The Edges of Life

When Wolf was small we noticed that he had an inclination toward violent play (as many little boys do). So we taught him the law of the jungle: one may only kill for two reasons, either for food, or to avoid being killed yourself. (This may have slightly backfired when, at five years old, he asked if we could please shoot--and eat--a songbird in the front yard, and I had to explain that it was too small to provide enough meat to be worth eating. He was terribly disappointed.) But I digress.

For the last two years we have been raising chickens. We are in it for the eggs, and we have quite a flock of happy ladies.

We knew that eventually they'd get too old to lay anymore, and we agreed from the start that when that time came we would kill them and eat them (or--since an old bird is tough and isn't great eating--put them in the crockpot to make soup or dog meals etc). However this last summer it became evident that one of our spring babies was growing up to be...not a girl. And so we had to face the prospect of slaughtering sooner than we had anticipated. I named him King Louie, because he strutted around, crowed a lot, and was destined to lose his head.

King Louie

(At this point you may be realizing that this post deals with slaughtering animals. If that bothers you feel free to stop reading. One photo shows blood but isn't graphic. I do discribe the process but it's not overly gory, and I share because the experience overall has been significant and poignant, so I hope you'll read on.)


We had no use for a roo. He eats food, he harrasses the ladies, we don't need fertilized eggs since we're eating them all anyway, and he doesn't need to defend the flock since we have that covered. So in October I sent a message to my friend who has butchered birds before, and asked if I could come over and she could teach me how. She was willing so we set a date.

Bear greeting the turkeys.

Hubby didn't happen to be available that weekend, and neither was Wolf, so I piled the younger boys into the truck and took them to my friend's house. She had a turkey that was destined for Thanksgiving dinner and the plan was to take care of Louie and her bird at the same time. Turkeys are big and strong and have to be wrestled a bit, so she'd invited another friend (also with experience) to come and help. All of us had young kids there, and we invited them to watch or help if they wanted to, but also told them that they didn't have to if they didn't want to. I feel like it's healthy to be part of the process though if you're going to be a meat eater, and to be conscientious of where our food comes from. (Bear opted to watch us kill the turkey and Eagle helped with plucking it.)

I was so glad that I slaughtered with these ladies though, because the first thing they both said to Louie as I got him out of the kennel was "thank you" and then I held him while one of them slit his throat, and as she did she was saying "thank you Louie" to him again.

It was a deeply respectful process. 

The place where we took Louie's life.

I somewhat expected to have a moment where I wanted to back out, but I never did. I didn't wield the blades but I helped hold both birds, helped with the plucking, and I cleaned out Louie's insides. We saved some of the feathers from both birds too--I don't know what I want to do with them but they are beautiful and I feel strongly about utilizing as many parts as we can. One of the ladies kept commenting about how clean Louie was so that made me feel pretty good about how we keep our flock. :)

It wasn't until afterward, when I was packing up and getting ready to come home, that I realized that Samhain was that weekend. That's the old observance of final harvest. (There's a grain harvest observance in August, a fruits/vegetables harvest observance in September, and the November observance is for harvesting animals.) I'm sure you know that Halloween has origins in the traditions about Nov 1 being the new year, and the old year dies on the 31st which is why the veil is thin between life and death and ghosts roam etc. Dia De Los Muertos as well as other ancestor-remembering traditions are celebrated at this time, and it all ties into the recognition of death as part of life, which I think is important even if I've never really been into any of those celebrations. This year we ate Louie on that day. It seemed fitting.

 ~~~~~~~~~

But the story isn't over. Because literally the night that I got home from killing Louie, I heard a crow from the coop.

And that's when we realized there was another roo.

I have to explain a bigger story here. We bought chicks in the spring from a local farm store. But in the summer one of our adult hens (from the year before) got broody. So we got her a few fertilized eggs to sit on, and she hatched three babies. So these babies were four months younger than the spring ones, hadn't reached their adult appearance yet, and thus we hadn't realized that one of them was a roo.

Until we took Louie out of the coop, and realized that he hadn't been the only one crowing.

But back to the broody hen: I was checking on her daily, and I was the first to see the tiny fluffy babies when they hatched. I was even there during one of the hatchings--I watched the mama turn this way and that, continually shifting her weight and position and slowly turning a full circle until a third little voice started cheeping with the other two. It was the first time I had ever been present for a non-human birth, and I felt something similar to the births of my siblings or children.

The longer I live, the more I realize that the edges of life are sacred, on both sides.

The transition between life and non-life is an important time, regardless of what you believe is before and/or after it. And regardless of whether the being involved is human.

We gave Chanticleer time to reach maturity of course, but this week his time was up. I had hoped to wait until the snow melted so that we could do it outside, but we've had a lot of snow this winter and finally we decided to just do it in the garage.

Chanticleer

This time it was just myself and Hubby. I opened the door of the little kennel we'd put him in and carefully grabbed his feet with one hand and around his body with the other. He flapped and wiggled a bit, but quickly calmed. I adjusted my grip to make sure it was secure.
Since Hubby hadn't done it before, he asked to hold the bird and have me wield the knife. I had expected this, and had had several months to anticipate doing it, but in the process of getting Chanticleer out some part of me had thought and hoped that maybe it wouldn't be me.

Because here is the thing about taking a life: it is easier to do if you can distance yourself from what you are doing (indeed, the farm kills I had seen in my youth seemed to be of this sort). I certainly understand the inclination to dissociate onself from the act of taking a life. But I think that it is important--even vital--to get ones head INTO the space of what is happening, rather than out of it. The end of a sentient life--as with the beginning of one--should be a mindful thing. 

And it was. 

As my husband held Chanticleer's body and feet, I pulled our sharpest knife from its sheath and circled around to face the bird. I gently took his head in my hand, feeling his neck to make sure I would make my cut at the right place. I looked him in the eye. He looked at me for a moment, and then his eye slid shut, as though he knew what was coming; as though he were resigned to it, and knew that he was filling the measure of his creation. I pulled the knife across his neck quick and deep. His death was almost instant.
We quickly tipped him in a large bucket as he bled out, continuing to hold him as his body spasmed a few times. It's disconcerting to feel a body move when you know it's dead, and I had the fleeting fear that perhaps I hadn't done my job right and he was still alive and suffering... But he was not. I did my job properly.

And that is my biggest takeaway from all of this: how to do the job properly. It's not that I've learned how to hold a bird to kill it, or where to put the knife, or that I've learned how to make sure the blood doesn't make a mess, or that I know how to pluck it quickly and cleanly and how to get the guts out. I think the most important lesson in all of this is that life matters, and that whether I am ushering someone into it or out of it, I will always do it with mindfulness and respect for the life in question.

Making Tallow Candles--part 1 (rendering the tallow)

We bought a half a beef last fall. They asked if we wanted the scraps, and since I believe in using every part of the animal (since it died for us, I don't want to waste any part of its life), we said yes.
I surmised that the 'scraps' would be soup bones and the like.
I was wrong.
We got a box full of, well, scraps. There was some bone (which did go to make stock of course), but most of it was fat. Cows are fatty animals in case you didn't know or have forgotten (and there is nothing like a whole box full of fat to make sure that I will never ever forget!)

So what does one do with a whole bunch of cow fat? Well render it into tallow and make candles of course!

First, all that fat/gristle/unknown stuff has to be chopped into little pieces  (you can see the box there behind my bowl of bits--it was pretty full).

Second, put the bits in a big pan with some water, and boil for a loooong time until all the fat becomes liquid (keep an eye on it, because the water will boil off and then things get ugly and stinky and just generally bad...)

Pour the contents of the pan out through a strainer. BE CAREFUL, THIS STUFF IS REALLY HOT!! The things I read recommended straining twice, which I did (once with a bigger-hole metal colander and then once through a fine-mesh strainer). Once it is well strained, pour the remaining liquid--which will be murky--into a dish to separate and cool. The water and fat will separate and the fat will rise to the top and solidify. Give it at least a few hours, I have had the best results with letting it go overnight. (I put it in bread pans here, the square shape made it easier to get the tallow block out later.)

Once the tallow is solid, use a table knife to separate the tallow from the edge of the container. Dump out the water into the toilet. (The bits of tallow will clog up your sink drains, it has to go in the toilet!!) Set out the tallow to dry/drain (I put it on paper towels). It usually seems to have some gunk along it where it bordered the water, so I use the table knife to scrape that scuzzy part off and put it in the garbage or toilet.

I like to let it air out for at least a few hours before using it. If you do not have immediate plans for it, put it in a bag in the freezer.

Coming next: part 2, making the candles!!

Razor Clams

A couple of weeks ago we had a nice low tide, so we went clamming.

What the photos don't reveal is that this walk across the 'beach' is actually walking through an inch or two of water...the whole way...
Oh, wait, that doesn't give an idea of how far out it really was.
Let's try without the zoom:
(yes, they are out there, right in the center...you can kinda see Wolf's red coat and that big rock they were next to...)

