Pregnancy loss and grief: keep it under wraps?

Every once in a while, the dark, sick nature of the human race hits me: lately, it's been in comments both about the Duggars announcing their latest pregnancy, and then in the sad news that they had lost their precious child. The talons come out, of course, and people basically find a nice way of saying, "They deserved it!" Barf. 
Judging from some of the comments I've read, I'd say hate is the only word to describe some of them. Thinly-veiled at times, yes; but still hate, all the same. Then when I read an article about how they openly shared very touching, heartfelt photos taken after their baby had died, I saw even more hate and disdain.

"Disturbing" and "grotesque" were some of the words used. But as someone bluntly put it, "It's not like they posted pics of a bloody mess." Some comments are so utterly inappropriate - and made in all seriousness, I think - that I don't dare post them. And yet, on the TMZ site where the photo ran, this (see left) was in another set of photos on the sidebar. What kind of world do we live in where the above photo is "disturbing" and the other one is a-okay? I do not get this.

I've had two people on Facebook tell me that acquaintances actually unfriended them and stopped reading blog posts when they chose to open up about their experiences. Seriously?! I felt chills when I read this and couldn't imagine responding so coldly and callously about something like that.

A few years ago I caught up with my friend Em on Facebook and was delighted to hear from her after so many years. I was equally bummed, and felt sad and guilty, that I had no idea what she had experienced, that I wasn't there for her. I couldn't imagine the pain and grief she went through, in addition to the problems she already manages to deal with in her day-to-day struggles with bipolar disorder. Em also told me that another "friend" told her the same thing two months after her own pregnancy loss - that she was a "dweller" and criticized her for being so open about it. So when that "friend" ended up miscarrying twins, Em thought it would be a good chance to help her be more open with her feelings and emotions. Wrong.

Years ago, before I ever had kids, I was friends with a coworker who ended up giving birth prematurely to a baby that had a severe heart defect. Open heart surgery ensued, and an overbearing mother-in-law who accused her of doing something to cause this didn't help. I was appalled that this woman could be so heartless at a time when her daughter-in-law needed support, love and encouragement the most. In a crazy twist of fate, my coworker's brother and his wife lost their baby when she was six months pregnant to a heart defect as well.

Her hospital decided they weren't sure how staff would handle the birth of this stillborn baby, so they sent her an hour away to another hospital. At the time, and still, really - I can't understand why they did that. It wasn't like she had aborted her child, or done anything wrong to cause this to happen. Once they delivered the child, photos were reluctantly taken, which would appear gruesome to some, but were all she had at the time. I wasn't a mother yet, had no real idea what she was dealing with, when I saw her going about her business one day while the photo of her daughter lay on the table, out in the open. I only caught a glimpse of it, but rather than say something or react, I figured that was her way of dealing with it and just said hello and moved on. What else can you say?

I knew someone else, who, when she gave birth in the 1970s, was not even able to hold or see - or even know the sex of - her baby that was stillborn at around six months. I thought how horrible that was, to not even know, and couldn't imagine what kind of grief process she was still grappling with, several decades later. Who are they to decide how this mother grieves her child?

Several readers shared that they had been unfriended, had people stop reading their blog, even send hate mail - because they had shared their experience and grief so publicly. It's like saying, "I don't want to hear what you have to say about your hurting and loss. Get over it," and giving a big cyber middle finger to someone who is in pain and wants to grieve differently than someone else does. When you want to talk about it, they shut you out, shut you off, and effectively tell you, "You know what? I don't care, I can't care, because it makes me too uncomfortable to deal with this." 


Although I've never personally miscarried, I know the words most women who have least like to hear is "It was for the best," or "it just wasn't meant to be." It may be that these people mean well and don't know what else to say, or it just comes out wrong. But at least they're saying something - instead of tuning you out and getting mad when you want to share your feelings. Saying those things could be a lot worse - like simply severing contact with someone who is reaching out. By being shut down like that, it's like you're  not allowed to grieve. Like somehow in our minds, it's not really a baby unless it's full term and comes into the world screaming, pink and "healthy."

