytical paragraph:
This part of the book told me a lot I didn’t know about how cadavers are used to find the cause of plane crashes and to improve survival chances for soldiers. It is scary that airlines don’t install safety features that the cadavers have helped identify in order to save money. The most interesting part of this book to me was the part about where in the body people have thought the soul was located and how amazing it is that a person who is dead can still have a living heart and other organs that can save another person’s life.
By the end of this part of the book I think I am no longer that bothered about cadavers being treated like objects for a good reason (the improvement of living people’s lives). I am not thinking that this body could be my grandfather and even if it was, it would be a great thing if he could make life better for someone else. The more you read this book the more at ease you are with dead bodies and the idea of all the good they can do. That seems to be the point of this book.
Precis:
The second third of the book Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers tells how cadavers have been used to find the cause of airplane crashes. In the case of TWA Flight 800, which crashed in 1996, the fact that bodies were found in tact in the water with burns only on their backs caused by fuel catching fire on the water proved that the plane did not have a bomb (which would have blown up the bodies) and was not hit by a missile (which would have caused burns on fronts and sides). This part of the book also tells about cadavers being used for military studies like testing more humanitarian bullets that could stop enemy soldiers without killing them, improving chest armor, and testing boots to be worn when clearing land mines. There is a section about a doctor in the 1930s who “crucified” cadavers to try to prove that a cloth called the Shroud of Turin was the one Jesus was wearing when he died. Another doctor about ten years ago used live people instead of cadavers with leather straps instead of nails to disprove the other doctor’s theories. The last chapter in the third section is about a “beating heart cadaver,” which is one that can be used for transplants of the heart and other organs since the brain is dead. It also talks about the huge fear of being buried alive before the perfecting of the stethoscope, the debate about where in the body the soul is located, and the fact that it was only in 1974 that brain death (and not the stopping of the heart) was made the legal definition of death.
Quotes:
For Shanahan, the hardest thing about Flight 800 was that most of the bodies were relatively whole. “Intactness bothers me much more that the lack of it,” he says. The sorts of things most of us can’t imagine seeing or coping with – severed hands, legs, scraps of flesh – Shanahan is more comfortable with. “That way, it’s just tissue. You can put yourself in that frame of mind and get on with your job.” (p. 114)
Could airlines do a better job of making their planes fire-safe? You bet they could. They could install more emergency exits, but they won’t, because that means taking out seats and losing revenue. They could install sprinkler systems or build crash-worthy fuel systems of the type used on military helicopters. But they won’t because both these options would add too much weight. More weight means higher fuel costs.” (p. 125)
To allay patients’ considerable fears of live burial…eighteenth and nineteenth-century physicians devised a diverting roster of methods for verifying death…The soles of the feet were sliced with razors, and needles jammed beneath toenails…One French clergyman recommended thrusting a red-hot poker up…”the rear passage.” (p. 171)
Analytical paragraph:
This part of the book told me a lot I didn’t know about how cadavers are used to find the cause of plane crashes and to improve survival chances for soldiers. It is scary that airlines don’t install safety features that the cadavers have helped identify in order to save money. The most interesting part of this book to me was the part about where in the body people have thought the soul was located and how amazing it is that a person who is dead can still have a living heart and other organs that can save another person’s life.
By the end of this part of the book I think I am no longer that bothered about cadavers being treated like objects for a good reason (the improvement of living people’s lives). I am not thinking that this body could be my grandfather and even if it was, it would be a great thing if he could make life better for someone else. The more you read this book the more at ease you are with dead bodies and the idea of all the good they can do. That seems to be the point of this book.
Monday, May 2, 2011
HW # 49 - Comments on Best of Your Break HW
Naima’s Post (my comments)
My first thought after reading about the deaths of your mother and of “Little Ped” was how proud your mother would be because of the feelings and values you have and how well you write about them. Your father, your brothers, and you had to be incredibly diplomatic with your grandmother, even allowing your mother to be buried in a dress you knew your mother hated. I think it was great that you found ways “to make sure that the ceremony reflected my (your) mother’s values.” I hope there was some drumming.
You also talk about the conflict between generations over the decision of your stepmother to end her pregnancy due to a fatal birth defect and the wishes of your father’s mother to
keep the baby alive and hope for a miracle. Burying Little Ped’s ashes under a tree you planted for him is about the best burial practice I can imagine. How great it would be if
we all ended our lives this way.
The only other comment I have is that your family’s experience with your mother’s death seems like an argument for people to write down what they want to have happen when they die to avoid conflicts. Your mother died much too young but for older people it
probably is a good thing to tell your family your if-I-die wishes.
Eloise’s Post (my comments)
I was impressed by the fact that you interviewed four people and had four different responses to death that represent the way many people feel about it. There was the Christian who will go to heaven or hell, the thoughtful guy who thinks we go to “a different place” the guy who thinks death is blankness and non-existence, and the guy who wants his body to rot but have one bone remain as a record of his having been here. I think you were just missing a Hindu who believes in coming back to earth in a different life form. It was interesting that the Christian said about death that there “seemed to be no thinking to do.” That line sounds like one of the big reasons religion had to be created, so that people don’t have to worry themselves about death. It is also interesting that three of the four of them want to be cremated and donate their organs. This is a trend
that should continue.
Nina's Post (my comments)
Nina does not have a blogger account...I cannot post comments
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Eloise
I thought your post was intersting and insightful into your family dynamics.I could hear a good amount of family character in your post.
You discuss both your grandomthers perespectives and that of your fathers. You discuss how their perspectives differ, their similarties and how you compare to there views.
I really liked the way you peiced together the answer by also inserting your insight. I think that this poem resonates well with your post !
EXPENDABLE BY: LANGSTON HUGES
"We will take you and kill you,
Expendable.
We will fill you full of lead,
Expendable.
And when you are dead
in nice cold ground,
We'll put your name
above your head-
If your head
Can be found."
I think it is powerful to note that with generation and time big things change and in a mass size, most of my interviewees as well desired to be cremated. I wonder how our current dominate religous views reflect of the major cremation acceptance !
GREAT JOB.
From Naima
i appreciated the context in which you brought the reader. your use of quotes made your post more engaging and allowed your post to flow in a nicer way.
i also liked how you showed that normally, people in your family would be more attracted to burials, and how both of your grandmothers (on both sides) are breaking the tradition by preferring cremations.
your post bring the reader to speculate about how some people like to have a good image of the dead (you used the example of your grandmother spent lots of money to make her husband look nice. your post also makes the reader think about the different controversies in this decision making. all in all, good job.
From Nina (Nina does not have a blogger account Andy...How can she post comments?)
My first thought after reading about the deaths of your mother and of “Little Ped” was how proud your mother would be because of the feelings and values you have and how well you write about them. Your father, your brothers, and you had to be incredibly diplomatic with your grandmother, even allowing your mother to be buried in a dress you knew your mother hated. I think it was great that you found ways “to make sure that the ceremony reflected my (your) mother’s values.” I hope there was some drumming.
You also talk about the conflict between generations over the decision of your stepmother to end her pregnancy due to a fatal birth defect and the wishes of your father’s mother to
keep the baby alive and hope for a miracle. Burying Little Ped’s ashes under a tree you planted for him is about the best burial practice I can imagine. How great it would be if
we all ended our lives this way.
The only other comment I have is that your family’s experience with your mother’s death seems like an argument for people to write down what they want to have happen when they die to avoid conflicts. Your mother died much too young but for older people it
probably is a good thing to tell your family your if-I-die wishes.
Eloise’s Post (my comments)
I was impressed by the fact that you interviewed four people and had four different responses to death that represent the way many people feel about it. There was the Christian who will go to heaven or hell, the thoughtful guy who thinks we go to “a different place” the guy who thinks death is blankness and non-existence, and the guy who wants his body to rot but have one bone remain as a record of his having been here. I think you were just missing a Hindu who believes in coming back to earth in a different life form. It was interesting that the Christian said about death that there “seemed to be no thinking to do.” That line sounds like one of the big reasons religion had to be created, so that people don’t have to worry themselves about death. It is also interesting that three of the four of them want to be cremated and donate their organs. This is a trend
that should continue.
Nina's Post (my comments)
Nina does not have a blogger account...I cannot post comments
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Eloise
I thought your post was intersting and insightful into your family dynamics.I could hear a good amount of family character in your post.
You discuss both your grandomthers perespectives and that of your fathers. You discuss how their perspectives differ, their similarties and how you compare to there views.
I really liked the way you peiced together the answer by also inserting your insight. I think that this poem resonates well with your post !
EXPENDABLE BY: LANGSTON HUGES
"We will take you and kill you,
Expendable.
We will fill you full of lead,
Expendable.
And when you are dead
in nice cold ground,
We'll put your name
above your head-
If your head
Can be found."
I think it is powerful to note that with generation and time big things change and in a mass size, most of my interviewees as well desired to be cremated. I wonder how our current dominate religous views reflect of the major cremation acceptance !
GREAT JOB.
From Naima
i appreciated the context in which you brought the reader. your use of quotes made your post more engaging and allowed your post to flow in a nicer way.
i also liked how you showed that normally, people in your family would be more attracted to burials, and how both of your grandmothers (on both sides) are breaking the tradition by preferring cremations.
your post bring the reader to speculate about how some people like to have a good image of the dead (you used the example of your grandmother spent lots of money to make her husband look nice. your post also makes the reader think about the different controversies in this decision making. all in all, good job.
From Nina (Nina does not have a blogger account Andy...How can she post comments?)
