Disgusting Spin Mom has baby, didn't even know she was pregnant.....aww??

[Heddi]

Watching MSNBC now and this is a story they're covering. The coverage is just disgusting. "Oh fun. A woman didn't know she was pregnant. What a gift" :puke:

I've looked on the MSNBC site but can't find it.

They're getting ready to the story now. At commercial.

In the lead-in before the commercial, the two Anchorwomen (Allison Stewart and someone else) Said "And coming next, a family in California has a baby. The AMAZING part is that mom didn't even know she was pregnant! Awwww" They both sat there, looking at each other with glee and joy in their eyes, smiling.

aww? Smiles?



Okay...I'll try to transcribe as I hear it

On a lighter note a california couple who had given up hope of having a child brought their child home from the hospital yesterday.

37 year old mother didn't even know she was pregnant.

She is a new and very very surprised mother.

==mother being interviewed===

Q How is it that you had no idea you were almost 6mos pregnant at the time?

A Looking back, I see some signs. There were some jeans I couldn't fit into. Other than that I didn't have any symptoms. At birth she was a pound and 6 ounces.

Q You were one of the lucky pregnant women who didn't put on alot of weight or have morning sickness or the other things going along with it

A you're right

Q In April, you were working late, thought you were having menstraul cramps. The dr said you were 6 months pregnant. What went through your mind

A I couldn't believe it. If this man would just give me some motrin the cramps would go away. We were going back and forth fetus fetus. He asked how old I was I said 37 and he said a fetus is a baby and I said I know that.

Q How did your husband react to all of this

A we were both pretty shocked. He passed out in L&D. He was very shocked. We were all shocked. my entire family.

---
Allison Stewart:
There is a collective comment from the control room: HOW DID SHE NOT KNOW?

Both anchors: ha ha ha
----

Okay. This woman had tried to get pregnant for many years but couldn't and thought that it was impossible.

I don't begrudge or demean her for that. In fact, I'm very happy for the mother and the father as this was obviously a child that was wanted and is deeply loved by both parents and all family members.

I suppose my disugst lies in the way the media is playing this up. First, "congratulating" her for not having any of the tell-tale signs of pregnancy.

Secondly, because this woman didn't know she was pregnant, she did not get proper prenatal medical attention, no prenatal vitamins. Was she a smoker? A drinker --- Again, this isn't the fault of the mother (as she didn't know), but I love how that little thought is just forgotten away

Thirdly, this is a REMINDER to all of you fuckers out there who believe that abortion should be illegal because "women know" they're pregnant. Or that "You've got serious problems if you don't know after a few months that you're pregnant"

BULLSHIT. Women do NOT have a fucking kitchen timer in their stomach that pops out when they get pregnant. Some women know the first month, other women, like this woman, didn't know until she was 6 months pregnant and about to give birth.

---

So to the anti-choicers out there--let's say this situation was reversed:

well educated 37 year old woman in stable married relationship goes to the hospital for severe menstrual cramps and finds out she's 6 months pregnant. Never had any indications of pregnancy at all. Let's say, though, that unlike the lady in the story, this was NOT a wanted child. This was NOT a planned pregnancy.

Should she be allowed to get an abortion? She didn't know. This wasn't an 11-th hour decision. Her desire to have abortion would have been just as strong if she found out she was 2 months pregnant. Her body didn't work in the 'normal' way. She is just as shocked to find out she's 6 months pregnant than she would be at the news she's 2 months pregnant.

So why would you deny this woman the right to seek abortion if that was her choice?

[shrike]

1. This was on a national news channel?

These stories have been around for as long as I can remember. (Don't you think these ladies would get a clue when their periods stop? But having never been pregnant myself, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.) Then again, they were always on the local news -- sort of a bright little feature to end the broadcast. But on MSNBC? They're scrapping the bottom of the barrel now, all in hopes of avoiding Iraq.

[WildClarySage]

21. Shrike, not all women have regular periods.

I've gone six months between periods several times and not been pregnant. It happens.

[BlueEyedSon]

2. Is she obese? Is she stupid? Yeah, those 2 conditions are GIFTS!

[Heddi]

5. No, she wasn't obese

The baby was born in April, at 6 months of gestation. She (the baby) only weighed a pound and a few ounces.