So I took the littles back off the beach and we played by the river mouth instead.

Bear threw rocks at the water (he didn't want to walk on the wet sand, preferring to stay on the dry rocks, so he wouldn't get close enough to the water to actually throw rocks IN the water...so he just threw them AT the water).
Eagle chewed on rocks and got dirty.
I got my toes into the earth... Ahhhhhh... (Bear is a hardcore barefooter, and since my shoes were wet from crossing the beach I joined him.)

And Wolf and Hubby dug us a bunch of razor clams. (Which, if you want to eat razor clams, you boil then for 10 seconds then drop them in ice water--that opens them up and also kills them pretty humanely--it's better than trying to cut them up without boiling them!)


For the record, I didn't like clams before, and now that I've gutted and carved a few dozen clams, I have no intention of ever eating one again. (Did you know they poop through their foot?!) Hubby and Wolf can have them all. But I guess that's ok, because they caught them.

Thank You Sockeye

I have said before that I believe in sustainable eating--in only taking what we can (will) use, and then in using all the parts of the animal (or, in making sure that all the parts are used, even if we don't use them all personally). I also believe in conscientious eating--that is to say, I believe in being grateful not just to the Lord for providing the food, but also to the animal who gave his life for our sustenance. Ancient tribes would give verbal thanks to the animal when they killed it, and I think that is a tradition worth remembering.
While I have not been present for the actual deaths of the 27 sockeye (red) and 2 pink salmon that Hubby has brought home this summer, I have done some of the cleaning and most of the filleting. I have tried to treat each fish with respect. To observe their beauty, to cut them carefully and not waste any meat. The guts and heads and other parts we don't use we try to either throw into the river at the time they are caught, or use for bait or throw back to the river or sea later on. We smoke or freeze the meat with the skin on, but since we don't eat most of the skin (Wolf likes to eat it sometimes), we give that to our dog. As I said, we try to respect the animal, and to waste no part of the life he gave to us.
I asked Hubby to take some pictures of a particularly big and beautiful fish so that I could document this side of our lives.
Look how big this guy is! Wash him off (Hubby guts them on site when he catches them).


Isn't he beautiful? I mean, he's a fish, and yeah he's a little slimy, but the colors on their heads and backs are so beautiful.
Take off the head, right behind the first fin (cutting as close to the fin as possible, so as not to waste meat). I find it hard to make that first cut--probably because that eye is looking back at me. But taking off the head (pardon the expression) dehumanizes the fish enough that I can do the rest. It is HARD for me to slice these guys open. Hard to think that we took a life. Sure, I know this was a spawning salmon and that it would have died within another week or so anyway, but still, we're responsible for his death, however slight it was in it's prematurity. That responsibility keeps me determined to use every bit of the meat.
Two very fat salmon fillets. As I'm taking the meat off the bones I often end up with little bits that didn't slice nicely--little scraps and bits. (I had a lot of those bits at first, I don't make so many now.) I collect all those together as well, and when I have a couple of cups I chop them up and use them to make salmon burgers or quiche or something like that.
I took a life to sustain my own; I must not waste it.

Why I'm NOT Vegetarian

Several times someone (upon learning that I care about nutrition and am trying to eat a healthy and natural diet), has been surprised to learn that I am not vegetarian. So today I thought I'd explain why that is.
It is not because I like meat and am just unwilling to give it up. That reason might apply for my Hubby, but not for me. I don't like beef much. I rarely eat pig products (even though I like pork) because they give me gas. I do like chicken, but I don't care for turkey or goose. Lamb is pretty strong and I'm not fond of it either. Ironically, given that I live on the coast of Alaska, I really don't like fish and I won't touch any other seafood.
We do not eat as much meat as the SAD ("Standard American Diet"). Rather than a chicken breast per person, I use 1 or 2 breasts (or thighs) cut up and mixed in with the pasta or rice or whatever. I cut steaks in half, and even roasts--I cut it in half before bringing it to the table, and one half goes straight into the fridge to be cut up for use in other meals such as stew or stroganoff. Sure, sometimes we have burgers or ribs or some other meat-centric meal, but they are the exception rather than the rule. I believe that meat is part of a healthy diet, but not the basis of it.

But yes we do eat meat, and will continue to do so.

From a geographic and environmental standpoint, we live in a cold climate with a short growing season. Fresh produce is not as readily available as in warmer places. The higher fat content of meats, including the omega 3s of fish, help support our systems through long cold winters with little sunlight. If we wanted to be vegetarians we would have to buy food that was almost all shipped great distances, and that is not sustainable (nor is it economical, nor is it as healthy as eating fresh local foods).

From a genetic standpoint, our ancesters were all northern european (mostly scandinavian), meaning that they adapted to live in a climate similar to the one we have here in Alaska. If their genetic makeup adapted to that regional diet (which included meat), then it seems that our genetic makeup would also thrive on that same diet.

From a physiological standpoint, our bodies are not constructed the same as vegetarian mammals--we have much shorter digestive tracts for one thing. They are not as short as the average carnivore either though, because we are omnivores. Yes, most of our teeth (the 'choppers' in front and the molars in back) are plant-eater teeth. However, we also have those four corner cainines--meat-eating teeth. Considering the ratio of meat teeth to plant teeth, I certainly believe that meat should be a small part of our diet...but I think the simple fact that we have meat teeth is a clear indication that meat does still have a place in the human diet.

From a religious standpoint, we have The Word of Wisdom, the dietary policy which makes us teetotalers and non-coffee drinkers, but also includes a long list of "dos" with all of the "do nots." It talks about eating foods in season, and using all foods with gratitude and thanksgiving. It also says that it is appropriate to use meat sparingly, but especially to use it in times of winter, or cold, or famine. Considering that I live in a cold place with a long winter, there is the final reason why I am not--and am not considering becoming--vegetarian.

A "Crunchy" Mama

(I started this post a looong time ago, then I got morning sick, then I didn't get around to finishing it...but I still wanted to post it so here goes!)


So, I labeled myself as a crunchy mama, then Jenn over at BabyMakinMachine asked me what it meant, so I tried to explain, and it led to her writing this post in which she pondered crunchiness and whether it was for her. That post then led to nearly 50 comments (most of them lengthy and some of them quite heated)... and I concluded that I was gonna just lay it all out.
I think Jenn put it quite fairly when she suggested that perhaps there's a middle level, somewhere between 'crunchy' and 'soggy' (or mainstream) which might be called 'chewy.' I find myself chewy in a number of things, because I'm not nearly so far off the beaten path as many of my uber-crunchy friends. On the other hand, I'm pretty far off the beaten path!

My reasons for being crunchy (or chewy) come from one main thing, and that is that I believe in questioning the status quo, and doing my own research about things, so that I can make my own decisions about what is best for me and my family. Again and again I discover that mainstream practices were born of the greedy side of capitalism (not that capitalism is evil in and of itself, but the associated greediness certainly is...) and that the things that really seem best are falling into this category called "crunchy." Here are my few basic tenets:

1. I believe in not messing with the way God made things.
2. I believe that Godmade is better than manmade, and should be utilized if available.
3. I believe in avoiding unnecessary interventions/chemicals
4. I believe in respecting people and the Earth.
5. I believe in logic
6. I believe in making things cheap, easy, and comfortable unless there's a good reason not to (you got it folks, I'm lazy!).

So what does this mean?

I believe in not messing with the way God made things

• My body gives me signs every month of what is going on with my fertility, so I observe them and take notes rather than trying to control or change them.
• My body makes milk for my baby, therefore, I should give it to the baby.
• God made baby boys with foreskins. End of discussion.
• If you're gonna drink cow milk (which is actually made for baby cows you know), then at least drink it whole, or even raw. Its vitamins are fat-soluable, so if you want the nutritive benefits of it, you'd better be getting the fat with it. Oh, and the low/no-fat versions have petroleum in them, just FYI.
• God made some people women, and some people men, and then He gave them each bodies built to fulfill certain roles, therefore I birth and nurture children and keep our home, while my husband provides for and protects our family.

I believe that Godmade is better than manmade

• So infant formula is only for emergencies, not for the average baby.
• Food out of the dirt or off a tree = good, food out of a box = not so good.
• If there's an herb that fits the bill, then I don't want some chemically formulated pill. Ideally I'd like nothing at all.
• I think HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) is bad news...I'm trying to restrict it in our diet, though I doubt we'll manage to remove it entirely.
• Partially hydrogenated anything = evil
• I believe in butter. Margarine is the devil (also it tastes like BLECH).
• I've recently found that I vastly prefer natural fibers (cotton, wool, hemp, bamboo) over almost all of the synthetics. Especially now that Eagle seems to break out when he wears synthetics.
• I don't typically wear makeup--I wear the face God gave me.

I believe in avoiding unnecessary interventions and chemicals

• The vast majority of women's bodies can give birth without intervention, so they should be allowed to do so.