Sunday, May 1, 2011
HW # 50 - First Third of Care-of-the-Dead Book Post
First Third of Care-of-the-Dead Book
Precis:
The first third of the book Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers tells how cadavers have contributed to a better life for the living beginning with heads that help cosmetic surgeons practice on the job, how they have helped medical students throughout history learn anatomy through dissection, how they used to be hard to come by and produced the profession of body snatcher, how they became easier to get after the first successful heart transplant, the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, and the increased cost of funerals, and how they are used in crash testing to improve design improvements for safety in cars. This part of the book also tells about the process of decay of bodies thanks to bacteria and baby flies (maggots), the process of embalming to make the body last a little longer, and the process of cremation to make the point that body disposal is never pretty.
Quotes:
“The way I see it, being dead is not terribly far off from being on a cruise ship…If I were to take a cruise, I would prefer that it be one of those research cruises…I guess I feel the same way about being a corpse. Why lie around on your back when you can do something interesting and new, something useful?” (p.9)
“The problem with cadavers is that they look so much like people.” (p.21)
“For evident reasons, mortuary science is awash with euphemisms. ‘Don’t say stiff, corpse, cadaver…Say decedent, remains of Mr. Blank. Don’t say ‘keep.’ Say ‘maintain preservation.’…” Wrinkles are “acquired facial markings.” Decomposed brain that filters down …and bubbles out the nose is “frothy purge.” (p. 77)
“Life contains these things: leakage and wickage and discharge, pus and snot and slime and gleet. We are biology. We are reminded of this at the beginning and the end, at birth and at death. In between we do what we can to forget.” (p. 84)
Analytical paragraph:
Because a lot of the beginning of this book is so gruesome dealing with the treatment of cadavers for education and testing and the way the body decays, I liked the historical parts the best like the description of the Father of Embalming, Thomas Homes, who seems to have been responsible for modern embalming. He developed a fluid to put in the arteries that helped the Civil War troops not to have to deliver decomposing bodies to families. He also made it possible for Abraham Lincoln’s body to travel from Washington to Illinois and be seen by so many people. I know that the reason this book seems so grotesque to me is that like most people I can’t separate the cadaver from the human who used to be attached to it. I think it is good that medical students are having more digital anatomy classes now even if it is just because they don’t have enough time to spend with cadavers. Also researchers are using body parts now more than whole bodies. This fact makes me feel better about donating my body for research. The idea of having family members, friends, or myself laid out whole to be cut up by a first-year medical student would keep me from signing the donation form.
Precis:
The first third of the book Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers tells how cadavers have contributed to a better life for the living beginning with heads that help cosmetic surgeons practice on the job, how they have helped medical students throughout history learn anatomy through dissection, how they used to be hard to come by and produced the profession of body snatcher, how they became easier to get after the first successful heart transplant, the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, and the increased cost of funerals, and how they are used in crash testing to improve design improvements for safety in cars. This part of the book also tells about the process of decay of bodies thanks to bacteria and baby flies (maggots), the process of embalming to make the body last a little longer, and the process of cremation to make the point that body disposal is never pretty.
Quotes:
“The way I see it, being dead is not terribly far off from being on a cruise ship…If I were to take a cruise, I would prefer that it be one of those research cruises…I guess I feel the same way about being a corpse. Why lie around on your back when you can do something interesting and new, something useful?” (p.9)
“The problem with cadavers is that they look so much like people.” (p.21)
“For evident reasons, mortuary science is awash with euphemisms. ‘Don’t say stiff, corpse, cadaver…Say decedent, remains of Mr. Blank. Don’t say ‘keep.’ Say ‘maintain preservation.’…” Wrinkles are “acquired facial markings.” Decomposed brain that filters down …and bubbles out the nose is “frothy purge.” (p. 77)
“Life contains these things: leakage and wickage and discharge, pus and snot and slime and gleet. We are biology. We are reminded of this at the beginning and the end, at birth and at death. In between we do what we can to forget.” (p. 84)
Analytical paragraph:
Because a lot of the beginning of this book is so gruesome dealing with the treatment of cadavers for education and testing and the way the body decays, I liked the historical parts the best like the description of the Father of Embalming, Thomas Homes, who seems to have been responsible for modern embalming. He developed a fluid to put in the arteries that helped the Civil War troops not to have to deliver decomposing bodies to families. He also made it possible for Abraham Lincoln’s body to travel from Washington to Illinois and be seen by so many people. I know that the reason this book seems so grotesque to me is that like most people I can’t separate the cadaver from the human who used to be attached to it. I think it is good that medical students are having more digital anatomy classes now even if it is just because they don’t have enough time to spend with cadavers. Also researchers are using body parts now more than whole bodies. This fact makes me feel better about donating my body for research. The idea of having family members, friends, or myself laid out whole to be cut up by a first-year medical student would keep me from signing the donation form.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
HW # 48 - Family Perspectives on the Care of the Dead
I interviewed my two grandmothers and my father on the subject of the care of the
dead and was surprised that they all favor cremation over burial. My grandmother on
my father’s side says that she is probably the first one in her family who will be cremated. “I don’t want to rot. Why would anyone want to rot?” She does want to
have a wake though. Her husband was cremated, but he had a wake first. She thinks
it helps family members and friends to see the person “lying in peace.” Her husband’s ashes are in an urn in their church, but she just went to visit and took some of them to bring to relatives in South Carolina where he was born. My other grandmother believes in cremation because she does not want to take up space in the ground or use a coffin, which she thinks is wasteful. She thinks that wakes are “ridiculous”. She wants her ashes to be scattered even though all her family members are buried in the same place in England. Both grandmothers are breaking traditions in their families by being cremated. My dad says he wants to be cremated and to “have the ashes thrown away on the spot.” He thinks that keeping human ashes with little bits of bone and teeth in them is disgusting. I believe that all three think that spending a lot of money on a casket and burial makes no sense. My grandmother on my mother’s side who has very little money was still willing to pay a lot for a wake and for a funeral home to make her husband look nice. It was important to her to have friends say how handsome he was. For her a memorial service or a funeral is a big social occasion. For my other grandmother and my father funerals and memorial services are events to avoid if at all possible. According to the New York Times, in 2005 28 per cent of Americans were cremated. In more recent articles written by funeral homes it seems as though at least one-third of the American population is choosing cremation over burial because cremation is cheaper, simpler, and better for the environment.
My two grandmothers do not agree about donating organs after death. My dad’s mother said, “Every bone in my body is tired, and all my organs must be too. I don’t wish them on anybody.” My other grandmother filled out an organ donor card in her fifties. At first she was only donating her eyes, but now she has said her body can be used generally for organ donation. She also filled out a form that said it could be used for research because her doctor told her that she had had interesting surgery that saved her life when she was young and that seeing what was done could be useful. She has also filled out the Right to Life forms and a few other ones so that she won’t be kept alive on machines. She hates hearing stories that doctors don’t always pay attention to these requests. My dad says he will eventually fill out an organ donor card, and my grandmother told him, “What are you waiting for?”
dead and was surprised that they all favor cremation over burial. My grandmother on
my father’s side says that she is probably the first one in her family who will be cremated. “I don’t want to rot. Why would anyone want to rot?” She does want to
have a wake though. Her husband was cremated, but he had a wake first. She thinks
it helps family members and friends to see the person “lying in peace.” Her husband’s ashes are in an urn in their church, but she just went to visit and took some of them to bring to relatives in South Carolina where he was born. My other grandmother believes in cremation because she does not want to take up space in the ground or use a coffin, which she thinks is wasteful. She thinks that wakes are “ridiculous”. She wants her ashes to be scattered even though all her family members are buried in the same place in England. Both grandmothers are breaking traditions in their families by being cremated. My dad says he wants to be cremated and to “have the ashes thrown away on the spot.” He thinks that keeping human ashes with little bits of bone and teeth in them is disgusting. I believe that all three think that spending a lot of money on a casket and burial makes no sense. My grandmother on my mother’s side who has very little money was still willing to pay a lot for a wake and for a funeral home to make her husband look nice. It was important to her to have friends say how handsome he was. For her a memorial service or a funeral is a big social occasion. For my other grandmother and my father funerals and memorial services are events to avoid if at all possible. According to the New York Times, in 2005 28 per cent of Americans were cremated. In more recent articles written by funeral homes it seems as though at least one-third of the American population is choosing cremation over burial because cremation is cheaper, simpler, and better for the environment.
My two grandmothers do not agree about donating organs after death. My dad’s mother said, “Every bone in my body is tired, and all my organs must be too. I don’t wish them on anybody.” My other grandmother filled out an organ donor card in her fifties. At first she was only donating her eyes, but now she has said her body can be used generally for organ donation. She also filled out a form that said it could be used for research because her doctor told her that she had had interesting surgery that saved her life when she was young and that seeing what was done could be useful. She has also filled out the Right to Life forms and a few other ones so that she won’t be kept alive on machines. She hates hearing stories that doctors don’t always pay attention to these requests. My dad says he will eventually fill out an organ donor card, and my grandmother told him, “What are you waiting for?”
Friday, April 22, 2011
HW # 47 - Peer Perspectives on the Care of the Dead
Ambrose's Answers (someone of a similar backround)
Do your grandparents or parents prefer burial or cremation?
-cremation
Is it important to you that you be buried or cremated?
-no
Do your family members believe in having wakes or burials with open caskets in which the bodies are worked on to look as good as possible?
-no
Would you like to be in an open casket yourself (when dead obviously – sorry for this one)?
-no
Have your grandparents or other family members ever mentioned where they would like to be buried or have their ashes put or spread or what music they would like at their funeral or any other details about how they would like to go out of this world?
-yes, my grandmother has mentioned music she would like to have played at her funeral.
Have any members of your family filled out organ donor cards?
- no, i don't' think so
Do you think you would ever fill one out?- no
Would you feel good about having someone be able to live thanks to one of your organs?