From the interview, she seemed pretty normal, intelligence-wise. THey mentioned the work she was doing at the time she started going into labour (she thought it was menstrual cramps, so maybe she was having periodic spotting or bleeding?) and it wasn't, like, McDonalds or anything.

She seemed pretty normal and stable to me. They showed her sitting in her house feeding the baby, and it didn't look like she lived in a hovel or anything :shrug:

[zalinda]

7. Sorry, but there are women who don't look pregnant

until very late. And there are some women who menstruate the entire time they are pregnant. I've know 2 women who at 6 months no one knew they were pregnant. One was a 16 year old, the other was a go-go dancer. Yeah, the dancer worked until she was 6 months along in a decorated bra and panties.

And, my aunt had periods throughout one of her pregnancies.

Surprise pregnancies are more common than people think.

zalinda

[BlueEyedSon]

8. So maybe she FORGOT she had sex?

[Heddi]

9. She and her husband had tried to achieve pregnancy for many years and

failed repeatedly. She was 37 years old and had never been pregnant before in her life. She was under the impression that she or her husband were infertile/sterile.

SHe was married. Of course she had sex. Probably alot. Probably frequently.

If she's 37, and hadn't been able to get pregnant in the previous 10 years (as alluded to in the story), there's nothing odd about her thinking "hmm...infertile for 10 years....safe to have unprotected sex because the chances of me getting pregnant are pretty low"

Surely you're not blaming this woman for the way her body reacted to the pregnancy by showing no signs, right?

[BlueEyedSon]

10. No, but every one of these stories (where the baby goes full term)

includes some amount of cluelessness and/or obesity.

My baby started kickboxing (in utero) at 4 1/2 months... kinda hard to miss that.....

[Heddi]

12. Perhaps she was clueless but she wasn't obese

and didn't seem particularly stupid to me when they interviewed her.

Women's bodies are different, I suppose. Some gain tons of weight, some gain none. Some have morning sickness, some have none.

Our bodies respond to different things differently.

In the story, she said she was at work and had horrible "menstrual" cramps and went to the emergency room with her husband and that's when she found out she was pregnant.

When she was asked if she saw any symptoms, she said 'none at the time' although now when she looks back, she realizes there were 2 pairs of jeans she couldn't fit into anymore. Because she didn't mention lack of mensturaion (hallmark sign of pregnancy), it would lead me to believe that she either had irregular periods pre-pregnancy, or continued to have periods while she was pregnant.

I guess I have no reason to doubt her. She said she had no idea she was pregnant espeically given the fact that she and her husband had been unsuccessful in the past at having a child. She was 37 years old and I"m sure pretty much in-tune with her body. If it were a 16 year old, I'd say "yeah, lack of knowledge" but I don't think it's the case with this woman. I honestly believe her that she had no idea because her body did not respond in the 'normal' way that women's bodies respond during pregnancy :shrug:

[zalinda]

15. Except that some babies are very quiet

or they only move at night when mom is sleeping. Some move so slowly the feel only like gas movement.

I thought my son was twins, because I didn't think one could move so often, but that was about at 6 months.

zalinda

[BlueEyedSon]

16. deleted.

[REP]

20. Not Every Pregnancy Is The Same

Your pregnancy was exactly like, well, your pregnancy. Not every pregnancy is alike.

[iverglas]

23. I see the book of bizarre rude questions is being passed around

"So maybe she FORGOT she had sex?"

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

Did you not bother reading the facts? Not bother applying your store of general knowledge to them? Or maybe just decide that none of that mattered as much as making a pointless and offensive comment about a total stranger?

Is there some possibility that you believe that every instance of having sex in a woman's life results in pregnancy? (Hey, even though we know that this woman had tried for years to become pregnant, which I suspect involved having sex a fair bit, and never before did.)

I can't think of any other reason why you would think your question in any way pertinent.

What urge is it that prompts people to make pointless and offensive comments about people they don't know anything about, and who aren't even around to answer their rude and bizarre questions?

If you want to know the answer to yours, why don't you phone her up and put it to her?

You might want to think of some explanation for asking it first, of course.

[lukasahero]

3. The "lucky you, you never got fat" line of praise is repugnant

The baby weighed "At birth she was a pound and 6 ounces." and this is something these people think is a good thing? Dear goddess how did that little one survive? Eh, who cares? The important thing is the mother didn't get "fat". Good grief.