Jaime miscarried her first child two years ago, and she still finds it difficult to talk about. She says that saying nothing at all is better than "It was for the best," which she thinks kind of trivializes it and makes it sound like "no big deal." She writes, "I totally agree that most people are trying to be supportive and just aren't sure how. My best friend sat with me (over the phone cause she is 1,000 miles away) and let me vent and cry and prayed with and for me without saying 'It will be alright' or anything. That was and is, in my opinion, the best thing you can do for a person."

It certainly turns that "At least you have a healthy baby!" argument on its ear, doesn't it? As if to say, Well, it's supposed to turn out that way, but if it doesn't we don't want to hear about it. People don't seem to be able to handle it if that baby isn't healthy - then what? Well, we can't talk about that. Maybe it's a deeply-seated idea that there must have been something the mom did wrong for it to happen; or that if the pregnancy wasn't far enough along, surely she has nothing to grieve, perhaps.

I honestly wonder sometimes if our culture's in-your-face attitude about abortion is another reason people are often reluctant to talk about pregnancy loss - it puts a face to that ultrasound of a baby that is, often times, fully formed even though they are nowhere near ready to be born. It presents a confusing, dual reality for some, I think, that it definitely is more than a "ball of cells," or the suspension of disbelief that this is, was, a living little person. The idea that for some, if you don't come home with a baby in your hands that somehow, it never happened, isn't worth dwelling on because it is a life prematurely halted and therefore somehow not worthy of celebrating.

While the Duggars are in the spotlight, I think we can all learn from their experiences and trials, and I hope these wonderful photos will be a vehicle for women to open up, should they choose to, about their pregnancy loss. Many women who had suffered losses also attended the funeral - no doubt as a show of support, but perhaps also in a way to acknowledge and memorialize their own lost babies.

The Duggars' choice to memorialize their child this way is nothing new - not more than a century ago that's what people did: took pictures of dead relatives (even propped up in a casket) to remember them and celebrate their lives. What people find most grotesque about these pictures is that it puts into perspective the potential for a human life, even one so small, that I think most people would just rather not think about and pretend doesn't exist, doesn't happen.

I think there are many, many silently grieving mothers who would beg to differ.

More reading:
Duggar pictures of dead baby at memorial raise ridiculous reactions 
Becoming Sarah blog - a mother writes about her home, family and healing from loss

Michelle Duggar - Pregnant again!

It's positive!

So, the Duggars are expecting their 20th child. Wow (she says with a glazed-over expression...)

It's not that I'm not excited for them; in fact, I think that if that's what they want, great! I'm just waiting for more nasty comments to fly, since it seems that no one has anything nice to say about this family.

Every time they announce a pregnancy, more myths, rumors and stupidity surface. It's things like this that just further ignite controversy over a woman's uterus, I think - the old idea that when you're pregnant, you're not thinking rationally and therefore that gives others - including complete strangers - the right to make decisions for you, make statements about your moral character, mental status, financial situation, family size and physical health.

I really think the biggest cause of vitriol is because fewer people have larger families anymore. That's it. Not that they're "killing the planet" by single-handedly overpopulating it, but because they have all those kids and are well-adjusted and appear to be reasonably sane. Because no one else wants more children, surely these people shouldn't either, and by all rights should be criticized for daring to think outside the box. Quiverfull movement aside, no one can understand why you'd want "more mouths to feed" and will criticize and label you, no matter what religious persuasion you happen to be.