• If my child is exploring, I don't get in the way unless injury is imminent.
• If (older) kids disagree, I try to help them work it out, rather than stepping in and taking over.
• I think that antibiotics are making superbugs, so I don't use antibacterial soaps or products in my home, and would not seek (or take) a prescription for an antibiotic unless there were a good reason for it (such as post-surgery).
• I don't wear makeup (most of it is toxic to some degree)
• I don't use scented soaps/lotions/shampoos/detergents.

I believe in respecting people...

• I try to boycott companies that treat their employees badly (such as Walmart)
• My children do not call adults by their first names. If an adult is more than a few years older than myself *I* usually do not call them by their first name.
• I think it's offensive to do cosmetic surgery on an infant boy's private parts without his permission.
• I follow my infant's schedule, rather than demanding that he follow mine.
• I don't let a small infant cry. I don't let an older child cry for long.
• I try to be gentle and respectful in my parenting.
• I try to take care of myself by eating (relatively) well and dressing modestly
• If I can tell that my infant needs to poop, I often remove his diaper and hold him over the toilet. There's no reason to force him to sit in his own waste for even a moment if I can help it.

...and respecting the earth

• I try to support local farmers, and sustainable farming practices
• I recycle
• I buy second-hand if I can
• I re-use or re-purpose things because I don't throwing away good fabric/wood/etc
• I try to be minimalist
• I try to stock my kitchen (and my kids' toyboxes) with things that will last--things made from wood, metal, or glass.
• I use recycled packaging when I mail things
• I use cloth diapers, wipes, rags, etc. (I do use cloth pads, but this was a very secondary reason for it--the primary reason is below)

I believe in logic

• I make milk + baby is hungry = give the kid a boob!
• I need sleep + baby needs sleep + baby needs to eat during the night = let's all sleep in the same place
• Babies like to be held + mommy needs to get stuff done = babywearing
• Children learn by example, therefore I should be gentle with them if I want them to learn to be gentle with me or anyone else.
• I see the sense in some vaccines (though not all) but I also see the dangers...so the ones we get we get on a spread-out schedule.

I'm lazy, frugal, and like my comforts

• I use cloth pads and cloth diapers because fabric is more comfortable than plastic on tender parts.
• babywearing is cheaper and easier than strollers and carriers (and doesn't require smooth sidewalks, of which we have precious few here!)
• I re-use or re-purpose things because I don't want to spend the money to buy new ones.
• I don't wear makeup--I've got the face I've got and if you don't like it then don't look, I'm not going to paint it for anybody.

I'm sure there are other things, but this is what comes to mind off the top of my head. ☺

Come back tomorrow and hear about my "soggy side"

What we ♥ about cloth diapering

In honor of Valentine's Day, this week I am posting a few "why I love ____" lists. Starting today is cloth diapers--this was collected from the mamas on the etsy cloth diaper team--a list of why we (as cloth diaper makers) love using cloth diapers for our little ones. ("LilBees" is me)

We love...

• Knowing that my baby is comfortable in soft fabric rather than rough paper or sticky plastic. (LilBees)
• How soft they are on my babies bum. (PudderPals) 
• Two words: "Bamboo velour." If you've ever touched it you understand! (LilBees)
• That they aren't made of paper products ☺(Suzanne'sSpecialKids) 
• That they are not crinkly or smell like fake baby powder (WinkyDinks)
• That they don't smell like chemicals when they pee in cloth diapers. (LittleMooseDiapers)
• That I can use the same diaper over and over, even for multiple kids. (LilBees)
• That they are a conversation starter (WinkyDinks)
• How cute they are - its another part of their outfit (WinkyDinks) 
• How cute and fluffy it makes my little one's bum. (PudderPals)
• Having something cute on their buns ☺ Disposables are not cute... (3MonkeysClothDiapers)
• That I get to be creative and make whatever I think is cute into a butt cover to use over and over and over...(Chelory Boutique)
• Having a favorite diaper, and getting to use it over and over and over... (LilBees)
• Being able to pick and choose which cute item they'll be wearing on their bum! (LittleMooseDiapers)
• That they like their diapers and choose which one they want to wear next. (3MonkeysClothDiapers)
• That even though my diapers are OSFM (one-size-fits-most) the absorbency isn't. I can have light absorbency one day and then bump it up the next. (PudderPals)
• That it doesn't matter if the baby pees/poops mere seconds after I put on a new dipe because I can just toss it in the wash, I'm not out 50cents for 5 seconds of use. (LilBees)
• That since I have twins, can I just tell you how much money I have saved by cloth diapering???? (3MonkeysClothDiapers)
• That since I've had one or another in diapers for the last 3 years, with another one coming soon...all the money we've saved has allowed me to stay home with the children! (LittleMooseDiapers)
• That I don't ever run out of diapers! (PudderPals)
  
• That I don't have to plan ahead to make sure that I never run out of diapers...if I'm running low I just throw them in the wash. ( LilBees)
• That they can be made to look like real undies (Suzanne'sSpecialKids)
• That they can be completely customized for my special needs child (Suzanne'sSpecialKids)
• That they add a bit of "typical" to a special child's life ☺(Suzanne'sSpecialKids)
• That I have made my children's diapers with my own hands...there is a sense of independence and accomplishment in that. (LittleMooseDiapers)
• I am always super proud to say, yes I made that!! (3MonkeysClothDiapers)

WFMW: baby cradle cap solution

A lot of babies get cradle cap, which is more or less the same thing as dandruff--flaky skin in their hair (my babies seem to get it in their eyebrows as much as the crown of their heads, go figure!) When Bear was little, I remember having a conversation with another mom who said that her pediatrician recommended a dandruff shampoo for her baby's cradle cap. Well, my husband has a dandruff shampoo, and do you know what the active ingredient is?

Yup, coal tar. I don't know if all of them use the same thing, but this is a pretty high end shampoo, so I'm guessing that most dandruff shampoos have something at least that nasty. I don't want to put that on my baby's head, let alone in his eyebrows!! Especially considering that I don't even use soap on my babies' sensitive skin, but just bathe them with warm water and a washcloth.
Then I remembered that my mom had had a soft plastic brush that she always used to loosen the crud off the baby's head (again just using the gentlness of warm water). So I went hunting for one...I looked in every store in town (and I lived in a big town at the time!) and I was not able to find anything appropriate, so finally I figured out something else:

A soft bristle toothbrush.
I even labeled it so that nobody accidentally scrubs a toilet with it ☺

So that's what works for me! See more "works for me wednesdays" by clicking the icon below.

Oh yeah, we had a homebirth...

A couple of people commented that they thought I was planning a birth center birth, not a homebirth. It's true, at the beginning of this pregnancy I did talk about a birth center as my ideal. At the time it was. However, when we finally found out which city we were moving to, I discovered that the nearest birth center was 80 miles away (remember midwife K who arrived 10 minutes after the birth? She was from the birth center...) I actually considered going there but was hesitant about the distance particularly because my due date was in the wintertime and, well, this is Alaska! So I opted out of the birth center, which left me with either home or the hospital.
I didn't think that Hubby would be comfortable with home (since he wasn't last time), but I had heard such good things about the midwife here that I decided to meet her anyway. I also visited the L&D area of the local hospital, and actually it was quite nice: more birth center-like than I would have expected of a hospital, even in a pretty naturally-minded area. However I still just felt really good about midwife A. So I prayed about it--I told God that I liked the midwife and was feeling drawn to homebirth, but that I needed His go-ahead that this was an appropriate and safe choice for this birth. After all, the vast majority of births are safe at home, but occasionally one isn't, so I figured it made sense to get an ok from Someone who would know.
I continued to feel very peaceful about birthing at home, and as I started trying to visualize labor and birthing I always pictured myself at home (in the dark...see, I did know something!)
When I felt like I knew what I wanted, I talked with Hubby...I told him that I really liked the midwife, and that I wanted her to attend me at home, but that I needed him to be part of the choice, and to be comfortable with what we chose to do. He said that he "would be more comfortable at the hospital," but that he was "ok with home." So I started planning for a homebirth.
We basically adopted a "don't ask don't tell" policy about the homebirth plan though--we answered honestly if someone asked us (only a few people did), but otherwise we didn't volunteer the information. The reason for this was that we knew that some of our family members would worry a great deal over our choice, and we didn't want them to worry (nor to have to listen to their worries). So we simply waited until after Eagle was born and then called them and said "he's here, by the way, he was born at home...yes on purpose..." In the meantime, since we weren't telling our family our plans, it didn't seem appropriate to be telling the rest of the world either. So we didn't.
I used the term "midwife" here on my blog, but I guessed (and rightly) that many people would assume I was seeing a CNM who would attend me in a hospital or birth center. My mother and sister (both homebirthers themselves) saw the term "midwife" and assumed I was planning a homebirth, but I don't think anyone else did. ☺

At my 3-day postpartum home visit, Midwife A asked Hubby if he'd liked homebirth better than the hospital.
He said "yes."