Oh and thanks for the rant to the "a woman knows she pregnant by" x crowd. Much appreciated. Of course they'll just say she "should" have known (all women know these things all the time after all). :eyes:

Edited for grammar.

[Silverhair]

4. I once had a neighbor who didn't know she was PG until she delivered.

No kidding. She was incredibly FAT. She started having pains, went to ER, and discovered she was in labor. The baby was a full term baby. She kept and raised the child.

Suppose on diagnoses she had demanded an abortion before the delivery. Usually labor lasts several hours so she would still have had time.

Good question for both sides. At this late stage, should abortion still be an option?

While I generally support a woman's right to choose, in this special case, I would have to say that she was just too late. The baby is already on the way. If she doesn't want it, let it be adopted.

I will instantly admit that this kind of case is extremely rare and basing a legal argument on a special case makes for bad law. But it can make for interesting discussion.

[Heddi]

6. The woman in the story I posted, though, was a little under

six months pregnant when she found out and then delivered a few days later.

Not quite the same as full term.

And for the record, the woman in the story was not obese or anything close to it. SHe had a 'normal' body,---not stick thin, not 500 lbs. She said she had no clues other than not being able to fit into a couple of pairs of pants.

When the baby was born, it only weighed 1 pound, 4 ounces I believe. She had the baby in april and it's just come home because it had to spend time in NICU because of its terribly undeveloped state

[BlueEyedSon]

11. Actually its a pretty sad story. I have friends (2 pairs) that had twins

(each)... kids were 1.5 to 3 lbs. One died, all have problems.

[Heddi]

13. Wow. That's small.

The woman in the story was being interviewed while feeding her daughter on camera. THe baby was born at right around 6 months gestational age back in April. That means that the baby is now 4 months old but that baby was still VERY tiny.

one pound. That's tiny. That's 16 ounces.

I'm amazed that the little girl is alive at this point because lung function and viability are really the last things to develop (along with kidney & liver function) and that's why so many premie babies don't make it, or have a hard road to hoe because of respiratory underdevelopment which either leads to death right after birth, or soon afterwards.

I'm glad she's doing well. The mom said she was totally surprised because she and her husband were never able to conceive before and she thought that having natural children, at this point, was completely out of the question.

[rebecca_herman]

17. I'm guessing she was about 24 weeks?

At that point 50% of babies now make it... anyway, I'm happy for them that they were able to have a child after all those years and that the baby lived, I hope it's healthy.

And I guess my answer to the question is no, I would not support an elective abortion at 6 months being legal.

[Heddi]

18. Why not? msg...

If the idea is that 6 months is too long....well, she didn't KNOW for 6 months that she was pregnant. If she didn't want the child or didn't plan on having the child why is that out of the question? WHy should she be punished for her body not acting 'normal' and giving assumptive signs of pregnancy as happens in about 98% of all other pregnancies?

[rebecca_herman]

19. Because

My reason why I believe abortion should be legal is because the woman owns her body. Therefore, she gets to decide if the fetus stays in her body. At that point, it can survive on its own, and it is developed enough that it already has a cerebral cortex with significant activity, so it can't even be called a vegetable. If she wants it out of her body and can find a doctor who will actually deliver that early for that reason, fine, but basically what I believe is a woman has the right to say the fetus can no longer stay, but not that it HAS to die if it is capable of its own surival.

To me, saying a woman can get a really late abortion for no medical reason if she didn't know she was pregnant before is just too close to saying a woman who never found out she was pregnant before suddenly going into labor and rapidly giving birth can smother the newborn because if she had known months ago she would have had an abortion. I am not saying it is EXACTLY the same thing, but it is just too close to me - for me a fetus at that point is just too developed to kill without a medical reason.

Obviously, there are people who believe life begins at birth and what I believe is not going to change their minds.

I don't really want to debate this at all, however. I have simply stated what I believe, and now I am done with this. *shrug*

[iverglas]

24. if you don't want to "debate" something

why not just whisper it to some god in the dark?

Given your past experience, you would seem to be quite aware that you are unable to defend your positions. What you might want to spend your time doing, then, is developing an ability to do that -- or maybe first, asking yourself why you can't defend them.

It may be that you could defend your positions if you just learned a little more and thought about it a little more. It may be that they're indefensible.

Ordinarily, I wouldn't care how it shook out. But when what you're doing is taking a position that, if adopted as policy, would affect other people's lives, and asserting it in public where, as you presumably intend, it could influence someone else, then I do care.