Case in point - there is a large family (I think at last count they were on child #9) floating around town, the mother sort of dressed in Bohemian style, with the most beautiful hair. Her many daughters, all while maintaining their own sort of individual eclectic style, have long hair like hers, and therefore they are quite recognizable even from a distance. I've been seeing this family - in the grocery store, at the library - where mom usually has the youngest in a sling and is happily tooling around with her homeschooled bunch. No one is freaking out, yelling or fighting and everyone looks happy and well-adjusted, despite the fact that the oldest will often be seen holding one of her many baby siblings and looking totally okay with that. I have on many occasions wanted to stop her and just say, "I think you have an awesomely beautiful family!" and photograph them in all their splendor. I thought about this the last time I saw them, as I was out for a morning walk and noticed them up ahead of me on the sidewalk. I was sort of stalking them, I guess, admiring how they plodded through town like the von Trapp family.

I remember at one point hearing rather disparaging comments about them from my neighbor, who said something like "They all sit up front at mass" with an eyeroll, like they are the poster children for stereotypically dutiful Catholicism. Why the religious reference? I thought. Maybe she just wants that many kids, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I get so sick of the "Oh, the perfect family and you're done!" crap; the bullying, both overt and subtle, that goes on when someone decides to have more children than what our culture deems "necessary." And that's exactly what it is: bullying. We as a society are so set against it and want to teach each other how to love, respect, and all that crap - yet the minute we see someone with more than the prerequisite number of kids coming our way, we immediately snap to judgment. There is such negative bias against larger families, even those with far fewer than 20 kids, because we are now living in a "two-kid world." Anything more than that is often considered a burden or an inconvenience.

An editorial recently ran in Shine magazine about a woman who is childless by choice, and wants her friends, family and strangers to stop asking about when she's having kids, especially now that the population toll has reached 7 billion. Great - I can respect your choice and think if you don't want kids, don't have them. Do the responsible thing and go to great lengths to protect yourself from pregnancy; I wish everyone could be as responsible as that. But some of the comments were, as they usually are, disgusting - implying that people who wanted kids were stupid breeders and totally ignorant.

I find some of the comments about Michelle Duggar, though, as ignorant as some of the her harshest critics say she is - worrying about her pre-eclampsia, birth defects, leaving her children motherless, blah blah blah. You stand just as much chance of having a child with birth defects at age 20 as Michelle Duggar; statistically more women have children with Down Syndrome at a younger age, even though the risks of it go up after age 35.

A childless friend commented on the Duggar story and remarked that 'she didn't even carry the last baby to term.' Perhaps, but that almost makes it sound like she had an abortion. And it's not like all of her children were premature; her premature baby was no different than any of the millions of others born in this country every year, for various reasons - it's just that we heard more about it because of the media's focus. Should that be a reason for her to stop having children? I have a friend who has three children and had complicated pregnancies and pre-term births every time. Does that mean she shouldn't have any more?

With the current crisis of forced abortions in China, why are we worrying about this? When a family can stay together, under one roof and raise a family without outside assistance - not to mention they can raise them to be loving, conscientious and productive members of society - who are we to criticize when in other parts of the world there are women who are forced by their own government to undergo abortions when they want to be pregnant and have a family? And even if you aren't financially stable, does that mean you have no right to have a family?

Bottom line: Reproductive rights don't end with abortion. Everyone is so concerned about Michelle Duggar's health, which is great - but something tells me she has it under control. She has support from her OB, which is amazing, especially considering the overwhelming lack of support some OBs seem notorious for. When you start invoking China's horrible one-child policy and saying things like "Remove her fallopian tubes!" you are still attacking her basic human rights.