☺

Eagle's Birth Story

I have a lot of thoughts and feelings that I want to put with this story, but it's taking me a while to get them all into words, and since the story part is actually fairly short, I decided to go ahead and post the facts and then I'll post the thoughtful part later on.


There is a standard which suggests that if mama has contractions that are one minute long, 5 minutes apart, and continue at that rate for an hour, then she is in active labor and should go to the hospital (or call the midwife). In the two weeks prior to Eagle's birth I achieved that status at least four different times, always in the evening. On each occasion, I thought hey, maybe this is finally it...but since the contractions never got closer together or more intense (and in fact always slowed when I laid down for bed, if not when I was snuggling in the kids) then I knew it was not really labor. After three days in a row of it however I did call my midwife just to let her know what was going on. I told her I felt a bit silly calling, because I knew this was not it, but I thought she should know that I was contracting a lot, and regularly. She said that probably my body was warming up, and that as soon as the baby's head engaged I would have a fairly fast labor. She encouraged me to do things that would help him engage (ie--drop down and put pressure on my cervix).

I spent two days doing belly lifts/hip tucks and hip circles (both on and off the ball) trying to get him to descend, but so far as I know he hadn't engaged when I went to bed on Wednesday (my due date). He may have started to engage though, because over the course of the evening I had a half dozen contractions that seemed different from the many previous ones. I can't explain how, they just seemed different... I had a gut feeling that I'd probably wake up in the middle of the night in labor, but since I'd had that feeling on several nights in the prior two weeks I didn't bother to say anything to Hubby, and just went to bed as normal.
Bear woke up around 3, so I got up to comfort him for a few minutes, and as I got back in my own bed I had a really uncomfortable contraction. Then 10 minutes later another--the kind where you think gosh, laying down is terrible, I have to move. 10 minutes later I had a third so I got out of bed to lean on the bathroom counter and do hip circles, and the contractions promptly switched to being 5 minutes apart. After all the false starts I decided to wait another 40 minutes to make sure they kept on consistently before I woke Hubby, but I knew they were going to.

Shortly after 4am I woke Hubby. I told him I was in labor and that I needed him to put up the pool. He didn't know yet that I'd been up for over an hour, and later admitted that he wondered if it was another false start and was very tempted to roll over and go back to sleep. But he got up and started puttering around. I felt terribly impatient at this point and started working on the pool myself--we had inflated it to about 80% two weeks prior so it was quick and easy to finish the job. I think my impatience in getting the pool out helped Hubby realize that I was not at all iffy on whether this was the real thing, and he quickly stepped in to get it done for me. As he was working on the pool he informed me that he was going to have to run in to his classroom briefly, as he'd been working on some things the afternoon before and would need to put them away if a substitute was coming in that day. (After two weeks of figuring that any day could be the day, I guess he had reached the "she's gonna be pregnant forever" state of mind too!) He said he would probably only be gone about 20 minutes, so as soon as he finished inflating the pool I told him to hurry and go because I knew I'd need him soon. We called the midwife to let her know that this was it, and she said to call her back as soon as anything changed and she would come right over. So Hubby left, and I took a shower, lit some candles, and started filling the pool.

While he was gone my contractions continued to be 5 minutes apart. After a little while, needing to convince myself that I was making progress, I decided to do an internal check on myself. I had tried this several times throughout the pregnancy, and especially during the final weeks. During pregnancy the cervix is very high and also tipped to the back, so I was never able to reach it very well (I was familiar with what it felt like when I'm not pregnant because I check it regularly as part of my fertility awareness, but pregnancy is a whole different ballgame!) I had discussed with my midwife how I couldn't feel it, and she said that the height combined with the softness of it in those late weeks was probably why. This time when I reached in though I could clearly feel it: I guessed I was around 3cm dilated and I could feel the sack of waters bulging. The sack is the coolest thing to feel--sortof slippery and slimy but also obviously very strong. I couldn't feel the baby's head behind it, just the squishy edge of the sack, but I knew he must be right there since I was dilating.
I started really focusing myself into the labor. The body can (and will) do the work of birthing pretty much on its own, if mama will just relax and let it do so; on the other hand, if mama will work with her body (as opposed to merely stepping aside for it) then the whole process can be all the more effective and efficient. Ina May Gaskin talks about "integrating" contractions so that you can move forward and into the next level. Birthing From Within teaches a similar notion when it encourages the mother to go into the center of each contraction. So as I leaned against the counter and circled my hips I repeated words like "down" and "center" and "deeper." In the prior couple of weeks I had mentally stumbled upon the image of a drop or stream of water coming down onto a pool and the waves of ripples radiating out from it--so I took that image (with the downward and outward motion) and replayed it in my head over and over.

As soon as Hubby got home (around 5am) my contractions became noticeably more intense. I really think my body was just waiting for him to get home before it allowed labor to progress. I was needing to concentrate enough that I couldn't time them myself anymore, but Hubby said they were still 5 minutes apart. They were stronger though, so we called the midwife. Since my water had not broken, I'd had no bloody show, and they were still 5 minutes apart, she said she'd be over soon but we all understood that she wasn't rushing. Hubby got a quick shower and I got into the pool.
Wow!
I had planned to labor in the water with Bear (although at the hospital they'd have me get out for the actual delivery), but labor had been so long that by the time we got to the hospital I was too tired to do anything but lay on the bed. This time I had had a nap the prior afternoon, plus gotten half a night's sleep prior to waking up in active labor--I was awake enough that I was far more conscious of everything that was going on (I was falling asleep between contractions at the end of Bear's labor). I also had enough energy this time to be upright and moving around, which I believe helped labor progress rapidly...although I think this would have been a faster and more intense labor regardless. In any case, warm water felt fantastic on my hard-working middle and back. I sat down in the water between contractions, but during them I still needed to be up and moving, so I knelt up and leaned on the edge of the pool and continued my hip circles...the only problem was that this brought my hips out of the water (right when I wanted it most!). So Hubby got a saucepan and poured water over my lower back during contractions. I have to say, now that I have labored with water, I cannot fathom wanting to labor without it! I started vocalizing through the contractions--keeping a loose throat can help keep a loose bottom, so a low "ahhhh" while contracting can be helpful--and it simply came naturally.

Midwife A arrived sometime around 6am I think--I was far enough into laborland that I had no concept of time. I had recently checked myself again and estimated that I was around 5cm dilated--still with the bulging waters. Bear had recently wakened and Hubby put on a movie for him. A had me get out of the pool between a couple of contractions so that she could check my vitals and dilation. I knew I was in serious labor because I didn't feel the need to grab a towel or sarong when I got out (I'm normally a very modest person, and had those things on hand because I'd expected to want them). Modesty is one of those things that just goes out the window in labor, which is good because it would be terribly inconvenient if it didn't! I was pleasantly surprised when she reached in and said "you're about 8cm dilated" (she later told me I'd been "a stretchy 8"). I got back into the water for a contraction while she called her associate midwife K (who had a 90 min drive) and got her doppler ready, and then I sat on the birth ball so that A could listen to the baby's heartrate through a couple of contractions. During the first one his heartrate dropped dramatically, but during the second it stayed steady. Contractions can be stressful for the baby, though not usually dangerously so, but she needed to listen through a couple more to determine which result had been the anomaly. The next three contractions--two with Hubby holding under my arms (suspending me), and especially the one laying on the bed--were awful. Contractions are intense anyway, but without the mediating effect of the warm water they were harder to integrate. (Did I really spend an entire labor on a bed last time? Yikes!) Baby's heartrate was stable through the subsequent contractions, so I got back into the pool.

Getting back in the water felt glorious, and was just in time...the next few contractions were stronger and I was getting louder at the peaks. I wasn't focusing myself into them anymore, just trying to stay on top of them and let my body work. I remember thinking that this was awfully hard and I'd rather just stay pregnant, and even that I totally understood why epidurals are popular...and then it hit me that those kinds of thoughts are a sign of being in transition, and that it meant I was in the home stretch! (I don't recall having any of those sorts of thoughts during Bear's labor--presumably because I was too tired to have thoughts that conscious.) Between contractions I stretched out, laying my head on the side of the pool and letting my body float out behind me. (A commented "now that's a woman in labor!" so we took a picture, but I cropped it for the blog...I'm open but not quite that open!)
I guess I woke Wolf at this point--though 7 would have been his normal wake up time anyway--he joined Bear watching the movie. I started feeling pushy. I wasn't sure if it was my body pushing or my mind wanting to push, but I told A because I figured she'd want to check me again to make sure I was fully dilated. That's what they'd done in the hospital after all. But A just said "do what your body wants to do; don't do anything that hurts." What perfect advice for labor! I don't know if the timing was coincidental or if her "giving permission" freed me, but with the next contraction I was definitely pushing, and I was getting louder too. A asked if my water had broken yet, and it hadn't, but within a couple more contractions it did. If feeling the bulging sack with my finger was weird, feeling the sack break spontaneously was really strange! (Bear's water was broken by the OB.) It was something akin to blowing a bubble gum bubble and having it pop all over your face...except of course it wasn't on my face. I really thought there was an audible pop, but I guess in the midst of labor sensory perception is garbled because Hubby and A both said it didn't make noise.