If you don't want someone else to be influenced by your position, there is no reason to state it publicly. Nobody really cares, y'know?

If you do want someone else to be influenced by your position, then prepare for it to be opposed.

And if you choose not to respond sincerely and in good faith and relevantly to objections to it stated sincerely and in good faith, then you can hardly be regarded as someone interested in democratic discourse. You simply look like someone who wants her own way in matters that she has not demonstrated are any of her business.

http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/1999/1/02/demo/Glossary/glossaryhtml/ddiscourse.html

Democratic discourse

Democratic discourse is a "civilized debate among convictions, in which one party can recognize the other parties as co-combatants in the search for authentic truths without sacrificing its own claims to validity." (Taylor, 133) Democratic discourse is essential to a well-functioning democracy in which citizens are able to express diverse opinions in the form of "reasonable disagreement". Reciprocity is also necessary as it allows for a multi-dimensional flow of ideas and discussion which may affect all parties.

[rebecca_herman]

25. I explained it because I was asked

But I am sick of wasting time on abortion debates. My experience is that no one EVER changes their mind in these. EVER. I have never seen a single person, and this is on multiple boards, not all of which were even political. I have better things to do with my time.

And for what it's worth, you seem plenty willing to, if you had the right, make policies that would negatively effect the personal lives of those that do not agree with you. How are YOU any better? You seem to only care about the personal lives of people who want to have abortions; you don't seem to give a crap how the lives of those who would choose not to are affected. That's not choice.

But since you seem to eager to pick a fight - may I ask what is so indefensible about the fact that at some time prior to birth a fetus has the same type brain activity as a newborn - the cerebral cortex and higher functions of the brain are active at 6 months of pregnancy - when brain activity is the standard by which we judge whether someone is alive and whether to remove someone from life support? In addition, I've noticed you showing a very negative attitude toward news stories and examples concerning those who want to try and continue a pregnancy in difficult circumstances. How is that any of your business? How is forcing an abortion against the will of the pregnant woman and anyone she wishes to consult with better than forcing a birth?

Quite frankly, I am done with this forum. I guess you can't post here unless you think abortion should always be legal, even on a woman 9 months pregnant, with no physical or mental health issues at all, with a completely healthy fetus. Good riddance.

[iverglas]

27. scusi?

I explained it because I was asked

Actually, you voluntarily jumped into the thread and offered your opinion of your own accord:

"And I guess my answer to the question is no, I would not support an elective abortion at 6 months being legal."

Nobody was asking *you*, as I recall.

My experience is that no one EVER changes their mind in these. EVER. I have never seen a single person, and this is on multiple boards, not all of which were even political.

Well, I have.

But whatever. You're the one choosing to be publishing your opinions in such places ... and then complaining. ??

And for what it's worth, you seem plenty willing to, if you had the right, make policies that would negatively effect the personal lives of those that do not agree with you. How are YOU any better?

Well, let's see.

First, what?? am I doing?? Assuming that you are referring to abortion policy (since, as far as I know, you don't know anything at all about my positions on any other policies), the way things "seem" to you seem rather strange to me.

I suppose that if you're going to claim that your "personal life" is affected by me having an abortion (or marrying a partner of the same sex, or getting divorced, or doing any of a myriad of other things that are covered by what we usually consider to be "personal life"), then gosh, you must be right. You define your "personal life" to include mine, and I'm just stuck with that.

How am I any better? Well, to start with, the premise of your question is of course simply false. I don't have to accept your definition of anyone else's "personal life" as including what I do in my own.

But in so far as I do advocate policies that negatively impact someone else's exercise of a right or freedom, I present my reasons. I cite the generally-held values of the society and attempt to demonstrate how my positions are consistent with them. I attempt to demonstrate the importance of the objective of the policy I advocate, and why it should take precedence over a particular exercise of a particular right or freedom. I present facts that, in my submission, support my conclusion. I explain the reasoning that leads me to that conclusion.

But since you seem to eager to pick a fight - may I ask what is so indefensible about the fact that at some time prior to birth a fetus has the same type brain activity as a newborn - the cerebral cortex and higher functions of the brain are active at 6 months of pregnancy - when brain activity is the standard by which we judge whether someone is alive and whether to remove someone from life support?

Well ... that's a bit of a dog's breakfast, isn't it?