Why I Think People Hate the Duggars

So. Michelle and husband Jim Bob have welcomed their 19th child, a daughter, into the world. Sadly the baby is premature, but stands a nearly 85 percent chance of recovering fully, which I hope she does. Every time I read a story about these people, it makes my blood boil. Not because of them, or what their beliefs are, etc. etc. but because of the nasty, irritating comments people leave with these articles. Just horrible hatred, mostly. Idiocy cloaked in comments like "think of what it's doing to the environment," or "God gave her a brain," blah blah blah. Yeah, whatever. I'm sure Michelle Duggar doesn't wake up every morning and suddenly realize, "Hey, I have 19 children!" I'm sure she's thought of all that crap before. Sometimes it's hard to put your finger on just WHAT people have a problem with. Some say that with each child, they are posing more risks to the mother and her baby. Yes, that's true. But pregnancy can be a risk to anyone, regardless of age. (Imagine, then, if they'd known she did a VBAC - my goodness, the comments then! *sarcasm*) Women who are perfectly healthy can go on to have disabled, sickly children, miscarry, or have serious problems in pregnancy. And with all the women over 40 running around pregnant with multiples, I don't hear a flood of negative comments about that - since they are considered a 'high-risk' group for problems. People who are sooooo concerned about her internal organs, child's health and safety, blah blah blah....where are these same people when a premature infant is admitted to the hospital after being born to healthy, young parents who have just had their first child? Other moronic comments I've heard: "They are over-populating the planet!" Yeah, and so is just about everyone else. Yet, at the same time, people *are* dying! Novel idea, huh? "They are contributing to greenhouse gases/increasing their carbon footprint!" Supposedly, I've heard the Duggars lead a pretty "green" lifestyle, which is a term that I personally detest. They may do it to cut down on trash in their household, or to get money from recycled goods to offset their expenses; who knows. As one commenter wisely said, though, who's to say that one of their children couldn't solve the "problem" of "global warming"? Be the next president? Nobel Peace Prize winner? Curer of cancer? Hmm...kind of makes you think. "A uterus isn't a clown car!" OK, this one came from, among others, a friend of mine, so I'll stop short in calling her 'moronic.' However, I still think that it's Michelle's uterus, not ours, so she can do with it what she wants. Not that long ago, women routinely had large families. And dealt with it. Before the age of the internet, cable television, talking toys and yes, birth control, women had their kids - lots of 'em - and made do with what they had. They didn't live a lifestyle of expensive family vacations, second homes and three cars (unless they were insanely wealthy, I'm guessing) because they spent that money on their children, and were okay with that. I'm guessing that if Michelle Duggar were on her 19th abortion instead of pregnancy, people would be saying "It's her body." Because, after all, if you have more than 2.5 children, you're considered "brave," or an anomaly, at best. I think most people who think so negatively of the Duggars really can't put their finger on why they dislike them so much, either. But if hard-pressed -- like, if they were waterboarded in a room with terrorists -- I think they'd probably admit they don't like them because of certain things about their lifestyle. Like: • They're Christians! Yes, they do believe in God, and they live their lives as such. How dare they actually a) profess their love of Christ?! and b) actually mean it!? You mean Christians are really supposed to do that, instead of just say, "Yeah, I'm a Christian. I believe God exists!" *insert deep sigh here* So that makes them the perfect target for hate, and labeled as a bunch of nuts, all wrapped up into one convenient package. Can you imagine, allowing God to let you know when it's time to stop having kids?! (Much to my husband's chagrin, I believe in this, too, but I will say I'm not going to let God talk me into having 19. LOL) • They live debt-free. In these hard economic times, it's hard for people to get by. It seems it always is hard for people to get by, though, when they decide to spend their money on meaningless crap instead of invest wisely or save - this much seems true of any economic situation. The 'don't buy what you can't afford' mentality of our grandparents and great-grandparents is a dead philosophy, ushering in the 'buy it because it'll make you feel good, even though you don't really need it!' approach. Since the Duggars manage to live without debt, in a house big enough to comfortably hold all those people, in spite of hard economic times, it makes them even more hateable. Like the old Morrissey song says, "We hate it when our friends become successful." We despise seeing people succeed where most others have failed, and feel like because we're struggling, they should, too. How dare they?! In the end, I think people mostly detest them because they're different. Just like a group of chickens who peck a strange-looking bird until it dies, we mostly like to denigrate them because they do things a bit differently than the norm, like homeschool all their kids, raise a super-large family, and manage to turn out a nice, well-behaved bunch of (normal) kids. How can they get any alone time? They can't, just like I can't with my husband and I only have three kids. Some things, regardless of size and shape, are always the same.