- While I would feel good about someone else living because I was a donor, I believe in keeping my body in one piece after I die (if i can help it).
Have you ever had a pet die? If so, did you bury it or did the vet take it?
- Yes I have buried two turtles, two dogs, and a crawfish in my back yard. Also buried my friends cat in the mountains.
If someone else would pay for you to have your body frozen and maintained so that you might be brought back to life one day (in spite of all current scientific evidence saying this is impossible), would you agree to be frozen?
- Maybe, I would have to think about it more when the time came, it would depend how old I was already. Sounds cold too!
Alexis's Answers (someone that I don't know that well)
Do your grandparents or parents prefer burial or cremation?
- cremation
Is it important to you that you be buried or cremated?
- no
Do your family members believe in having wakes or burials with open caskets in which the bodies are worked on to look as good as possible?
- no
Would you like to be in an open casket yourself (when dead obviously – sorry for this one)?
- no
Have your grandparents or other family members ever mentioned where they would like to be buried or have their ashes put or spread or what music they would like at their funeral or any other details about how they would like to go out of this world?
- no
Have any members of your family filled out organ donor cards? Do you think you would ever fill one out? Would you feel good about having someone be able to live thanks to one of your organs?
- yes, yes, yes
Have you ever had a pet die? If so, did you bury it or did the vet take it? yes, --- buried
If someone else would pay for you to have your body frozen and maintained so that you might be brought back to life one day (in spite of all current scientific evidence saying this is impossible), would you agree to be frozen?
- no
Marc's Answers (someone who is a close friend)
Do your grandparents or parents prefer burial or cremation?
burial
Is it important to you that you be buried or cremated?
- Catholics are supposed to remain "intact" so yes
Do your family members believe in having wakes or burials with open caskets in which the bodies are worked on to look as good as possible?
- No wake, just a memorial service.
Would you like to be in an open casket yourself (when dead obviously – sorry for this one)?
- No
Have your grandparents or other family members ever mentioned where they would like to be buried or have their ashes put or spread or what music they would like at their funeral or any other details about how they would like to go out of this world?
- My grandparents never talk about it but my parents want to be buried in their hometown in Mexico
Have any members of your family filled out organ donor cards? Do you think you would ever fill one out? Would you feel good about having someone be able to live thanks to one of your organs?
- I will be the first member of my family that will fill out an organ donor card
Have you ever had a pet die? If so, did you bury it or did the vet take it?
- I have never had a pet due to the fact that my parents are very cheap
If someone else would pay for you to have your body frozen and maintained so that you might be brought back to life one day (in spite of all current scientific evidence saying this is impossible), would you agree to be frozen?
- Hell No!
Jason (someone of a similar back round) and Emily (someone of a different backround)
Do your grandparents or parents prefer burial or cremation?
--Cremation (Jason)
--Some burial, some cremation (Emily)
Is it important to you that you be buried or cremated?
-- I'd prefer cremation (Jason)
-- Cremation (Emily)
Do your family members believe in having wakes or burials
with open caskets in which the bodies are worked on to look
as good as possible?
-- No (Jason)
-- Yes, they do (but this doesn't really work. My father looked like he was on a roller coaster ride) (Emily)
Would you like to be in an open casket
yourself (when dead obviously – sorry for this one)?
-- Not especially (Jason)
-- I don't mind-- as long as my mouth isn't hanging open (Emily)
Have your grandparents or other family members ever mentioned
where they would like to be buried or have their ashes put or spread or
what music they would like at their funeral or any other details
about how they would like to go out of this world?
-- My mother has expressed some interest in music and texts she would like read, but says she does not care where her ashes are placed. (Jason)
-- My father asked to just be put in a Hefty trash bag. My mother just doesn't want to talk about it. (Emily)
Have any members of your family filled out organ donor cards?
Do you think you would ever fill one out? Would you feel good about
having someone be able to live thanks to one of your organs?
-- No. I'd prefer not to have my recently deceased body disturbed in this way. (Jason)
-- I haven't decided on this yet. (Emily)
Have you ever had a pet die? If so, did you bury it or did the vet take it?
-- Yes, I have three buried in my backyard. (Jason)
-- I bury mine (Emily)
If someone else would pay for you to have your body frozen and maintained
so that you might be brought back to life one day (in spite of all current scientific
evidence saying this is impossible), would you agree to be frozen?
-- No, this is the very last thing I would want to happen to my body. (Jason)
-- No, no, no. (Emily)
What amazed me most about the responses was that two of the people said they would not fill out organ donor cards and one said she was not sure whether she would. One of the people who said he would not is known as a very generous person, and I know he is not Catholic. Actually, the religious excuse makes no sense to me. If you can save another person's life or help another person see after you are gone, why would your god not like you to do that? To me giving away organs after death when we are all going to turn into dust anyway is such an obviously good thing to do. It can't even cause us any pain. I am very proud of one of my best friends whose family is Catholic, who says he will be the first member of his family to fill out an organ
donor card. I have even more respect for him now than I did before.
Only my close friend who is Catholic said definitely that he wanted to be buried.
Here is another problem with the Catholic religion in my opinion. Cremation is better in every way. It is much less expensive although not as cheap as a Hefty bag, but cremation has more dignity. The ashes can go where the dead person asked them to go, and relatives don't have to feel guilty if they are far away and can't visit the grave. Also, there are a lot of Catholics and not so much land for burials.
Regarding my question about buring animals vs. taking them to the vet, I think people
bury their pets because it doesn't cost anything.
Regarding my somewhat stupid question about wanting to be frozen or not if someone else would pay for the process, I was interested that one person I know said that he
would like to do it if he died next month so that he could wake up with a young body.
He would never want it done if he was old and wrinkly.
Do your grandparents or parents prefer burial or cremation?
-cremation
Is it important to you that you be buried or cremated?
-no
Do your family members believe in having wakes or burials with open caskets in which the bodies are worked on to look as good as possible?
-no
Would you like to be in an open casket yourself (when dead obviously – sorry for this one)?
-no
Have your grandparents or other family members ever mentioned where they would like to be buried or have their ashes put or spread or what music they would like at their funeral or any other details about how they would like to go out of this world?
-yes, my grandmother has mentioned music she would like to have played at her funeral.
Have any members of your family filled out organ donor cards?
- no, i don't' think so
Do you think you would ever fill one out?- no
Would you feel good about having someone be able to live thanks to one of your organs?
- While I would feel good about someone else living because I was a donor, I believe in keeping my body in one piece after I die (if i can help it).
Have you ever had a pet die? If so, did you bury it or did the vet take it?
- Yes I have buried two turtles, two dogs, and a crawfish in my back yard. Also buried my friends cat in the mountains.
If someone else would pay for you to have your body frozen and maintained so that you might be brought back to life one day (in spite of all current scientific evidence saying this is impossible), would you agree to be frozen?
- Maybe, I would have to think about it more when the time came, it would depend how old I was already. Sounds cold too!
Alexis's Answers (someone that I don't know that well)
Do your grandparents or parents prefer burial or cremation?
- cremation
Is it important to you that you be buried or cremated?
- no
Do your family members believe in having wakes or burials with open caskets in which the bodies are worked on to look as good as possible?
- no
Would you like to be in an open casket yourself (when dead obviously – sorry for this one)?
- no
Have your grandparents or other family members ever mentioned where they would like to be buried or have their ashes put or spread or what music they would like at their funeral or any other details about how they would like to go out of this world?
- no
Have any members of your family filled out organ donor cards? Do you think you would ever fill one out? Would you feel good about having someone be able to live thanks to one of your organs?
- yes, yes, yes
Have you ever had a pet die? If so, did you bury it or did the vet take it? yes, --- buried
If someone else would pay for you to have your body frozen and maintained so that you might be brought back to life one day (in spite of all current scientific evidence saying this is impossible), would you agree to be frozen?
- no
Marc's Answers (someone who is a close friend)
Do your grandparents or parents prefer burial or cremation?
burial
Is it important to you that you be buried or cremated?
- Catholics are supposed to remain "intact" so yes
Do your family members believe in having wakes or burials with open caskets in which the bodies are worked on to look as good as possible?
- No wake, just a memorial service.
Would you like to be in an open casket yourself (when dead obviously – sorry for this one)?
- No
Have your grandparents or other family members ever mentioned where they would like to be buried or have their ashes put or spread or what music they would like at their funeral or any other details about how they would like to go out of this world?
- My grandparents never talk about it but my parents want to be buried in their hometown in Mexico
Have any members of your family filled out organ donor cards? Do you think you would ever fill one out? Would you feel good about having someone be able to live thanks to one of your organs?
- I will be the first member of my family that will fill out an organ donor card
Have you ever had a pet die? If so, did you bury it or did the vet take it?
- I have never had a pet due to the fact that my parents are very cheap
If someone else would pay for you to have your body frozen and maintained so that you might be brought back to life one day (in spite of all current scientific evidence saying this is impossible), would you agree to be frozen?
- Hell No!
Jason (someone of a similar back round) and Emily (someone of a different backround)
Do your grandparents or parents prefer burial or cremation?
--Cremation (Jason)
--Some burial, some cremation (Emily)
Is it important to you that you be buried or cremated?
-- I'd prefer cremation (Jason)
-- Cremation (Emily)
Do your family members believe in having wakes or burials
with open caskets in which the bodies are worked on to look
as good as possible?
-- No (Jason)
-- Yes, they do (but this doesn't really work. My father looked like he was on a roller coaster ride) (Emily)
Would you like to be in an open casket
yourself (when dead obviously – sorry for this one)?
-- Not especially (Jason)
-- I don't mind-- as long as my mouth isn't hanging open (Emily)
Have your grandparents or other family members ever mentioned
where they would like to be buried or have their ashes put or spread or
what music they would like at their funeral or any other details
about how they would like to go out of this world?