A "fact" is neither defensible nor indefensible. It's a fact. If it actually is a fact, of course. Yours doesn't happen to be quite that.

The issue is the relevance of the fact in making distinctions, distinctions (and similarities) between things being the basis on which we decide what to do about those things. It may be a fact that fetal brain function is sufficient at some point *after* 24 weeks (best estimates are actually some point after 26 weeks) for a fetus to "feel" pain in some sense, for example ... but it's also a fact that a fetus has not been born.

Another problematic fact you cite is that we judge "whether someone is alive" by brain activity. We do no such thing. We decide whether or not to permit life-sustaining treatment to be withdrawn based on brain activity. The fact that legislation (such as California's) permits this to be done is the evidence that a "brain-dead" person is not actually regarded as dead at all; legislation is required in order for it to be lawful to treat him/her as if s/he were dead.

The two situations are quite distinguishable, in my submission. In one case, you advocate that brain function be used as the criterion for determining whether a fetus, which is *not* a human being, may be removed from a woman's body and not given life-sustaining treatment. In the other, society generally agrees that absence of brain function is a criterion for determining whether a human being may be denied life-sustaining treatment. I can see the difference.

In addition, I've noticed you showing a very negative attitude toward news stories and examples concerning those who want to try and continue a pregnancy in difficult circumstances. How is that any of your business?

Gee. How too bad that you're able to make this false allegation, and ask that loaded question, and yet apparently are unwilling to substantiate it.

I, of course, know what you're talking about. I know you're talking about the thread in which a man's decision to have his brain-dead wife kept alive on life support for several months while her body gestated a fetus was being discussed.

And *I* know that I showed no such attitude, and that you either understand this and are misrepresenting what I did say or somehow managed to completely fail to grasp what I did say. Just for starters, I'm the one who suggested that pregnant women would do well to have "pregnancy wills", stating their wishes in the event that they suffer catastrophic illness or injury during pregnancy and are incapable of making life-and-death (or gestation-termination) decisions for themselves.

Interesting, though, that you should say "those who want to try and continue a pregnancy in difficult circumstances" ... since in the case in issue, none of the "those" wanting to continue the pregnancy was actually the pregnant woman ...

Nonetheless, all you've done here is misrepresent my position, whether in good or bad faith, in the same way others did in that thread. I attempted to make the point that there is a serious issue that *is* a matter of public concern, when a pregnant woman becomes incapable of making such decisions for herself, and that it may be that the people making such decisions for her are not acting in her best interests ... and here you are saying that I did something quite different. Sigh; why does one bother, eh? Why not just issue an invitation for anybody who's interested to put words in one's mouth and sign one's name to them?

How is forcing an abortion against the will of the pregnant woman and anyone she wishes to consult with better than forcing a birth?

How is asking a question that contains a VICIOUSLY FALSE premise about the person you are addressing, which is plainly what yours contains about ME -- I NEVER ADVOCATED "FORCING AN ABORTION" AGAINST ANYONE'S WILL (the thread wasn't even ABOUT abortion, it was about whether to allow a brain-dead individual to die) -- in any way to be regarded as something a decent person would do?

Quite frankly, I am done with this forum. I guess you can't post here unless you think abortion should always be legal, even on a woman 9 months pregnant, with no physical or mental health issues at all, with a completely healthy fetus. Good riddance.

Oh dear oh dear oh dear. It's the letter of resignation. Nobody can fire you; you quit. You have better things to do with your time. Blah de blah de blah. And so much for democratic discourse. But hark! others have done it better than you:

"i'm Leaving This Forum forever" Template

Need to make an exit? Need to go out with a bang? Is this place full of "assholes" and "stupid people”? Simply use the "This Forum Sucks, I'm Leaving" Template!! Now you can still be a worthless attention whoring drama queen down to the very last post!

SUBJECT HEADER

The first step in the template is the Subject header. Let’s start with
examples…

1. I’m leaving
2. Goodbye
3. "…this is the end, beautiful friend…"
4. This Forum Sucks, I’m Leaving!

The first two examples are blunt and to the point. It means you are serious and mean business. It’s as if you are so frustrated, you don’t even know what to say!

The third example shows the effectiveness of a song lyric. This strategy is very different from the “blunt” strategy. It showcases a more thoughtful and emotional ending to your presence on the forum. Do you want to take a more tear-jerker route with this exit? Have you had a really tight bond with many of the regulars on the forum? Have you and the other forumites “been there for each other”? Have you been known to stumble home drunk and post deep emotional poetry or fervent social commentary? If you answered “yes” to any of these questions, this may be the subject heading for you!