The older boys' movie got over and they came in. Wolf sat back but Bear came right over, put his hand on mine, and started vocalizing with me.
Within another contraction or two I knew things were getting close so I turned over and leaned back against the side of the pool rather than staying on my knees leaning forward. I know a lot of women deliver on their knees or hands and knees, but I wanted to be able to look down and see what was happening. In retrospect this was pointless because I couldn't see around my belly, but at the time it seemed terribly important. I reached in and for the first time felt my baby's head: all soft and wrinkly and covered with hair! The mind definitely doesn't function normally in labor, because I had the momentary thought "he doesn't have a skull" (because I could only feel the soft wrinkles of his scalp). Fortunately the work of pushing distracted me before I had a chance to linger on that notion!
Interestingly, once I turned around I no longer felt contractions nor a physical urge to push. I had a huge mental urge to push, but nothing physical. However I could feel the baby's head coming down so I had no hesitation about pushing like crazy. I'd had a feeling for some time that this baby would be bigger than the last one, so I had mentally geared myself up for a 9 pound baby. As I felt his head begin to enter my birth canal I had the thought that it was impossibly big and would never fit, but there's not really any way but down and out at that point, so I pushed anyway and remarkably enough he slid on down without much trouble at all. Of course sliding down the canal is one thing, actually getting out is another. I don't recall the classic "ring of fire" as he crowned, but I was aware of many hands being there--Hubby was in the pool with me catching the baby, the midwife's hands were supporting my perineum, and I realized that I had reached down to support myself in the front as well. Being part of my own 'catching team' was something I don't think I ever would have done in a hospital, but it came instinctively and I think it helped me not tear. His head came out, but then he stopped at the shoulders. I was pushing but he wasn't budging. Hubby moved aside and A started working the baby back and forth to get him out. My mind started racing with thoughts of shoulder dystocia and I just knew that she was about to tell me to turn over (it's easier to get sd babies out if mama is on hands and knees) and I was just sure she was going to have to break his clavicle to get him out (that's the official procedure if the baby won't come unstuck). All within the moment I was already beginning to mourn my baby's broken shoulder...but A never asked me to flip over. I felt pulling and stretching that made delivering the head feel like birthing a pillow (A later told me that she had her hands "in there with him" to get him free), and then suddenly she was done and Hubby was handing me the baby and A was putting a towel around the little one.

The first moments after birth are so precious, just staring into the eyes of my new little one and realizing the blessing of being part of a miracle.

I hadn't been able to see it, but Eagle had a nuchal hand (his hand was by his face as he was born, so although his head measurement was 36cm, the addition of his hand made it 38cm--15 inches). Hubby and A were discussing the nuchal hand when I felt a uterine twinge and knew it was time to deliver the placenta. I started to hand Eagle off to someone when I realized we hadn't cut his cord so he was still attached to me. I pulled back the towel to expose the cord and discovered that it had broken on its own! I had never heard of such a thing (and I have read a lot of birth stories). A said that it happens occasionally, but is very rare. She clamped it to make sure he did not lose any blood through it, and then turned to help me with the placenta. Delivering the placenta is easy--it doesn't have any bones. ☺
An unmedicated birth is followed by a rush of adrenalin, so I climbed out of the pool and took a quick shower. While I was showering midwife K arrived. Both A and K commented that I seemed very lively for someone who had given birth just minutes before...I wasn't trying to be lively or anything else, I just felt fantastic and ecstatic (and very glad to have the baby on the outside!). I climbed into my bed (how wonderful to be able to get right into my own bed!) and tried to get Eagle to nurse. He wasn't interested for a while, in spite of Bear telling him that nurn was good and he should try it. Wolf cut the umbilical cord (closer to his navel, as the break was several inches down). After we'd all had a chance to cuddle the baby a bit A examined me. She said that between the nuchal hand, the big head, and the stuck shoulder she'd expected to have a big sewing job, but somehow I had no tearing at all. I don't know if it was being in water, being well-supported, being relaxed, my prenatal diet, or something else, but A pronounced that I had "a beautiful vagina" and after double-checking that there was not even a skidmark, she tucked me back into bed with my baby.

B C Brighton
Born on November 12, 2009 at 8:03am
8lbs even, 20.75inches long, 36cm (14.5in) head (Bear was 7lb1oz, 19.5in, but his head was the same size!).


This labor was shorter but more intense than my last one. I was more conscious of everything, but also more in control. I do not have regrets over my choices nor the events of my first birth; in fact Bear was not even an hour old when I told Hubby "I could do that again!" (a sentiment I did not feel for a couple of days this time). However if I could choose one labor & birth to repeat in the future, it would definitely be Eagle's.

Thoughts on Inductions and Encouraging Labor

As you can probably tell from some of my recent posts (particularly my facebook friday one) I'm getting ancy for this kiddo to be born. Ironically I'm not even to my due date yet, but my body keeps giving signs of labor, and I'm past the date where I delivered Bear, so I'm feeling overcooked even if I'm not really. I confess this last week I've given some thought to inductions, and feel like I have some understanding for why women choose that route. (I confess I even had a dream wherein I got one of my crochet needles and broke my own water!!) I never felt this way with Bear, first because I was prepared to go past 40 weeks because I know that's common for first-time moms, but secondly because I didn't have ongoing prodromal labor as I have this time. When labor started with Bear, it started and it continued until he was born. This time has, obviously, been very different!

There are two types of "induction," but they're not really the same at all, so I prefer to think of them as "inductions" verses "encouragements." The former will stimulate labor forcefully, the latter will simply encourage it to move along if (and only if) it is ready to happen anyway.

Standard inductions include administering synthetic hormones (such as pitocin) via IV, or via vaginal suppository (such as cytotec, which by the way, commonly causes birth defects, uterine rupture, and maternal death--if you don't look at any other links in this post at least look at this third one here!).  Inductions of this sort are commonly done because the woman is "overdue," or because either the woman or her doctor had a schedule to keep and just wanted to get the baby out already. A friend of mine put together an excellent post on why "Overdue is NOT an Emergency" and she cites many references to back up that stance.

Dangers of Induction
In my opinion, one of the biggest problems with having an induction based on dating is that estimated due dates (EDDs) are just that--estimates--and are wrong at least as often as they are right. A woman who has anything other than a 28 day cycle (or who ovulates on any day other than day 14) will have an inaccurate EDD if she bases it on her last menstrual period--which is what most providers do.
Secondly, EDDs are based on average gestations, but some women gestate for 38 weeks and some gestate for 42, and there are differences from one child to the next as well as from one woman to the next. So even if you know that your dates are correct (because you know your date of ovulation) you still can't really know how long your baby needs.
Inductions do not always work--particularly if the mother's body was not showing signs of readiness (dilation and effacement) prior to the induction. As mentioned in the post I linked above, when first time moms with no dilation and no effacement are induced at 41wks (merely because of the date), they have about a 50% chance of ending up with a c-section for failure to progress. In other words, half of them will not go into labor in spite of the induction, so their babies will have to be delivered surgically.
Finally, there is evidence to support the idea that every week (even every day) that a baby spends in utero prepares him for life outside the womb. It is true that medical science has found ways to save the lives of babies born very very prematurely, but ask any of those premie's moms and they will tell you that they would have preferred that the babies be full-term. Just because the babies are able to live does not mean that it is in any way desireable for them to have been born so early! Babies who are even just a couple of weeks premature often have under-developed lungs, insufficient fat stores, eating problems, immature livers (leading to jaundice), and underdeveloped/undersized brains. But don't we also need to worry about the baby getting too big? Nope, we really don't.
I believe that inductions are terribly overused, and not nearly as appropriate (or as safe) as we are led to believe.


Encouragements are quite different from inductions, in that they will stimulate contractions, help ripen the cervix, or facilitate the baby's head engaging with the cervix, but they will not really force labor to start. I am comfortable with encouraging labor--particularly when the woman's body has already been giving signals that it's about ready.
Here is a short list of labor encouragements and how they work:

1. Walking--being upright and in motion can encourage the baby to descend into the pelvis and engage his head with mama's cervix, thus stimulating dilation. Many women find that physical activity brings on contractions as well.  (Safety feature--if mama's body isn't ready for labor, the contractions will usually stop once she stops walking.)
2. Doin' the Deed--yep, you got it, the same thing that got the baby in can encourage the baby to come out. This actually works in four ways: A--daddy's semen contains prostoglandins (the hormone that softens the cervix), B--if mama orgasms then those contractions can stimulate labor contractions, C--nipple stimulation releases oxytocin (which is explained more fully below), and D--getting mama relaxed and increasing her blood flow to her pelvic area can be helpful as well. There is really a lot more in common between getting babies in and getting babies out than what most of us have been told, but all the organs and muscles are the same, and many of the sensations are comparable, so it's only logical that they should work together so nicely.
