meeting Tina

You find yourself at a cocktail party with the author of the book you just finished reading. To demonstrate that you really read it, you say, "Hey - thanks for writing Birth, The Surprising History of how we are Born. Your thesis on humans’ behavior regarding birth throughout time, giving emphasis to the changes the process of delivering has gone through over the last few centuries, made me rethink pregnancy & birth. The way men suddenly invaded an all-women profession and, without any knowledge about birthing by the time, unnaturalized the process for both mother and child.

But the author, surprised to be talking to someone who instead of sharing their own birth story actually rephrased the main idea of the text she spent months giving birth to asks, "Really, which parts were most effective or important for you?" When you answer, "Well, in the last third of the book you focused on the postpartum period, which added another angle to the need to take birthing as a natural process, not an illness, further developing the idea of how unnatural men have made delivering in hospitals, which contradicts the way humans have acted up until only a few centuries ago, as you have described on the first 2/3rds of the book. But let me be more specific."

And then you listed the top 3 ideas/pieces of evidence/insights from that final third of the book (and somehow even listed page number references).

1. Bonding (228)

2. Breast-feeding (234)

3. Rooming-In (225)

“It is shocking how modern hospital procedures differ from the natural delivering process. How now we ignore the importance of breastfeeding, of the mothers bonding immediately to a newborn; how rooming-in is a relatively new habit, after the 20^th century. Natural delivery doesn’t solely influence the process of giving birth, but it benefits the mother, for it being a life-changing experience, and the immediate bonding – which benefits both – by breastfeeding and being able to “room-in”, could have long-term implications to the newborn.”

At this point, realizing that she's having a unique conversation with a serious reader of her/his book, the author asks - "But what could I have done to make this a better book - that would more effectively fulfill its mission?" You answer, "Well, let's be clear - your text sought to provide historical – retelling the history of being born since we started evolving to walking up straight and growing our brains, journalistic – adding important data of our recent behavior regarding birth, and policy analysis – relating different countries’ public policies responding to medical dictations throughout the last few centuries, even though those would often come from wrong assumptions, from the perspective of a mother and journalist for the book-reading-public to better understand pregnancy & birth in our culture. Given that aim, and your book, the best advice I would give for a 2nd edition of the text would be to better organize, chronologically, the historical facts. But I don't want you to feel like I'm criticizing. I appreciate the immense amount of labor you dedicated to this important issue and particularly for making me think about natural delivery & placenta eating. In fact, I'm likely to do a lot differently as a result of your book – such as look for natural pain relief, I’ll not consider any other option of delivery besides a natural birth (and why not a water birth?), which I could have considered if not reading your book, and I’ll take this book to Brasil to try to spread your words among my women." The author replies, "Thanks! Talking to you gives me hope about our future as a society!"