If you just want to add a little punch to your exit, simple anger usually suffices… the fourth example is a good one to use for such a purpose!

THE POST

The post can be broken down into simple guidelines:

1. State the reason!

Perhaps you are leaving because of a general decline in forum behavior, but more than likely, you can pinpoint a specific occurrence that served as the “straw that broke the camel’s back”. Point it out! You may be able to get a few extra points with this exit, and actually make the perpetrator feel guilty.

2. Reflect on the past!

Here is a simple law: the effectiveness of the “I’m leaving” post is directly proportional to the length of time you have spent on the forum. Did this forum once serve as your sanctuary? Was there a time in your life that this forum served as a second family? Or better yet… did it serve as your “only family” when you “hit a rough patch”? Go ahead and blurt it out! Don’t hold back now! It’s good to make these “assholes” feel they have ruined a once holy place.

3. Kudos to the good forumites!

Yes. Name names if you have to. Give credit where it’s due. There needs to be an element of sadness in your exit. If everyone is an asshole, then what’s so sad about you leaving, right?! Go ahead and express how much you will miss the “good forumites”. If you do this properly, you may even get some “we’ll be here if you decide to come back” or “you’ll be sorely missed, but we understand” replies. Also, don’t forget to publicly let your forum regular friends know that you guys will still talk on whatever IM software or IRC you use. Sure, you could easily just tell them in private, since you are all so close, but how do you make the “assholes” feel like they are missing out on the wonder that is you!

4. Taking “time off from the Internet” is EN VOGUE!

Yep, you heard me! Everyone is doing it these days! It may not be directly related to why you are leaving, but feel free to add in the fact that you need to take time off the internet and focus on “real life”. Not spending enough time with the kids? Feel a need to focus on your studies? Perhaps you are going to start taking Yoga? Remember… your exit will have more strength if you imply that you are going to be moving on to bigger and better things (i.e. lurking the forum but not posting).

5. Special notice to the forum admins

Sure, they may have nothing to do with any of this, and they don’t care if you’re here or not and in fact they would rather not have such vapid and stupid shit contaminating their forum, but this is where they get their props. Make sure to let them know they run a good place with the exception of those few who have to ruin it for everyone. Also suggest that maybe their forums would be more popular/friendly if they had an “ignore” feature. The key thing to focus on here is that you’re making everyone miss out on your exclusivity, keep that in mind!

... I hope this template will help you guys when you finally get fed up and leave the forum. Remember… it’s your last post… make it unforgettable!

[Nobody]

14. A co-worker from several jobs ago was in the same situation

She figured it out when her period didn't come after Month 7. She menstruated up to then and was wondering why she put on so much weight.

[WildClarySage]

22. I knew a nurse who didn't know she was pregnant until 6 months.

As for the other arguments, let me just add anecdotally, I'm expecting #2 at age 37, after 9 years of trying, and the differences are astounding. My son, who is almost 11, was pretty still in utero, easy going and not a whole lot of fetal movement. We found out I was pregnant with him very early (after a few days) simply because I'd gone to the dr to find out why I hadn't menstruated in the past 6 months. Turns out I was 10 or so days along. If my doc hadn't decided at the last minute to do a pregnancy test before giving me some meds to bring my period on, or if I hadn't scheduled the appt, that woman could have been me.

This baby is a mover and shaker. I'm only 16 weeks yesterday and I've been feeling movement for the past couple of weeks, and could 'sense' movement for a week or so before that. This kiddo is wayyyyy different from her/his(?) brother. Not all pregnant women feel the same symptoms, and not all pregnancies present the same symptoms.

I wonder, too, if women's health was taken more seriously in this country, if she might have been more likely to have found out sooner and perhaps she might have received prenatal care that could have prevented preterm labor? Lotta if's there, but just wondering if those things could have been factors.

Having experienced infertility, I'm delighted for this family and glad that mom & babe are doing as well as can be expected. I just wish that the public would stop making women out to be clueless, unhealthy or careless with their bodies. An unknown gestation doesn't mean didly squat about women and our morals or health or intelligence whatsoever.

[musical_soul]

26. Good point.

Not sure how a woman can not know she's pregnant, but it obviously happened.