   
3. Nipple Stimulation--I've heard a few mothers say that nursing their toddler got labor up and rolling, or of course daddy can help out, or mama can do it herself with a breast pump (it does need to be a sucking type of motion). The reason it works is that it releases oxytocin, as mentioned above, and oxytocin causes uterine contracting--this is exactly why immediate breastfeeding helps to get the placenta out and reduces the risk of postpartum hemmorage (because it causes the uterus to clamp down).
   
4. Consuming Castor Oil--basically castor oil will stimulate the bowels, and since the bowels and uterine muscles are ajacent, stimulating one often stimulates the other. (Loose bowels is a common symptom of early labor, as the body tries to get everything out of the way to make as much room as possible for the baby to get through.) Theoretically any laxative could cause this result, but obviously laxatives also carry the potential danger for dehydration, and castor oil is sufficiently nasty that I doubt the average mama would take enough of it to overdose! Incidentally, on top of castor oil being nasty, it doesn't always work, so you may be taking a dose of nasty for no reason...just something to keep in mind. ☺ (If you do want to try it, I'm told it can be chugged in a glass of orange juice to cover the taste, or try mixing it with some scrambled eggs (before frying them), and you'll get greasy eggs but they won't taste too bad.)
   
5. Eating Spicy Foods--these can stimulate the digestive system, which may stimulate contractions. Of course, spicy foods may also stimulate heartburn, so attempt this at your own risk! I have heard that garlic may work this way too.
   
6. Squatting--my midwife recommends spending time in a deep squat (like a yoga squat--lean against the front of a couch or hang on an exercise ball if you need some support). Essentially this position can help encourage the baby's head to engage with the cervix.
7. Dance--get your hips moving in as wide a range as you can, especially in circles (like belly dancing or hula). The wide stance opens your pelvis, and the movement can encourage the baby to descend...sortof like a combination of the walking and squatting. Whether or not you utilize this to encourage labor, it is also a very helpful thing to do during labor.  (edited to add: this is what got this baby to engage and come out. After 2 1/2 weeks of solid "early labor" every night, but no progress, literally a day and a half of hip circles every 30-60 minutes got his head engaged and moved him right down. I did hip circles during almost every contraction in labor too, and he was out in less than 5 hours. Your mileage may vary of course, but I have become a BIG proponent of hip circles!)
8. Evening Primrose Oil--this can be consumed in capsule form or applied to the cervix directly. Either way, many midwives advise it during the final month or so of pregnancy, and it is supposed to help soften the cervix, which in turn should facilitate dilation when labor does start.
   
9. Acupuncture or acupressure--it's important to do this with someone who is trained specifically for it, but some women report rapid results. Of course some women also report that nothing happened.
10. Chiropractic Adjustment, Massage, or Reflexology--some women say it works, some say it doesn't... rubbing the lower half of mamas calves (in the back) is supposed to get things going...
    
11. Consuming Red Raspberry Leaf--RRL is a uterine toner, so consuming it throughout pregnancy is a good idea anyway. Consuming increased amounts of it in the final weeks will not generally stimulate contractions, but can help the uterus prepare to work effectively when labor does start.
12. Consuming Blue & Black Cohosh--these herbs are commonly touted in the naturopathic world as a "natural induction" but they do carry risks. I am not comfortable with them myself at this point, but if you are inclined to try them make sure you read up on them first!
13. Get busy doing something else. Really. Stop focusing on being not in labor, and go find something productive to do--once the baby comes you'll be too busy to do anything else for a while, so use your time now to clean the house, play with your other kids, spend time with your spouse, pamper yourself, or change the world. ☺
14. This site also has a great list of suggestions (with additional links with additional info) http://wrylilt.hubpages.com/hub/Ways-to-induce-Labour-Naturally
    

If any of my readers know of other methods (or references) that I have neglected here, please leave them in the comments and I'll edit them into the post!!

Trying Cloth Diapers (on a budget!)

After my recent post about the politics of diapers, I got the following comment:

So I'm actually kind of interested considering I'm going to have two kids in diapers in the next week. Any ideas on how to try out cloth diapers without investing a ton of money pre-commitment?

What a great question! I was ready to make the commitment before trying them out, so the investment wasn't really an issue for me. I knew that I wanted to use cloth, so I spent my time researching types of diapers, reading reviews about various patterns, and deciding which fabrics to buy. However, if you're just thinking about cloth diapers, and not sure yet if you're ready to jump in with both feet, here are a few suggestions:

• Figure out how many diapers you need (for all diapered kids) for one full day and night. I think that's the minimum number of diapers you'll need to get to try it out. If you only get enough diapers for a few hours then you may not be able to find out how you feel about mid-night changes or super-poopies, and we all know that those are facts of diapering, so if you're really considering cloth then you should try them for a full 24 hours.
• Remember that some parents choose a middle ground--they use cloth diapers at home or during the day, but still use disposables when going out or for nights. There isn't a right or wrong way to cloth diaper, it's just a matter of finding what works for you. This is one reason I recommend trying out cloth for 24 hours--maybe you'll find that you love cloth, maybe you'll hate it, and maybe you'll just realize that you're a middle-ground parent, and that's ok too!
  
• Some diapering styles are cheaper than others...but not everyone likes all the styles. The cheapest is prefold diapers (held closed with a snappi or pins) with some form of cover over them. Next come fitted diapers (with their own elastic and velcro/snaps but no leak-barrier layer and still requiring a cover). Then there are pocket diapers, and finally all-in-ones as the most costly options. There are single-size diapers (which come in S, M, and L), and one-size-fits-most diapers (which adjust to fit different sizes, but of course cost more per diaper). Cotton flannel or birdseye is pretty budget-friendly, bamboo velour is quite expensive. Recycling old fabric of your own is the cheapest of all! Even the diaper covers come with choices--fleece, wool, or PUL--each with their own options and price ranges. I recommend doing a little research at DiaperPin or one of the other diapering forums linked below to learn about the pros and cons of the various types of diapers.
• If you know someone who cloth diapers, especially if her children are different sizes from yours, she may be willing to let you borrow some of her diapers for a short period to try them out. Most cloth diapering mamas that I've known really love cloth, and are typically eager to help convert someone else to the world of cloth. ☺ Even if she doesn't have any spares, at the very least she'll let you look at her diapers and get an idea of what various styles are like without having to buy one of each of yourself.
  
• There are a lot of online shops that offer discounts if you buy big diapering packages. They tend to run $1-400 (depending on the diaper style, materials, or brand), and typically include a full set of diapers in one size, or some of the larger ones have everything you need to last from birth through potty training. Yes, that's a big monetary investment all at once BUT consider this: If you decide you don't like them, cloth diapers (especially barely-used ones) have a resale value. Yep, you read that right, you can re-sell your used cloth diapers, so if you buy a discounted package set, then decide you don't want to stick with cloth, you can probably resell all those diapers for very close to what you paid for them. So it's a lot of money up front, but it's not really a risky investment because you can get it back if you change your mind.
• Of course, that leads us to the next option--yes, you can buy used cloth diapers. I know several moms who have bought a variety of types of diapers so that they could try them all out. They keep the styles they like and re-sell the ones they don't care for. There are a variety of options from practically new diapers (sold for nearly new prices) down to "FFS" (free for shipping) which means that the diaper is old and worn but still works ok and you can have it for free if you'll just pay the cost of mailing. There are several places where one can do this: DiaperSwappers, and ClothDiaperNation are the most well known. (There are a few people who try to sell secondhand cloth diapers on ebay, but technically this is against ebay policy and they do police the listings, so I don't recommend trying to buy or sell diapers there.)
  
• There is at least one online shop which has a "try them out" kit where you can rent a set of a couple dozen diapers to try out. You do have to make a deposit for the full value of the diapers, but after the rental period if you decide that cloth is not for you then you can return the diapers and get back your deposit. If you do like them, they are yours to keep. I believe you can even exchange the (gently used) rental set for new diapers if you want. There may be more than one place that does this--search around a bit and see what you can find!
  
• If you know how to use a sewing machine (even just a little bit) then you can make diapers for a fraction of what it costs to buy them new. Depending on the type of diapers you want, you can save even more by making them with old flannel shirts for the outsides and old towels for the inside layers--your monetary investment can be limited to a snappi or some velcro and elastic, plus some covers. If you worry that your sewing skills are not good enough to make a diaper, remember these two things: 1--I know two different people who learned how to sew by making diapers and 2--diapers are to catch poop, not to win beauty contests; it's ok if they look a little funny. ☺
  
• If you have questions, ask a cloth diapering mama!! Like I said, we tend to get excited about new cloth-diaper-converts. There is also some useful information about various aspects of cloth diapering (such as information about diaper sprayers or cloth-diapering on the go) at the EtsyClothDiapers blog.