-- My mother has expressed some interest in music and texts she would like read, but says she does not care where her ashes are placed. (Jason)
-- My father asked to just be put in a Hefty trash bag. My mother just doesn't want to talk about it. (Emily)
Have any members of your family filled out organ donor cards?
Do you think you would ever fill one out? Would you feel good about
having someone be able to live thanks to one of your organs?
-- No. I'd prefer not to have my recently deceased body disturbed in this way. (Jason)
-- I haven't decided on this yet. (Emily)
Have you ever had a pet die? If so, did you bury it or did the vet take it?
-- Yes, I have three buried in my backyard. (Jason)
-- I bury mine (Emily)
If someone else would pay for you to have your body frozen and maintained
so that you might be brought back to life one day (in spite of all current scientific
evidence saying this is impossible), would you agree to be frozen?
-- No, this is the very last thing I would want to happen to my body. (Jason)
-- No, no, no. (Emily)
What amazed me most about the responses was that two of the people said they would not fill out organ donor cards and one said she was not sure whether she would. One of the people who said he would not is known as a very generous person, and I know he is not Catholic. Actually, the religious excuse makes no sense to me. If you can save another person's life or help another person see after you are gone, why would your god not like you to do that? To me giving away organs after death when we are all going to turn into dust anyway is such an obviously good thing to do. It can't even cause us any pain. I am very proud of one of my best friends whose family is Catholic, who says he will be the first member of his family to fill out an organ
donor card. I have even more respect for him now than I did before.
Only my close friend who is Catholic said definitely that he wanted to be buried.
Here is another problem with the Catholic religion in my opinion. Cremation is better in every way. It is much less expensive although not as cheap as a Hefty bag, but cremation has more dignity. The ashes can go where the dead person asked them to go, and relatives don't have to feel guilty if they are far away and can't visit the grave. Also, there are a lot of Catholics and not so much land for burials.
Regarding my question about buring animals vs. taking them to the vet, I think people
bury their pets because it doesn't cost anything.
Regarding my somewhat stupid question about wanting to be frozen or not if someone else would pay for the process, I was interested that one person I know said that he
would like to do it if he died next month so that he could wake up with a young body.
He would never want it done if he was old and wrinkly.
Monday, April 18, 2011
HW # 46 - Initial Thoughts on the Care of the Dead
I seem to have read about and heard about people having organ transplants over the last few years. I know that people are often on waiting lists for organs coming from someone who would be a good donor match. I wonder whether most of the donations come from dead people who indicated when they were alive that they wanted their organs to be donated or whether it is usually the relatives of the dead person who make the decision.
According to this article http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/organ-donation regarding organ donation in the U.S, “the need far exceeds the supply of transplantable organs.” Organ donation has come a long way since the late 1960’s when there were no federal laws dealing with the issue. The Uniform Anatomical Gift Act of 1968 (AGA) made it easier for people to pass on their organs after death and increase the number of available organs. Another step forward was taken in the fight for more easily accessible organs when the Uniform Donor Card was recognized as a legal document by all 50 states in 1972(after being mandated by The Uniform Anatomical Gift Act). I am interested in how long after the organs are taken out is the body given back to relatives for burial or cremation. The article talks about some countries like France and Denmark where bodies are used for research and organ transplants unless the formerly living people specifically indicated that they did not want their bodies to be used for these purposes, in other words the exact opposite of what happens in the U.S.
My feeling is that when a person dies, the body is just an empty shell. I believe that people should allow their bodies to be used to help living people. I also don’t think that wakes with open coffins make any sense at all. The idea of putting makeup on a dead person so that everyone can say how great and how peaceful he/she looks is ridiculous to me. I would want to remember dead people the way they were when they were alive, not the way they were when they were dead. I realize that other people feel differently for religious or cultural reasons, but I think that everyone should sign organ donor cards no matter what is done with the body afterwards. I think it’s better to be cremated and have ashes spread somewhere that is meaningful to the dead person and not have ashes end up in an urn.
Questions
1. How long after the organs are removed from the body is the body returned to the family?
2. In the U.S what is the proportion of bodies that are buried vs cremated?
3. After cremation, how often are ashes put in an urn vs scattered somewhere?
4. For environmental reasons, is cremation better than burial?
According to this article http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/organ-donation regarding organ donation in the U.S, “the need far exceeds the supply of transplantable organs.” Organ donation has come a long way since the late 1960’s when there were no federal laws dealing with the issue. The Uniform Anatomical Gift Act of 1968 (AGA) made it easier for people to pass on their organs after death and increase the number of available organs. Another step forward was taken in the fight for more easily accessible organs when the Uniform Donor Card was recognized as a legal document by all 50 states in 1972(after being mandated by The Uniform Anatomical Gift Act). I am interested in how long after the organs are taken out is the body given back to relatives for burial or cremation. The article talks about some countries like France and Denmark where bodies are used for research and organ transplants unless the formerly living people specifically indicated that they did not want their bodies to be used for these purposes, in other words the exact opposite of what happens in the U.S.
My feeling is that when a person dies, the body is just an empty shell. I believe that people should allow their bodies to be used to help living people. I also don’t think that wakes with open coffins make any sense at all. The idea of putting makeup on a dead person so that everyone can say how great and how peaceful he/she looks is ridiculous to me. I would want to remember dead people the way they were when they were alive, not the way they were when they were dead. I realize that other people feel differently for religious or cultural reasons, but I think that everyone should sign organ donor cards no matter what is done with the body afterwards. I think it’s better to be cremated and have ashes spread somewhere that is meaningful to the dead person and not have ashes end up in an urn.
Questions
1. How long after the organs are removed from the body is the body returned to the family?
2. In the U.S what is the proportion of bodies that are buried vs cremated?
3. After cremation, how often are ashes put in an urn vs scattered somewhere?
4. For environmental reasons, is cremation better than burial?
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
HW # 45 - Reply to Other Peoples' Comments
Response to Andy - I appreciate the fact that you described my project's recommendation of a birth practice change as an "easy" one because it does
seem easy to do and important to do and yet it still isn't done. It seems that once there is a set medical practice in our culture it is hard to undo it and go back to a
natural way even if it is obviously better. You asked about whether it wouldn't be
better to leave the cord attached until the placenta came out. I think the answer is yes but sometimes it can take time and since in a hospital time is money and the nutrients and other good things from the blood coming throught the cord can get to the baby in 1-3 minutes, at least doing this small thing should be done regularly. I think there are some risks with a placenta tearing and causing hemoraging but I'm not sure whether cutting the cord helps the placenta come out faster. I will find out. And I will scan my flyer (adding the sources I cited earlier) as a pdf so it can be downloaded -didn't know that my previous format was so "ugly".
Response to Abdul - I really appreciate the time you took to react to my project recommendattion of waiting to cut the umbilical cord and that it had the desired impact of making you think that the natural approach is obviously superior to the medical one. You are right that finding out more statistics about what is the practice nationally would have been good. I know that I read that cutting the cord right away is the normal practice in hospitals in this country now for all the reasons stated, but my point would have been stronger with more documentation. Also, the reason I only showed the flyer to two people was because of time and the fact that I wanted to find someone who had just had a baby (to help prove the point that the cord is cut right away without options given) and someone who was about to have one so that she could ask her doctor to cut the cord later. I had a hard time even finding these two people in time.
Response to Natalie - I was really pleased that you said that when you have a baby one day you think you will ask to wait to have the umbilical cord cut. The great thing would be if you did not have to ask because the practice would have changed by then. Judging by how hard it is to get a good health care plan in this country that probably won't happen. I will make a pdf of the flyer to uphold with the picture of the placenta before and after waiting for the cord to be cut.
seem easy to do and important to do and yet it still isn't done. It seems that once there is a set medical practice in our culture it is hard to undo it and go back to a
natural way even if it is obviously better. You asked about whether it wouldn't be
better to leave the cord attached until the placenta came out. I think the answer is yes but sometimes it can take time and since in a hospital time is money and the nutrients and other good things from the blood coming throught the cord can get to the baby in 1-3 minutes, at least doing this small thing should be done regularly. I think there are some risks with a placenta tearing and causing hemoraging but I'm not sure whether cutting the cord helps the placenta come out faster. I will find out. And I will scan my flyer (adding the sources I cited earlier) as a pdf so it can be downloaded -didn't know that my previous format was so "ugly".
Response to Abdul - I really appreciate the time you took to react to my project recommendattion of waiting to cut the umbilical cord and that it had the desired impact of making you think that the natural approach is obviously superior to the medical one. You are right that finding out more statistics about what is the practice nationally would have been good. I know that I read that cutting the cord right away is the normal practice in hospitals in this country now for all the reasons stated, but my point would have been stronger with more documentation. Also, the reason I only showed the flyer to two people was because of time and the fact that I wanted to find someone who had just had a baby (to help prove the point that the cord is cut right away without options given) and someone who was about to have one so that she could ask her doctor to cut the cord later. I had a hard time even finding these two people in time.
Response to Natalie - I was really pleased that you said that when you have a baby one day you think you will ask to wait to have the umbilical cord cut. The great thing would be if you did not have to ask because the practice would have changed by then. Judging by how hard it is to get a good health care plan in this country that probably won't happen. I will make a pdf of the flyer to uphold with the picture of the placenta before and after waiting for the cord to be cut.
Monday, April 11, 2011
HW # 44 - Comments on Other People's Projects
From Andy
Great project - you identified an easy change that could be made in our birth practices - not cutting the umbilical cord for one or more minutes - and clarified why this change matters.
