<p>Although I believe there has been abuse of these children, the part about the broken bones concerned me too. They said 10% of the children had evidence of broken bones. Which is much better than we’re doing in our family. Here’s it’s 3 out of 3 had broken bones. None of it was from abuse.</p>
<p>They have a few girls who are under 18 but have given birth to three children, as I mentioned before, pregnancy and nursing sustain a nutritional drain on your body including your bones. When you nurse, if your body cannot supply the calcium from food, it will take it from your bones.</p>
<p>The children have other health problems as well.
[Tracing</a> the Polygamists’ Family Tree - TIME](<a href=“http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1732498,00.html]Tracing”>http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1732498,00.html)</p>
<p>ek4 - I think you and I could start a pro-breastfeeding thread that would make the political threads look tame.</p>
<p>You go girl!</p>
<p>Well I never imagined I would be nursing my oldest long enough so that she would be reading books to herself about nursing toddlers, but after a c-section 10 weeks early and an 8 week NICU stay, breastfeeding was something I could get my body to do. ;)</p>
<p>Emeraldkity, it appears that the rate of broken bones in your own family is 50%. Is 10% high or low?
I’m speculating that the kids in this cult might be doing more physical labor than the typical kid does, and that they probably aren’t playing video games or watching TV. I don’t know that, though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK, I’ll bite; I have to throw this one out for those who don’t know (I’m assuming you are aware of this ek4). When a woman gives birth to a premature infant, their bodies produce milk that is appropriate for whatever gestation age the baby is born at. Babies born at 30 weeks have different nutritional needs than a baby born at 40 weeks. The composition of the breast milk changes according to the baby’s age, and nutritional needs. I just think it’s awesome that our bodies know how to do something like that.</p>
<p>But you are right, ek4, teen moms are at risk for deficient calcium. The body will always provide all resources to the baby (or milk if a mom is nursing) and mom’s needs will become secondary.</p>
<p>I had a discussion about something like this in a past class of mine and was wondering what you all think, maybe a little food for thought:</p>
<p>What is the difference between 16/17/18/19? For the majority of human existence 14/15 was seen as a suitable age to marry/have children. Three hundred years ago nobody would have made a big deal out of a 14 year old giving birth. Sure one becomes more responsible as they get into their later teens/early twenties but, from a purely biological perspective, what makes this “wrong?” (Disclaimer, I’m not saying it’s right but this was the discussion in class so I’m presenting it as we discussed it). Our professor cited us a few studies that show that women reach their biologically “prime” age for child bearing around 16 and that if we go by biology that’s when women are most “suitable” for having children. The idea that women should have children later in life, and that under 18 is unacceptable is a relatively new phenomenom. </p>
<p>^^^Doesn’t really have anything to do w/ the discussion at hand, more of a philosophical/ethical thing.</p>
<p>The composition of the breast milk changes according to the baby’s age, and nutritional needs. I just think it’s awesome that our bodies know how to do something like that.
I think that is pretty cool too, but of course that would be assuming that the nurses remembered to take the milk out of the fridge after I expressed it. ( She was fed by gavage- she wasn’t strong enough to nurse till she was 4 months old)</p>
<p>Emeraldkity, it appears that the rate of broken bones in your own family is 50%. Is 10% high or low?</p>
<p>Although if you take age into account, average age when broken bones occured would be 32.
What is the average age of the children with broken bones at eldorado?
The head of family services said some of them are very young.
Big difference between a young child who is barely walking having a broken bone and a middle aged man incurring a broken bone because he went over a ski jump.</p>
<p>activity strengthens bones.
the more active you are, assuming good nutrition, less likely to break bones.
Activity increases bone density, activity strengthens muscles and ligaments that support joints.
[Unhealthy</a> habits hurt kids? bones - Kids and parenting - MSNBC.com](<a href=“http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21979043/]Unhealthy”>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21979043/)</p>
<p>maternal age at first birth * Maternal age at first birth
12 to 19. * 31+
maternal deaths/1000 births * maternal deaths/1000 births
3.80 * 1.07
average birth weight * average birth weight
1.9kg * 2.65kg
premature births ( %) * premature births ( %)
20 * 11
perinatal deaths/1000 births * perinatal deaths/1000 births
29.6 * 4.3</p>
<p>This info is from Johns Hopkins school of Public Health- please share research that indicates adolescent girls are better prepared physically to bear children than grown women</p>
<p>emeraldkity I think that most young teens giving birth nowadays are living at the poverty level and may lack basic health care/prenatal care. </p>
<p>Society and life expectancy has changed but I do think it’s probably physically healthier for a 16yo to give birth than a 40yo.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which is often the case with premature babies - they’re fed through a tube (breastfeeding is much harder work than drinking from a bottle). Most moms find it incredibly draining to pump and be the 100% sole source of their baby’s intake. They’re often spending much of their time driving back and forth to the hospital and stressed out over their baby’s health. Even when they do leave milk in the frig, did the 3rd shift nurse get the message from the 2nd shift nurse that it’s in there? I can’t begin to express how much I admire any mom who has the fortitude to pump for all those months under those conditions, waiting for that day that they can finally nurse their baby.</p>
<p>so while some might " think that it is healthier for a teen to give birth than an adult, despite research from Johns Hopkins circa 1995- can you back that up with an equally reputable source?
