With the prevalence of depression diagnoses in the US, I think it’s time we have a honest discussion about mental health as a health risk when deciding to have a child. Physicians will inquire as to a woman’s physical health, but mental health is often overlooked. We consider weight, smoking status, and activity levels, so why should we not also consider history of mental illness when making the choice to get pregnant? With previous depressive episodes being high indicator of PPD incidence, hopeful mothers should consider their mental status carefully. With the birth of her child, a mother’s sole responsibility is no longer to herself. She must now consider the wellbeing of her baby on equal status as her own. Mental Illness seriously inhibits a woman’s ability to do so. I believe more discussion pre- and mid-pregnancy is necessary. Mental illness is often an overlooked and heavily-stigmatized aspect of health, but including it in the decision to reproduce is something I believe we can no longer afford to do.

I’ve found a couple blogs where women who have pre-existing mental illness or had serious PPD comment on their experiences and how it influences their decision regarding children. Take a read for yourself. They’re very interesing:

http://www.postpartumprogress.com/to-have-or-have-not-should-you-stop-having-children-if-youve-had-postpartum-depression

I Can’t Get Pregnant – I Have Bipolar Disorder

http://www.mommyish.com/2014/01/31/postpartum-anxiety/2/

Over the weekend I was surprised when I saw a TV commercial highlighting Chevron’s efforts to reduce mother to child HIV transmission in Nigeria. At first response, I was excited to see such a significant topic being discussed during a football game, but after further review, I began to consider some of the deeper implications of this campaign. Chevron’s actions are certainly noble, but can we really consider them altruistic? Big Oil, including Chevron, has done significant damage to communities around in the name of progress (and profit).  Elizabeth’s post about recognition made me wonder about this campaign. In our quest for maternal health issues to receive the attention they deserve, should we be prepared to partner with organizations that have clear ulterior motives? As long as we get the message out, do we need to concern ourselves with the whys behind it? Where do we draw the line between long-standing distrust and current need?

What do you think? Watch the video and sound off:

http://www.chevron.com/corporateresponsibility/community/health/

On a recent episode of Jimmy Kimmel, actress Ellen Pompeo of Grey’s Anatomy fame commented on the fact that even on medically themed show, the word vagina is seen as inappropriate and borderline obscene. It’s this intrinsic stigma against the female body that must be considered when constructing sexual education programs. Most people are intimidated by the unknown, and the female body, especially in its sexuality, is largely unexplored. When educating young students about the mechanics of sex, there is no room to shy away from one half of the biological population. Providing honest, unbiased data is difficult when there is a significant lack of research into the specifics of the female sexual experience. This information gap, however, should not hinder open and honest sex education. It merely requires us as educators to acknowledge what we do not know and encourage healthy and safe exploration. We have taken the comfortable path regarding sex ed over the past couple of years, and clearly, it leaves much to be desired. It’s time to step outside the comfort zone, acknowledge women as the sexual beings they are, and provide students with the tools needed to have healthy sexual relations.