The change you propose symbolizes to me the basic binary between the medical model and the natural model. The medical model assumes the connection to the mother (literally in this case) should be chopped ASAP. The natural model assumes that the connection to the mother should be preserved and respected and investigated for health benefits. Is there any reason to chop the umbilical cord at 3 minutes? Would it be bad for the baby or the mother if the umbilical cord remained connected to the placenta while the placenta got pushed out?
You need to cite sources - otherwise your advocacy loses a lot of credibility.
Your flyer, that you showed in class, along with the prop, struck me as persuasive and well-made. But here on this site, the information gets listed but in an ugly and unuseable format. Why not scan the flyer and post it as a downloadable PDF or JPG? Then you could link to it and others could use it and you will be able to access it long after your little flyer gets crumpled and yellow.
Also, why only show it to 2 people? Why not more? Its worth sharing!
Thanks for your work.
From Naima
I really appreciated your work! You presented the medical approach as one that may not have an understanding or appreciation of the effects of allowing the umbilical cord to be cut after three minutes and presented the natural approach as being more welcoming to the literal connection between mother and child.
After reading the book that I was assigned to from class, this was brought up but not written about in detail. I was interested in this topic and I'm glad that you provided me with more information.
I liked the way this blog post was written, but perhaps you could have displayed it in a more creative way?
From Abdullah
Devin it seems as though your post was about a simple yet extremely important idea. Knowing when to cut the umbilical cord doesn't seem that important however, your blog helped show me and hopefully your other readers that it truly is. I sensed the battle between medical and natural in your blog because, you stated the perspectives of both natural and medical views.
One aspect of your post that I particularly valued was the fact that it seemed as though you tried to not be to biased with the side you picked. It was clear to me that you were pro waiting at least one minute to cut the umbilical cord. When you initially opened up your arguments you started off stating three reasons why the cord is cut. This was a smart decision because if your readers like me didn't know the reasons, we can learn them from you.
A reason why I think your project matter is because I think many Americans don't know how important the placenta is towards the babies and the mother's health. This obviously raises concerns because we want people that are directly involved in birth to know as much as possible, so that they can make the best decision for their family. I also agree with what Andy said in his comment, you definitely should have showed the flier to more people two is certainly not enough. This information that the public needs to get it's hands on. Please take Andy's advice and try and scan it so more people can see what great work you've done.
I would have appreciated more from you on this topic. Although you blog was solid and much better than mines, I think you could have tried to compare umbilical cord rates across the nation to find out where there were more and less cords being cut and why? You also could have compared umbilical cord rates between countries with better healthcare systems than us such as France? Clearly you didn't need to do any of this since your blog and elevator speech were solid, but there just suggestions.
Nicely done Devin I think your blog and speech were the best in the class. Keep up the good work.
From Mom
My reaction to this report about the benefits of waiting to cut the umbilical cord is great frustration that I did know about them at the time of giving birth to Devin and his brother. They were born in St. Vincent's Hospital in Greenwich Village (now closed) because at the time it had the lowest rate of cesarean delivery of any hospital in New York City and it allowed the father to stay over night with mother and baby I had a long "natural" labor (no epidural)that would have ended in a c-section with any other doctor, but I was semi-delirious at the end and have no memory of when the cord was cut. I also do not remember reading about asking to wait to have the umbilical cord cut in "What to Expect When You Are Expecting," a bible for mothers-to-be. My husband has no memory of the timing of the cord cutting either. Since Devin was born unexpectedly on Christmas Day, his dad had to spend time playing baseball in the hall with Devin's older brother! I hate thinking about babies not getting the full measure of all the nutrients, stem cells, T cells, and whatever else nature intended the baby to get from the placenta because of outdated thinking or to hurry things along (though in fairness the birth took place just before midnight and we had arrived at the hospital at 5AM -- a long day for everyone involved). If you had the time, Devin, or should I say if you ever do have the time, it would be interesting to spend more time documenting the benefits and risks and then presenting your work to a good maternity web site to create more awareness.
The subject is so compelling that any mother-to-be would want to make the request of her doctor before going into labor to let the umbilical cord finish its job.
From Dmitry
I wasn't expecting to find the subject of a project about "birth" of any interest to me, but I have to admit that what you wrote about the timing of the cutting of the umbilical cord seemed really important. It's amazing that something that has such obvious benefits isn't done all the time considering how long people stay in medical school. That's the "weird" part I guess.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Abdullah
You asked yourself what the government does to help poverty stricken pregnant women in New York City and then you visited an office in the Bronx of an organization called PATH, which you found out a little about online.
I really liked the way you describe the look and feeling of the office at the entrance making the point of how unwelcoming it must be to a poor pregnant woman coming there. But then you contrast this with the happy looking women who were staying there, making it seem like a good place overall. It seemed amazing when Mr.C said that PATH has an 100% success rate helping mothers to support themselves finnancially and not need temporary housing again.
The work PATH does is really important. These are babies, ones born to poor single moms, who are most likely to drop out of school and not have a chance of making a good life for themselves. They need to be brought into the society not made to feel like outcasts.
Myy only suggestion would have to be to ask what kind of jobs the mothers got so that they could be independent and not need temporary housing. But maybe he would not have wanted a direct question like that. I think you did a great job describing this visit and making it interesting.
For Natalie
WOW!!! You have really written a manifesto for the right of women to fight court-ordered cesareans when the mothers are of sound mind. You go on to make a strong case for why pregnant women's own health should come before the health of the fetus.
I was impressed with the way you documented your points, stating the legal rights of the mother as upheld by the Supreme Court.
A reason why I think your project is so important is because of the people in this country who would like to reverse the Roe vs Wade decision of the Supreme Court and ban abortion. Obviously, these people don't think that women should have control over their own lives and bodies, and I think they are completely wrong.
There is one area though that is complicated and that is that a pregnant woman cannot know all the dangers to her un-born child. She has to trust her doctor, and the problem seems to be that doctors, because of lawsuits and convenience are delivering too many babies by cesaerean section. This fact makes women not be able to trust doctors, and this is obviously a bad situation. My point is that there can be some women who might be willing to take a risk by not having a cesaearen and regret it later if the child turns out to be in great danger.
For Andy
You analyzed a specific 10 to 15 second exchange in "The Business of Being Born" that was a contradiction of the overall goal of the film which was to discredit the over-medicalization of the birth process and to emphasize the importance of midwives and the advantages of home birth. This "contradiction" involved the doctor givong information that was not true seemingly to protect the midwife, who did not make a correct diagnosis.
I really liked the way you came up with so many possible reasons why the doctor would have covered for the midwife, including the fact that his own mother was a midwife. These possibilities gave your blog a lot of suspense, and I hope you will tell us when you get an answer back from the filmmaker.
For me the story is interesting because the fact that the filmaker wasn't truthful makes her project that had a worthy goal unworthy. She ended up with an emergency cesearean because there was a real problem with the baby. Midwives are supposed to have a medical doctor backup. I think the whole idea is that in a birth with no problems, a midwife is a better option than a medical doctor. Bu t if there is a problem, then a medical doctor in a hospital is essential. So why not have that be the message of the film.
One thing that would be interesting to know would be when you discovered this cover-up. Did you notice it the first time you saw the film or on the second or third time?
Great project - you identified an easy change that could be made in our birth practices - not cutting the umbilical cord for one or more minutes - and clarified why this change matters.
The change you propose symbolizes to me the basic binary between the medical model and the natural model. The medical model assumes the connection to the mother (literally in this case) should be chopped ASAP. The natural model assumes that the connection to the mother should be preserved and respected and investigated for health benefits. Is there any reason to chop the umbilical cord at 3 minutes? Would it be bad for the baby or the mother if the umbilical cord remained connected to the placenta while the placenta got pushed out?
You need to cite sources - otherwise your advocacy loses a lot of credibility.
Your flyer, that you showed in class, along with the prop, struck me as persuasive and well-made. But here on this site, the information gets listed but in an ugly and unuseable format. Why not scan the flyer and post it as a downloadable PDF or JPG? Then you could link to it and others could use it and you will be able to access it long after your little flyer gets crumpled and yellow.
Also, why only show it to 2 people? Why not more? Its worth sharing!
Thanks for your work.
From Naima
I really appreciated your work! You presented the medical approach as one that may not have an understanding or appreciation of the effects of allowing the umbilical cord to be cut after three minutes and presented the natural approach as being more welcoming to the literal connection between mother and child.
After reading the book that I was assigned to from class, this was brought up but not written about in detail. I was interested in this topic and I'm glad that you provided me with more information.
I liked the way this blog post was written, but perhaps you could have displayed it in a more creative way?
From Abdullah
Devin it seems as though your post was about a simple yet extremely important idea. Knowing when to cut the umbilical cord doesn't seem that important however, your blog helped show me and hopefully your other readers that it truly is. I sensed the battle between medical and natural in your blog because, you stated the perspectives of both natural and medical views.
One aspect of your post that I particularly valued was the fact that it seemed as though you tried to not be to biased with the side you picked. It was clear to me that you were pro waiting at least one minute to cut the umbilical cord. When you initially opened up your arguments you started off stating three reasons why the cord is cut. This was a smart decision because if your readers like me didn't know the reasons, we can learn them from you.
A reason why I think your project matter is because I think many Americans don't know how important the placenta is towards the babies and the mother's health. This obviously raises concerns because we want people that are directly involved in birth to know as much as possible, so that they can make the best decision for their family. I also agree with what Andy said in his comment, you definitely should have showed the flier to more people two is certainly not enough. This information that the public needs to get it's hands on. Please take Andy's advice and try and scan it so more people can see what great work you've done.