  

The Politics of Diapers

If you've never considered cloth diapering, here is a little background about disposables...it may encourage you to re-think your decision! (Especially since cloth diapers no longer require pins, separate plastic pants, or dunking & swishing in the toilet...they're easy, cute, trim, cost-effective, and oh yes, environmentally responsible. ☺ )

I just highlighted a few points (since I know you'll probably skim rather than actually read the whole thing!)


Published in Mothering Magazine issue 116, Jan-Feb 2003

1961 Proctor and Gamble (P&G) introduces Pampers.

1971 Pennsylvania Boy Scouts conducting a highway cleanup campaign report that the largest single source of litter is the disposable diaper. Disposable diapers contribute 171,000 dry weight tons of waste to be processed by US sewage systems. (M. A. Shapiro, Preliminary Study of the Environmental Impacts from Processing and Disposal of Diapers)

1975, February In comparing the effectiveness of several brands of disposable diapers, Consumer Reports notes that trees are cut down in their manufacture, enteric (intestinal) viruses and live polio viruses from vaccines have been found in feces in disposable diapers removed from "sanitary" landfills, flushing diapers can ruin septic tanks and plumbing lines and damage sewage-treatment plants, and only commercial incinerators can safely burn disposables.

1975, July Wildlife-management personnel complain of the increasing presence of throwaway diapers improperly disposed of in parks and preservation areas. In North Carolina, a marine biologist reports that raw sewage spilling from pipes clogged with disposable diapers is killing fish. (The Sentinel, Winston-Salem, July 31, 1975)

1975 "The presence of viruses in untreated human fecal matter in solid waste disposal sites originates largely from the increased, wide-spread use of disposable diapers, which often send feces to landfill sites rather than to the sewage plant. Small children and babies excrete large numbers of enteric viruses in their feces, and viruses from landfill sites might be leached out and contaminate underground water supplies." (Baylor College of Medicine)

1975 The EPA warns that rainwater washing through dumps may carry viruses-which can live in compacted solid waste for up to two weeks-into underground streams, and from there into public and private water supplies. Improved sanitation during this century has made rare the diseases associated with direct contact with raw sewage: hepatitis A, shigella, salmonellosis, amebiasis, and typhoid. However, the University of Oregon Survival Center notes that outbreaks of shigella, salmonellosis, and hepatitis A are now more common in hospitals and daycare centers. The World Health Organization has called for an end to the inclusion of urine and fecal matter in solid waste.

1978 The Office of Appropriate Technology of Lane County, Oregon, takes three random samplings from a sanitary landfill and finds that disposable diapers comprise 16 percent, 26 percent, and 32 percent of the garbage extracted in each sample.

1979 Pediatrician Dr. Fred C. Weiner, of Montreal, Canada, studies one-month-old babies brought to a well-baby clinic for a period of one year and finds that disposables cause more frequent and more severe diaper rash. He advises limiting their use. (Journal of Pediatrics 95, September 1979)

1979 Oregon Senator Mary M. Burrows co-authors the state's first proposed bill to ban the sale of disposables.

1981 Testimony on behalf of HB3047 and HB2838, the Disposable Diaper Ban Bill, before the Oregon House Energy and Environment Committee of the Legislative Assembly: "Valuable wood pulp goes into the manufacture of close to ten billion diapers annually. This represents in excess of 800,000,000 pounds of paper. All of this paper is used only once and thrown away. It cannot be recycled. Yet, the timber industry doesn't have enough allowable cut at the same time that the public is increasing its use of recreational timberland and is clamoring for more. We cannot afford to sink our valuable and diminishing natural resources into throwaway diapers. Industry sources claim that disposable diapers require less energy than rewashing reusable (cloth) diapers. These claims must be rejected out-of-hand. None of these energy use figures include the costs of sewage treatment or solid waste hauling and management, to say nothing of long-term costs of directing natural resources from other uses."

1986 "Over 40 percent of newborns in US hospitals are diapered in Ultra Pampers. In addition, the diaper has received a highly favorable response from pediatricians. In fact, within the first five months of introduction, over 25 percent of your colleagues reported that they had recommended Ultra Pampers to parents of diaper-age children." ("Dear Doctor," a brochure enclosed in Proctor and Gamble's Medigram, November 7, 1986)

1987 US disposable diaper revenues total $3.2 billion. 82,000 tons of plastic and 1.3 million tons of wood pulp-about a quarter of a million trees-are consumed annually in the production of disposable diapers.

1987 The Empire State Consumer Association petitions the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, and the New York State Attorney General's office to prohibit the sale of synthetic super-absorbent disposable diapers and adult incontinence pads. The chemicals used in synthetic super-absorbent products contain sodium polyacrylate, cross-linked with polymers to create super-absorbent components. These chemicals can cause severe skin infections and, rarely, toxic shock syndrome.

1988 Proctor and Gamble pay $120,000 for a three-year study at the University of Michigan to determine the effects of sodium polyacrylate in disposable diapers once it enters a landfill. The researcher says that the study shows that disposables are environmentally safe. (UPI, July 28, 1988)

1989 EPA estimates that single-use diapers account for 2 percent of all solid waste in US landfills. A Seattle, Washington study finds that 1.8 percent of its municipal garbage is made up of diapers.

1989 In a study commissioned by the National Association of Diaper Services (NADS), Carl Lehrburger of Energy Answers Corporation, a resource recovery company in Albany, New York, estimates that parents pay ten cents in disposal costs for every dollar spent on throwaway diapers. With 18,000,000,000 soiled diapers being hauled to the landfill every year, Lehrburger figures that American mothers and fathers spend $300 million annually on disposable diapers that take 500 years to decompose. Throwaways comprise 2 percent of the nation's solid waste by weight, making them the third most common solid waste item after newspapers and beverage and food containers. Even if all 18,000,000,000 of the single-use diapers disposed of annually in the US were biodegradable, the public would still spend $300 million each year for their disposal. Each family that chooses cloth diapers for their child prevents one ton of waste from entering the solid waste stream each year. (Diapers in the Waste Stream, 1989)

1989 Dioxin is produced when chlorinated compounds, such as chlorinated plastics, are burned at high temperatures. Dioxin is formed when paper and wood pulp are bleached. The bleached pulp is then converted into a variety of paper products, including disposable diapers. Dioxin has been associated with cancer, liver disease, miscarriage, immune-system depression, birth defects, and genetic damage in a variety of laboratory animals. The fatty tissue of the average person living in the industrialized world harbors measurable levels of dioxin. When Proctor and Gamble faces the possibility of losing its share of the Swedish diaper market because of that country's curtailment of chlorinated pollution levels, the company begins making chlorine-free Pampers for export. ("Whitewash: The Dioxin Cover-Up," Greenpeace 14, no. 2, March/April 1989)

1989 "Diapers are a good target for waste reduction advocates because with the exception of newspapers and beverage containers, they are the single consumer product that contributes the most to solid waste stream." (Positive Steps towards Waste Reduction, June 1989)

1989 Diaper services, which almost disappeared in the late 1970s because of the introduction of the throwaway diaper, increase business by more than 70 percent as a result of hundreds of news stories on environmental concern and the growing demand for reusable cotton diapers. The National Association of Diaper Services (NADS), trade organization for the $150 million yearly diaper-service business, has about 400 members. Another $50 million is generated yearly by the manufacture and sale of cloth diapers.

1989, June Gerber, Childrenswear, and Dundee Mills, major US manufacturers of cotton diapers, lobby for quotas limiting cotton-diaper imports from China-producers of the world's best and most durable diapers, the ones that diaper services use. According to some critics, the quota on Chinese imports creates a cloth-diaper shortage and kills competition. Some services have to create waiting lists of prospective clients. NADS does not take a position on the Chinese quota, but does make an agreement with Gerber "to do nothing to denigrate Gerber's current sales level for one year." Gerber contributes $80,000 to NADS in 1989 and $60,000 in 1990. (San Francisco Examiner, June 7, 1989)

1989, June Proctor and Gamble announces two pilot programs designed to test the feasibility of recycling its millions of disposable diapers and to show that composting "is a viable disposal method for municipal solid waste." One pilot program is in King County, Washington, where the King County Nurses Association has been working to educate hospitals and parents about cloth-diaper alternatives, and where 20 of the county's 34 hospitals have switched to cloth in their newborn nurseries and pediatric units. The second program, a $250,000 composting demonstration project, is planned for St. Cloud, Minnesota, a city that already recycles two-thirds of its trash. According to a Proctor and Gamble spokesperson, "Our aim is not to get into the recycling business on a permanent basis. Rather, we want to demonstrate that the technology is feasible and encourage entrepreneurs to get involved in this business." (Proctor and Gamble press release, "Perspectives on Disposable Diapers," June 20, 1989)

1989, July Connecticut begins to phase out the use of disposable products, including those used in patient care. Oregon is in the process of extending a 50 percent recycling credit to diaper services. New Jersey legislates a tax on the manufacture of "disposable, 'one-way,' nonreusable or nonreturnable products." Connecticut and New York consider requiring manufacturers of single-use diapers to affix labels to all diaper products, stating the environmental hazards associated with their disposal. Nebraska bans the sale of all nonbiodegradable diapers effective 1993. (Press Release of the National Center for Policy Alternatives, July 19, 1989)

1989 Contra Costa County, California, sets a December 1990 deadline to begin recycling throwaways; otherwise, a ban may be in order or purchasers may be charged with disposal fees. (USA Weekend, September 15-17, 1989)

1989 Kimberly-Clark, the second largest manufacturer of single-use diapers in the US, unveils a new line: Huggies Pull-Ups, training pants aimed at toddlers who are being toilet-trained and bedwetters.