[Meeting</a> the Needs Of Young Adults, Population Reports, Series J, Number 41](<a href=“http://www.infoforhealth.org/pr/j41edsum.shtml#top]Meeting”>http://www.infoforhealth.org/pr/j41edsum.shtml#top)</p>
<p>* I can’t begin to express how much I admire any mom who has the fortitude to pump for all those months under those conditions, waiting for that day that they can finally nurse their baby.
*
I didn’t really think about it- keeping the milk going gave me something to do even though I had never nursed her so it was like getting " honey from a rock
Most of the time I was actually there during feedings, my H brought me in the morning ( I had a section and I had a stick so I couldn’t drive for a while, plus we didn’t live in the city where she was born), then the mom whose children I had taken care of till I had gone on bedrest , came to pick me up so I could rest at her nearby home, ( although she had to hire someone else till I was ready to go back to work), then my H took me back to the hospital and we stayed till 8 or 9 or 10 pm. ( I can’t say enough about the care at the university hospital, they really kept me going)</p>
<p>This is off topic but one of the things I remember is while once she came home and I was giving her premie bottles ( 2 oz- very soft red nipples that I had to cut a hole into), I also allowed the preschooler ^( mentioned above) to feed her the expressed milk. He loved this. I would express the milk and hand it over too him and he would feed her, carefully propped and supervised. He was so frustrated when she got bigger and I nursed her most of the time instead. ( but then when she was big enough for solids, he was the only one who could get her to eat)</p>
<p>But anyway- it was really , really worth it.
Especially considering she was a very young premie- 30 weeks 26 years ago, she has few residual health problems and those could actually be genetic.</p>
<p>On the broken bones point, what I am try to emphasize is that it’s impossible to say if the fact that 10% of the children have evidence of past broken bones suggests abuse, without knowing what percent of children over all have evidence of past broken bones, and even then, it may just mean that these kids are more physically active. It’s an example of a factoid that is put out there to support what the authorities have done, but it may or may not actually mean anything. I predict that much of this case will unravel, and it won’t be pretty. Again, I’m not defending what this cult was doing with underage girls, but I just think the way it was handled will backfire.</p>
<p>Agreed. They could have taken it on a case by case basis. You need to look at each fracture and determine the cause, the age of it, where it is, etc. The authorities will try to justify but they are doing, but taking the children away from their mothers abruptly without evidence can only harm the children. It also is illegal. They needed to take everything on a case-by-case basis. </p>
<p>Otherwise, they could go into any community and take all of the children at whim. For instance, go into neighborhoods where a lot of teens get pregnant and take all of the children away. Or say that it is abusive for 16 year olds in general to have children and take them away from their families.</p>
<p>You could go into any urban area and take away all children regardless of age in all families where any girl under 18 years of age has a baby. Or in the entire neighborhood. Would that be acceptable? I don’t think so, the ACLU would have a field day. Yet that is what they are doing to these women.</p>
<p>nameneeded: Each of the hypothetical situations you listed is materially different than this one. The issue here is not just that 16 year olds were having children, but that they were having children with older men, on a regular basis, because they were trained and instructed to do so by their community leaders and parents - and also because there is other suspected abuse.</p>
<p>It’s not as simple as “oh, someone underage is pregnant, let’s take all the children”. And it’s disingenuous of you to imply otherwise.</p>
<p>I don’t think there was any other suspected abuse before the raid…which, as you recall, turned out to have been based on a hoax. It’s pretty clear to me that the authorities had a plan to take all the children, and that’s what they did. Stay tuned, and you will see what a horrible mess it turns out to be, and how sympathies will turn in favor of the weeping mothers.</p>
<p>“nameneeded: Each of the hypothetical situations you listed is materially different than this one. The issue here is not just that 16 year olds were having children, but that they were having children with older men, on a regular basis, because they were trained and instructed to do so by their community leaders and parents - and also because there is other suspected abuse.”</p>
<p>You cannot take away 400 children because you statistically believe that there are too many fractures. Then you have to do an analysis of every neighborhood in the US and see which ones have “too many” fractures, or accidents, underage drinking, kids riding bikes without helmets getting head injuries, etc. and take children away in the areas where there is what you think is a higher than acceptable incidence. Again, each case of suspected child abuse or neglect needs to be looked at individually, and unless it appears that the child is at IMMEDIATE risk, then the PS system favors the natural parent.</p>
<p>These Tx authorities have overstepped the acceptable practices for their industry and need to be stopped.</p>
<p>" Surely you’re not defending the raping of 14-17 year old girls…? "</p>
<p>Of course not. I am just pointing out the fact that this is the only life they know . It has been happening generation after generation and I find it hard to believe that authorities were unaware that this was happening before that mystery phone call was placed.</p>
<p>They live by the laws of their own religeous subculture. It is not right by any means to subject children to sexual abuse and relationships with adult men.</p>
<p>The kids that have been taken from their families are traumatized from this event , just as they are from the abuse</p>