I would have appreciated more from you on this topic. Although you blog was solid and much better than mines, I think you could have tried to compare umbilical cord rates across the nation to find out where there were more and less cords being cut and why? You also could have compared umbilical cord rates between countries with better healthcare systems than us such as France? Clearly you didn't need to do any of this since your blog and elevator speech were solid, but there just suggestions.
Nicely done Devin I think your blog and speech were the best in the class. Keep up the good work.
From Mom
My reaction to this report about the benefits of waiting to cut the umbilical cord is great frustration that I did know about them at the time of giving birth to Devin and his brother. They were born in St. Vincent's Hospital in Greenwich Village (now closed) because at the time it had the lowest rate of cesarean delivery of any hospital in New York City and it allowed the father to stay over night with mother and baby I had a long "natural" labor (no epidural)that would have ended in a c-section with any other doctor, but I was semi-delirious at the end and have no memory of when the cord was cut. I also do not remember reading about asking to wait to have the umbilical cord cut in "What to Expect When You Are Expecting," a bible for mothers-to-be. My husband has no memory of the timing of the cord cutting either. Since Devin was born unexpectedly on Christmas Day, his dad had to spend time playing baseball in the hall with Devin's older brother! I hate thinking about babies not getting the full measure of all the nutrients, stem cells, T cells, and whatever else nature intended the baby to get from the placenta because of outdated thinking or to hurry things along (though in fairness the birth took place just before midnight and we had arrived at the hospital at 5AM -- a long day for everyone involved). If you had the time, Devin, or should I say if you ever do have the time, it would be interesting to spend more time documenting the benefits and risks and then presenting your work to a good maternity web site to create more awareness.
The subject is so compelling that any mother-to-be would want to make the request of her doctor before going into labor to let the umbilical cord finish its job.
From Dmitry
I wasn't expecting to find the subject of a project about "birth" of any interest to me, but I have to admit that what you wrote about the timing of the cutting of the umbilical cord seemed really important. It's amazing that something that has such obvious benefits isn't done all the time considering how long people stay in medical school. That's the "weird" part I guess.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Abdullah
You asked yourself what the government does to help poverty stricken pregnant women in New York City and then you visited an office in the Bronx of an organization called PATH, which you found out a little about online.
I really liked the way you describe the look and feeling of the office at the entrance making the point of how unwelcoming it must be to a poor pregnant woman coming there. But then you contrast this with the happy looking women who were staying there, making it seem like a good place overall. It seemed amazing when Mr.C said that PATH has an 100% success rate helping mothers to support themselves finnancially and not need temporary housing again.
The work PATH does is really important. These are babies, ones born to poor single moms, who are most likely to drop out of school and not have a chance of making a good life for themselves. They need to be brought into the society not made to feel like outcasts.
Myy only suggestion would have to be to ask what kind of jobs the mothers got so that they could be independent and not need temporary housing. But maybe he would not have wanted a direct question like that. I think you did a great job describing this visit and making it interesting.
For Natalie
WOW!!! You have really written a manifesto for the right of women to fight court-ordered cesareans when the mothers are of sound mind. You go on to make a strong case for why pregnant women's own health should come before the health of the fetus.
I was impressed with the way you documented your points, stating the legal rights of the mother as upheld by the Supreme Court.
A reason why I think your project is so important is because of the people in this country who would like to reverse the Roe vs Wade decision of the Supreme Court and ban abortion. Obviously, these people don't think that women should have control over their own lives and bodies, and I think they are completely wrong.
There is one area though that is complicated and that is that a pregnant woman cannot know all the dangers to her un-born child. She has to trust her doctor, and the problem seems to be that doctors, because of lawsuits and convenience are delivering too many babies by cesaerean section. This fact makes women not be able to trust doctors, and this is obviously a bad situation. My point is that there can be some women who might be willing to take a risk by not having a cesaearen and regret it later if the child turns out to be in great danger.
For Andy
You analyzed a specific 10 to 15 second exchange in "The Business of Being Born" that was a contradiction of the overall goal of the film which was to discredit the over-medicalization of the birth process and to emphasize the importance of midwives and the advantages of home birth. This "contradiction" involved the doctor givong information that was not true seemingly to protect the midwife, who did not make a correct diagnosis.
I really liked the way you came up with so many possible reasons why the doctor would have covered for the midwife, including the fact that his own mother was a midwife. These possibilities gave your blog a lot of suspense, and I hope you will tell us when you get an answer back from the filmmaker.
For me the story is interesting because the fact that the filmaker wasn't truthful makes her project that had a worthy goal unworthy. She ended up with an emergency cesearean because there was a real problem with the baby. Midwives are supposed to have a medical doctor backup. I think the whole idea is that in a birth with no problems, a midwife is a better option than a medical doctor. Bu t if there is a problem, then a medical doctor in a hospital is essential. So why not have that be the message of the film.
One thing that would be interesting to know would be when you discovered this cover-up. Did you notice it the first time you saw the film or on the second or third time?
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
HW # 42 - Pregnancy & Birth culminating project
Independent Research Topic: “When to Cut the Umbilical Cord”
Advocacy flyer
Cover: Picture of Stewie from “Family Guy” with a speech bubble that says, “Just a
Freakin’ Fetal Minute, mother!”
Urgent Message for Mothers-to-Be: When it’s time to cut the umbilical cord, tell your doctor to wait at least a minute
Inside left page;
Why is the umbilical cord cut immediately after birth?
There are three primary reasons:
o Anesthesia
Formerly, most mothers were knocked out completely with anesthesia, and the cord was clamped immediately to keep the anesthesia from getting into the baby’s bloodstream
o Convenience
“Time is money.” Cutting the cord right away is yet another way of speeding up the institutional birthing process so that everyone can go home more quickly
o Technology
Since the clamping devices and warming trays exist now, there is a need to use them. In the not-so-old days it was normal to leave the baby attached to the umbilical cord resting on its mother for a while
Benefits of Waiting to Clamp and Cut the Umbilical Cord After Birth
o Blood from the placenta that has carried oxygen and nutrients through the umbilical cord to the fetus can continue to do so to strengthen the baby
o Waiting even one minute before clamping and cutting the umbilical cord means that 50% of the blood volume of the placenta will go the baby bringing iron that prevents iron deficiency anemia that can lead to learning delays and impairment. Waiting up to three minutes means that most of the blood volume of the placenta will go to the baby
• Waiting even one minute before clamping and cutting the umbilical cord also means the oxygen coming from the blood through the umbilical cord can help support the baby’s effort to breathe from the air for the first time. Aerating the lungs the first time requires a huge increase blood flow to the lungs. If there is not enough blood coming from the placenta, blood must come from the baby’s organs, which could be damaging to them
o Allowing the blood from the placenta to flow through the umbilical cord to the baby once it is born helps shrink the size of the placenta making it easier to come out and removing the risk of bleeding from the mother
o Stem cells in the umbilical cord’s blood stream can “differentiate” into every other kind of cell in the baby and be of enormous help to the baby’s future health
o T cells in the umbilical cord’s blood stream can help prevent cancer later in the baby’s life
o The additional blood from the placenta provides essential and even life-saving nourishment in many parts of the world where good nutrition is hard to come by including areas in the United States
o The one to three minutes of leaving the baby on its mother attached to the umbilical cord is a moment of peace for the mother, father, and baby and a
time to enjoy the wonder of what has just happened
Inside left page
Risks of Waiting to Clamp and Cut the Umbilical Cord After Birth
o Some medical practitioners have thought that cutting the umbilical cord would prevent an excessive amount of blood from overwhelming the baby’s system. The World Health Organization says that this effect does not happen. “In fact, there is probably a self-regulatory mechanism in the infant which limits the extent of placental transfusion. Moreover, there is evidence that the circulatory system of the newborn is capable of rapid adjustment to an increase in blood volume”
o There can be a mild form of jaundice caused because immature liver cannot process all the bilirubin, a yellow byproduct of breakdown or red blood cells that gets pushed out to tissues and causes baby to look a little yellow. Generally, sunlight gets rid of it, but sometimes there is a need for phototherapy, requiring technology that is not always available in some parts of the world.
Conclusion
So there we have it: Seven huge benefits to delaying the cutting of the umbilical cord and only one risk that is not serious. What will you choose to do?
Back cover:
Picture of a placenta when cut immediately after birth and a picture of a placenta after one to three minutes
Reaction #1 from Meghan who just give birth for the first time three months ago:
I wish I had known about this. My unbilical cord was cut right away even though I had a doula with me in the hospital. I signed a paper to donate the blood in my umbilical cord to a bank possibly to help others one day but was told there was not much blood and that it probably wouldn’t be that helpful. That was all.
Reaction #2 from Isabel who will give birth for the first time in sixth months:
I will definitely tell my doctor that I do not want the umbilical cord cut for three minutes. This is fascinating. I’ve read several pregnancy books and did not know about this option.
Advocacy flyer
Cover: Picture of Stewie from “Family Guy” with a speech bubble that says, “Just a
Freakin’ Fetal Minute, mother!”
Urgent Message for Mothers-to-Be: When it’s time to cut the umbilical cord, tell your doctor to wait at least a minute
Inside left page;
Why is the umbilical cord cut immediately after birth?