1990, April 20th anniversary of Earth Day.

1990 Legislation is introduced in 24 states and dozens of smaller jurisdictions to reduce the use of disposable diapers. Between eight and nine of every ten US families with diaper-age children use throwaway diapers most of the time. While in polls US families overwhelmingly support a ban on single-use diapers, three out of four mothers do not want to give up disposables.

1990 Proctor and Gamble commissions a study by Arthur D. Little, Inc., a consulting firm in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The consultant finds that laundering a cloth diaper over the course of its lifetime consumes up to six times the water used to manufacture a single-use diaper. In addition, the study concludes that laundering cloth diapers produces nearly ten times the water pollution created in manufacturing throwaways. (Arthur D. Little, Inc., "Disposable Versus Reusable Diapers: Health, Environmental and Economic Comparisons.")

1990 Jeffrey Tyrens, associate director of the Center for Policy Alternatives in Washington, DC, criticizes the Arthur D. Little study for a math error that makes single-use diapers appear cheaper than they are. He also finds that the ADL study fails to account for the water used in flushing away fecal material from single-use diapers-a practice recommended by Proctor and Gamble and other manufacturers on their diaper-box labels. Other critics point out that the ADL authors did not use independent data but instead relied on information gathered by P&G and other companies interested in promoting single-use diapers.

1990 Proctor and Gamble uses the Arthur D. Little data in a letter sent out under the auspices of the American Paper Institute, of which it is a member. The "Dear Legislator" letter reiterates the conclusions of the ADL study but fails to disclose that the study was funded by P&G. This letter prompts a rebuttal, a "Dear Colleague" letter signed by six legislators who support bills to encourage greater use of reusable diapers. Branding the API letter "misleading," the legislators write, "The disposable diaper industry realizes it is in danger of losing market share for this very profitable single-use product. Faced with overwhelmingly negative public opinion polls, they have launched a pro-disposable campaign among state lawmakers and commissioned the ADL study expressly to discredit cloth diapers." ("Review of Arthur D. Little, Inc.'s, 'Disposable Versus Reusable Diapers,' " Update on Diapers, September 1990)

1990 Proctor and Gamble sends more than 14 million copies of a pamphlet to US households stating that their diapers can be effectively composted in municipal solid-waste plants. The pamphlet, "Diapers and the Environment," complete with discount coupons for Luvs and Pampers, cites a five-week study conducted by P&G in St. Cloud, Minnesota, in which diapers from 2,700 homes and 17 daycare centers were composted along with the rest of the city's garbage. The results, according to the brochure, were "very positive." As part of a broad campaign to promote the company as environmentally friendly, P&G sponsors ads in more than a dozen major magazines featuring photographs of seedlings grow ing in pots filled with dark, porous-looking earth. The ads claim that 80 percent of each plastic and paper diaper is compostable and can be converted into a "rich, high-quality soil enhancer that's good for planting baby flowers, trees and just about anything else that grows." By some estimates, the company spends $250 million in 18 months on advertising. The New York City Department of Consumer Affairs charges that P&G promotes its diapers as easily compostable, but in fact few consumers have access to adequate composting facilities. A Rhode Island state official demands that P&G remove the following misleading statement, which appears on boxes of free samples of Luvs dropped on doorsteps that spring: "This product is compostable in municipal composting units. Support recycling and composting in your community." Rhode Island has no such facilities for composting diapers.

1991 P&G's $750,000 disposable diaper recycling project in King County (see 1989, June; second entry) is declared a technical success but an economic failure, yet continues to be touted in brochures for Luvs and Pampers. (Seattle Times, January 25, 1991)

1991, January Sponsored by NADS, Carl Lehrburger and colleagues undertake the most detailed study to date: a life-cycle, or cradle-to-grave, diaper analysis. They find that throwaway diapers, compared with reusables, produce seven times more solid waste when discarded and three times more waste in the manufacturing process. In addition, effluents from the plastic, pulp, and paper industries are far more hazardous than those from the cotton-growing and -manufacturing processes. Single-use diapers consume less water than reusables laundered at home, but more than those sent to a commercial diaper service. According to industry data from Franklin Associates and the American Petroleum Institute, 3.5 billion gallons of oil are used to produce the 18 million throwaway diapers that end up in landfills each year. Washing cloth diapers at home uses 50 to 70 gallons of water every three days-about the same as flushing the toilet five times a day. A diaper service puts its diapers through an average of 13 water changes, but uses less water and energy per diaper than one laundry load at home. (Carl Lehrburger, Jocelyn Mullen, and C. V. Jones, "Diapers: Environmental Impacts and Lifecycle Analysis," January 1991)

1991, July The American Public Health Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics publish the recommendations of their joint Child Care Standards Project. After four years of debate and research, the groups conclude that "only modern disposable paper diapers with absorbent gelling material" meet the standards they suggest for daycare centers.

1991, July In the United Kingdom, the Campaign for Reusable Diapers, the Women's Environmental Network's first initiative, finds that all of the available research on the environmental impact of throwaway diapers had been funded directly by makers of throwaways. A London independent environmental agency, the Landbank Consultancy, is asked to review and evaluate the data. The Landbank Report concludes that, compared to cloth diapers, throwaway diapers use 20 times more raw materials, three times more energy, twice as much water, and generate 60 times more waste. Using the Landbank Report, the Women's International Network challenges Proctor and Gamble's environmental equivalency claims before the UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). The ASA rules that P&G's claims are misleading. Under pressure from the press, P&G withdraws its claims.

1994 The Women's Environmental Network (USA) joins with other groups to demand a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation of the single-use diaper industry, charging the industry with deceptive advertising of environmental and health outcomes. Proctor and Gamble pays out-of-court settlements to the New York City Consumer Protection Board and to the Attorneys General of at least ten states for misleading advertising claims related to the recycling and composting of Pampers and Luvs. Environmental groups nationwide, including the New York Public Interest Group and Californians Against Waste, present Earth Day Awards to cloth diapers. Environmental Action, in Washington, DC, gives the Environmental Citizenship Award to the more than 300 hospitals nationwide that have switched to cloth diapers in the past few years. (Wet Set Gazette, April 1994)

1998 Fewer than one in ten US and Canadian households use cloth diapers. Thirty-five percent fewer cloth diapers were produced in the first six months of 1997 as compared with 1996. NADS has 150 members, a 37 percent drop in less than ten years. Disposable diapers have gone up as a percentage of solid waste in landfills. In Seattle, disposable diapers have increased from 2.5 percent of all residential waste in landfills from 1986 to 1989, to 3.3 percent from 1994 to 1995. (Residential Waste Stream Composition Study by the Cascadia Consulting Group)

1998 Seattle Baby Diaper Service receives a subsidy from Seattle Solid Waste for the cost of diaper service for low-income families because it's cheaper to pay a diaper service than to haul the waste away. Certain cities in Germany and Austria subsidize the cost of cloth diapers. Each child in disposables costs the city roughly $400 in municipal waste costs yearly. Coupons of $50 to $100 per family toward the purchase of cloth diapers have increased cloth-diaper usage in certain areas of Austria from almost zero to more than 40 percent.

1999 A study, "Acute Respiratory Effects of Diaper Emissions," in the October issue of Archives of Environmental Health, finds that laboratory mice exposed to various brands of disposable diapers suffered eye, nose, and throat irritation, including bronchoconstriction similar to that of an asthma attack. Chemicals released from the diapers included toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene, styrene, and isopropylbenzene, among others. The lead author of the study, Dr. Rosalind C. Anderson, advises asthmatic mothers to avoid exposure to these chemicals. Asthma rates are on a sharp incline in the US and worldwide, particularly among poor and inner-city children. Six leading brands of cotton and disposable diapers are tested. Of these, three are found not to affect the breathing of mice: American Fiber and Finishing Co., Gladrags organic cotton diapers, and Tender Care disposable diapers. Cloth diapers are not found to cause respiratory problems among mice.

2000 German study links use of plastic diapers to male infertility. The mean scrotal temperature is significantly higher in all age groups during the periods of plastic diaper use. Plastic diapers seriously undermine the body's natural ability to keep the scrotum and testicles cool. The researchers call for further research on the impact of increased testicular temperature in infancy on later sperm production. ("Scrotal Temperature is Increased in Disposable Plastic Lined Nappies," Archives of Disease in Childhood 83, October 2000.)