There are three primary reasons:
o Anesthesia
Formerly, most mothers were knocked out completely with anesthesia, and the cord was clamped immediately to keep the anesthesia from getting into the baby’s bloodstream
o Convenience
“Time is money.” Cutting the cord right away is yet another way of speeding up the institutional birthing process so that everyone can go home more quickly
o Technology
Since the clamping devices and warming trays exist now, there is a need to use them. In the not-so-old days it was normal to leave the baby attached to the umbilical cord resting on its mother for a while
Benefits of Waiting to Clamp and Cut the Umbilical Cord After Birth
o Blood from the placenta that has carried oxygen and nutrients through the umbilical cord to the fetus can continue to do so to strengthen the baby
o Waiting even one minute before clamping and cutting the umbilical cord means that 50% of the blood volume of the placenta will go the baby bringing iron that prevents iron deficiency anemia that can lead to learning delays and impairment. Waiting up to three minutes means that most of the blood volume of the placenta will go to the baby
• Waiting even one minute before clamping and cutting the umbilical cord also means the oxygen coming from the blood through the umbilical cord can help support the baby’s effort to breathe from the air for the first time. Aerating the lungs the first time requires a huge increase blood flow to the lungs. If there is not enough blood coming from the placenta, blood must come from the baby’s organs, which could be damaging to them
o Allowing the blood from the placenta to flow through the umbilical cord to the baby once it is born helps shrink the size of the placenta making it easier to come out and removing the risk of bleeding from the mother
o Stem cells in the umbilical cord’s blood stream can “differentiate” into every other kind of cell in the baby and be of enormous help to the baby’s future health
o T cells in the umbilical cord’s blood stream can help prevent cancer later in the baby’s life
o The additional blood from the placenta provides essential and even life-saving nourishment in many parts of the world where good nutrition is hard to come by including areas in the United States
o The one to three minutes of leaving the baby on its mother attached to the umbilical cord is a moment of peace for the mother, father, and baby and a
time to enjoy the wonder of what has just happened
Inside left page
Risks of Waiting to Clamp and Cut the Umbilical Cord After Birth
o Some medical practitioners have thought that cutting the umbilical cord would prevent an excessive amount of blood from overwhelming the baby’s system. The World Health Organization says that this effect does not happen. “In fact, there is probably a self-regulatory mechanism in the infant which limits the extent of placental transfusion. Moreover, there is evidence that the circulatory system of the newborn is capable of rapid adjustment to an increase in blood volume”
o There can be a mild form of jaundice caused because immature liver cannot process all the bilirubin, a yellow byproduct of breakdown or red blood cells that gets pushed out to tissues and causes baby to look a little yellow. Generally, sunlight gets rid of it, but sometimes there is a need for phototherapy, requiring technology that is not always available in some parts of the world.
Conclusion
So there we have it: Seven huge benefits to delaying the cutting of the umbilical cord and only one risk that is not serious. What will you choose to do?
Back cover:
Picture of a placenta when cut immediately after birth and a picture of a placenta after one to three minutes
Reaction #1 from Meghan who just give birth for the first time three months ago:
I wish I had known about this. My unbilical cord was cut right away even though I had a doula with me in the hospital. I signed a paper to donate the blood in my umbilical cord to a bank possibly to help others one day but was told there was not much blood and that it probably wouldn’t be that helpful. That was all.
Reaction #2 from Isabel who will give birth for the first time in sixth months:
I will definitely tell my doctor that I do not want the umbilical cord cut for three minutes. This is fascinating. I’ve read several pregnancy books and did not know about this option.
Monday, April 4, 2011
HW # 41 - Independent Research
When to Cut the Umbilical Cord
I find this to be an appropriate “Normal is Weird” subject because
as part of a normal birth process the umbilical cord is cut right away
in spite of the fact that all the acquired knowledge to date and research
trials recommend waiting even as short a time as three minutes
for the good of the baby.
“Health risks, benefits come with delayed umbilical cord clamping.” Center for Advancing Health. 15 April 2008
This article reports on a review of 11 studies evaluating the benefits of delaying the clamping of the umbilical cord. Results showed that “in most cases the time difference between early and late cord clamping is just one or two minutes, but the delay allows for an additional infusion of blood from mother to child.” Benefit: additional blood going to baby provides more iron and counters risk of anemia. Risk: mild form of jaundice caused because immature liver cannot process all the bilirubin, a yellow byproduct of breakdown or red blood cells that gets pushed out to tissues and causes baby to look a little yellow. Generally, sunlight gets rid of it, but sometimes there is a need for phototherapy, requiring technology that is not always available in some parts of the world.
“Effect of Timing of Umbilical Cord Clamping of Term Infants on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes.” RHL commentary (last revised: 2 March 2009). The WHO Reproductive Health Library; Geneva: World Health Organization
This article studies that have demonstrated that “there is a transfer from the placenta of about 80 ml of blood at 1 minute after birth, reaching about 100 ml at 3 minutes after birth.” It makes the case that late clamping is especially important in poor areas where there is not “access to good nuturition.”
“Care of the Umbilical Cord: A Review of the Evidence.” World Health Organization, 1999
This article talks about traditional beliefs about the cutting of the umbilical cord in other cultures. “In many cultures, people believe that all life from the placenta must be transferred to the newborn for otherwise they baby may die. Therefore the cord is usually cut after cord pulsations stop or after the delivery of the placenta.” The article also describes the umbilical cord as “a unique tissue, consisting of two arteries and one vein covered by a mucoid connective tissue called Wharton’s jelly and a thin mucous membrane. Blood flowing through the cord brings nutrients and oxygen to the fetus and carries away carbon dioxide and metabolic wastes.”
“Early or Late Cord Clamping?” Midwifery Today E-News 23 July 1999
This article states that clamping the umbilical cord too early is dangerous because when a baby takes its first breath the aeration of the lungs causes “a massive increase in pulmonary blood flow,” which is supposed to come from the placenta. If the cord is cut right away, blood has to come from the baby’s other organs and for some babies this could be fatal.
Forro, Chinmayo. “The Unbilical Cord Blood Controversy.” 2009
This article begins with some history – first person to say that the cord must be cut immediately after birth was a 17th century French obstetrician Francois Mauriceau. Even though there was no evidence at the time, most obstetricians today follow Dr. Mauriceau’s recommendation. The article quotes Doctors Barclay and Murata from an article they published in Pediatrics in 2006 that said cutting the cord right away “might deprive the newborn of some benefits such as an increase in iron storate…Iron deficiency early in life may have pronounced central nervous system effects such as cognitive impairment,” and that delaying cord cutting is also good because “the increase of hematopoietic stem cells transfused to the newborn might play a role on different blood disorders and immune conditions.”
“Scientist says Umbilical Cords Should Be Cut Later.” 25 May 2010
This article quotes Professor Paul Sanberg, the lead researcher in a study described in the Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine. It says, “Delayed cord clamping may have a host of positive consequences, including reduced risks for developing conditions such as respiratory distress, chronic lung disease, brain hemorrhages, anemia, sepsis and eye disease.”
“Benefits of delayed cord clamping.” Write About Birth. 9 July 2010
This article says that it is not true that delaying the cutting of the umbilical cord could bring too much blood to the baby’s system and overload it. It says that there is evidence that the newborn’s circulatory system “is capable of rapid adjustment to an increase in blood volume and viscosity by increased fluid extravasation and dilation of blood vessels.” It also says that midwives like to wait until the pulsing action stops in the cord because they they know that the blood has all gone into the baby.
Hughes, Pattie. “Should You Bank Baby’s Cord Blood?” Families .com 2001
This article talks about some parents who spend $1500 to put their baby’s umbilical cord blood in a bank with a storage fee of $100 each year in case their child ever develops a disease the stem cells in this blood could cure. This “blood banking” is not regulated so no one knows how long the blood would be effective. Also with some forms of cancer like leukemia and genetic disorders the blood stem cells might have the disease and not be helpful. Also the amount of blood might help a small child but not be enough for a grownup.
“Benefits of Delayed Cord Clamping.” Doula and Birth Services: Butterfly Birth. 12 July 2009
This article by a doula recommends waiting as long as an hour or an hour and a half for the placenta to come out and then cutting the cord. She says it is important for the baby to be lower that the placenta before it comes out so there can be effective blood flow.
The article also explains that the reason hospitals cut the cord immediately is out of habit from a time when most women were unconscious when they were giving birth and that doctors did not want the anesthetic to get into the baby through the cord. It also talks about the fact that when the cutting is delayed the blood in the placenta (up to 40% of the baby’s blood) will go into the baby and shrink the size of the placenta making it easier for it to come out faster and prevent more bleeding from the mother.
I find this to be an appropriate “Normal is Weird” subject because
as part of a normal birth process the umbilical cord is cut right away
in spite of the fact that all the acquired knowledge to date and research
trials recommend waiting even as short a time as three minutes
for the good of the baby.
“Health risks, benefits come with delayed umbilical cord clamping.” Center for Advancing Health. 15 April 2008
This article reports on a review of 11 studies evaluating the benefits of delaying the clamping of the umbilical cord. Results showed that “in most cases the time difference between early and late cord clamping is just one or two minutes, but the delay allows for an additional infusion of blood from mother to child.” Benefit: additional blood going to baby provides more iron and counters risk of anemia. Risk: mild form of jaundice caused because immature liver cannot process all the bilirubin, a yellow byproduct of breakdown or red blood cells that gets pushed out to tissues and causes baby to look a little yellow. Generally, sunlight gets rid of it, but sometimes there is a need for phototherapy, requiring technology that is not always available in some parts of the world.
“Effect of Timing of Umbilical Cord Clamping of Term Infants on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes.” RHL commentary (last revised: 2 March 2009). The WHO Reproductive Health Library; Geneva: World Health Organization
This article studies that have demonstrated that “there is a transfer from the placenta of about 80 ml of blood at 1 minute after birth, reaching about 100 ml at 3 minutes after birth.” It makes the case that late clamping is especially important in poor areas where there is not “access to good nuturition.”
“Care of the Umbilical Cord: A Review of the Evidence.” World Health Organization, 1999
This article talks about traditional beliefs about the cutting of the umbilical cord in other cultures. “In many cultures, people believe that all life from the placenta must be transferred to the newborn for otherwise they baby may die. Therefore the cord is usually cut after cord pulsations stop or after the delivery of the placenta.” The article also describes the umbilical cord as “a unique tissue, consisting of two arteries and one vein covered by a mucoid connective tissue called Wharton’s jelly and a thin mucous membrane. Blood flowing through the cord brings nutrients and oxygen to the fetus and carries away carbon dioxide and metabolic wastes.”
“Early or Late Cord Clamping?” Midwifery Today E-News 23 July 1999
This article states that clamping the umbilical cord too early is dangerous because when a baby takes its first breath the aeration of the lungs causes “a massive increase in pulmonary blood flow,” which is supposed to come from the placenta. If the cord is cut right away, blood has to come from the baby’s other organs and for some babies this could be fatal.
Forro, Chinmayo. “The Unbilical Cord Blood Controversy.” 2009
This article begins with some history – first person to say that the cord must be cut immediately after birth was a 17th century French obstetrician Francois Mauriceau. Even though there was no evidence at the time, most obstetricians today follow Dr. Mauriceau’s recommendation. The article quotes Doctors Barclay and Murata from an article they published in Pediatrics in 2006 that said cutting the cord right away “might deprive the newborn of some benefits such as an increase in iron storate…Iron deficiency early in life may have pronounced central nervous system effects such as cognitive impairment,” and that delaying cord cutting is also good because “the increase of hematopoietic stem cells transfused to the newborn might play a role on different blood disorders and immune conditions.”
“Scientist says Umbilical Cords Should Be Cut Later.” 25 May 2010
This article quotes Professor Paul Sanberg, the lead researcher in a study described in the Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine. It says, “Delayed cord clamping may have a host of positive consequences, including reduced risks for developing conditions such as respiratory distress, chronic lung disease, brain hemorrhages, anemia, sepsis and eye disease.”
“Benefits of delayed cord clamping.” Write About Birth. 9 July 2010
This article says that it is not true that delaying the cutting of the umbilical cord could bring too much blood to the baby’s system and overload it. It says that there is evidence that the newborn’s circulatory system “is capable of rapid adjustment to an increase in blood volume and viscosity by increased fluid extravasation and dilation of blood vessels.” It also says that midwives like to wait until the pulsing action stops in the cord because they they know that the blood has all gone into the baby.
Hughes, Pattie. “Should You Bank Baby’s Cord Blood?” Families .com 2001
This article talks about some parents who spend $1500 to put their baby’s umbilical cord blood in a bank with a storage fee of $100 each year in case their child ever develops a disease the stem cells in this blood could cure. This “blood banking” is not regulated so no one knows how long the blood would be effective. Also with some forms of cancer like leukemia and genetic disorders the blood stem cells might have the disease and not be helpful. Also the amount of blood might help a small child but not be enough for a grownup.
“Benefits of Delayed Cord Clamping.” Doula and Birth Services: Butterfly Birth. 12 July 2009
This article by a doula recommends waiting as long as an hour or an hour and a half for the placenta to come out and then cutting the cord. She says it is important for the baby to be lower that the placenta before it comes out so there can be effective blood flow.
The article also explains that the reason hospitals cut the cord immediately is out of habit from a time when most women were unconscious when they were giving birth and that doctors did not want the anesthetic to get into the baby through the cord. It also talks about the fact that when the cutting is delayed the blood in the placenta (up to 40% of the baby’s blood) will go into the baby and shrink the size of the placenta making it easier for it to come out faster and prevent more bleeding from the mother.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
HW # 40 - Insights from Book - Part 3
- Hey – Thanks for writing Pushed. Your argument that women do not have enough say
about what happens to them when they are giving birth did make me think about how
our society seems often to be corrupting what is supposed to be a natural event for the convenience and legal protection of health professionals.
- Really! You think so? I’m impressed that someone as young as you and who, if you pardon me for saying so, probably won’t have the experience of birth yourself would
be that interested. What parts stood out for you?
- Well, if I’m honest, it was an assigned reading project as part of a course I’m taking at School of the Future. I remember the last part the best, which is all about your advocacy for midwives and home births.
You make the point that midwives went out of favor in the U.S. in the 1930s because of medical reports that seemed to blame them unfairly for deaths in childbirth. Obstetricians had campaigns against midwives even in the 80s with bumper stickers that said “Home Deliveries Are for Pizza.” So the new generation of midwives had to start from scratch you say because there weren’t any around to learn from. Then you tell the story of Cynthia Caillagh who is the hero, who gets falsely accused of causing a woman's death in childbirth, and then gets her reputation back at the end. It’s interesting that she had a Cherokee grandfather who told her that she was fated to be a midwife even though she was really smart and was studying pre-med when she was 16.
Cynthia trains with a “traditional Cherokee midwife" for two years. Caillagh says on page 219: “She learned her skills from another midwife, who learned her skills from a midwife.. Knowledge was handed down, midwife to midwife.” This leads to your saying that over 33 years she “attended 2500 births.” This woman is a pro with special skills who is called in by other midwives because she can successfully treat even serious conditions with special diets and with herbs.
Then Cynthia is called by Julia Peters to help with her birth. We already know that Julia is going to die and that Cynthia is going to be accused of causing her death, but there is still suspense to find out what actually happened. Then we find out there is a villain in the story, Marcella Ferro, the state of Virginia's chief medical examiner, who is part of a coverup of the facts of the case and the campaign to blame the midwife. Then on page 245 you say, “On May 5, 2000, Caillagh pleaded guilty to practice of midwifery without a license, to practice of medicine without a license, and to 'abuse and neglect of an incapacitated adult.'” Now I am even more into this story and pretty angry. The idea that Cynthia abused or neglected Julia is a very bad joke.
Even though Cynthia gets off and Virginia declares “Midwives’ Day” the day after she is let go, the reader is still mad about her treatment. What Cynthia says to you on page 248 after her whole experience of having been arrested and accused as a criminal seems to be the main point of the whole book: "To truly give birth you have to surrender to the process of birth, which is to suspend a conscious awareness. You must trust the instinctive internal self. And I think we’ve come upon a generation of women who don’t know what that internal trust looks like. I think there will come a time when we will remember or will rediscover… the intrinsic value of birth under one’s own steam.”
Of course I’m a guy so what do I know about all this?
- I’m glad you got so much out of my book. How could it have been better?
- Again, if I’m honest, I found a lot of it hard to read. The Cynthia story was the one that I read without being bored at all. Not to say that all your facts and figures and histories of policies aren’t important. They are just hard to read about unless you are a health professional or pregnant with your second child and don’t want to have another cesarean section. But if I become a dad one day, you’ve definitely made me understand more about what a mother has to go through and hopefully I would be more helpful.
about what happens to them when they are giving birth did make me think about how
our society seems often to be corrupting what is supposed to be a natural event for the convenience and legal protection of health professionals.
- Really! You think so? I’m impressed that someone as young as you and who, if you pardon me for saying so, probably won’t have the experience of birth yourself would
be that interested. What parts stood out for you?
- Well, if I’m honest, it was an assigned reading project as part of a course I’m taking at School of the Future. I remember the last part the best, which is all about your advocacy for midwives and home births.
You make the point that midwives went out of favor in the U.S. in the 1930s because of medical reports that seemed to blame them unfairly for deaths in childbirth. Obstetricians had campaigns against midwives even in the 80s with bumper stickers that said “Home Deliveries Are for Pizza.” So the new generation of midwives had to start from scratch you say because there weren’t any around to learn from. Then you tell the story of Cynthia Caillagh who is the hero, who gets falsely accused of causing a woman's death in childbirth, and then gets her reputation back at the end. It’s interesting that she had a Cherokee grandfather who told her that she was fated to be a midwife even though she was really smart and was studying pre-med when she was 16.
Cynthia trains with a “traditional Cherokee midwife" for two years. Caillagh says on page 219: “She learned her skills from another midwife, who learned her skills from a midwife.. Knowledge was handed down, midwife to midwife.” This leads to your saying that over 33 years she “attended 2500 births.” This woman is a pro with special skills who is called in by other midwives because she can successfully treat even serious conditions with special diets and with herbs.
Then Cynthia is called by Julia Peters to help with her birth. We already know that Julia is going to die and that Cynthia is going to be accused of causing her death, but there is still suspense to find out what actually happened. Then we find out there is a villain in the story, Marcella Ferro, the state of Virginia's chief medical examiner, who is part of a coverup of the facts of the case and the campaign to blame the midwife. Then on page 245 you say, “On May 5, 2000, Caillagh pleaded guilty to practice of midwifery without a license, to practice of medicine without a license, and to 'abuse and neglect of an incapacitated adult.'” Now I am even more into this story and pretty angry. The idea that Cynthia abused or neglected Julia is a very bad joke.
Even though Cynthia gets off and Virginia declares “Midwives’ Day” the day after she is let go, the reader is still mad about her treatment. What Cynthia says to you on page 248 after her whole experience of having been arrested and accused as a criminal seems to be the main point of the whole book: "To truly give birth you have to surrender to the process of birth, which is to suspend a conscious awareness. You must trust the instinctive internal self. And I think we’ve come upon a generation of women who don’t know what that internal trust looks like. I think there will come a time when we will remember or will rediscover… the intrinsic value of birth under one’s own steam.”
Of course I’m a guy so what do I know about all this?
- I’m glad you got so much out of my book. How could it have been better?
- Again, if I’m honest, I found a lot of it hard to read. The Cynthia story was the one that I read without being bored at all. Not to say that all your facts and figures and histories of policies aren’t important. They are just hard to read about unless you are a health professional or pregnant with your second child and don’t want to have another cesarean section. But if I become a dad one day, you’ve definitely made me understand more about what a mother has to go through and hopefully I would be more helpful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)