Tom & Katie’s Scientologist Birth
I know what you’re all thinking: “Can’t we get something a little more engaging than the lives of celebrities?” Please do read on, as you might actually find some of this intriguing. As we all by now know, Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are dating and are even expecting a child together in the near future. Holmes has apparently converted to the Church of Scientology, but she may have done so without reading into the finer points of its practices. Scientologists have a very particular way of giving birth, and it is not one that is very considerate to the mothers-to-be. They must deliver their birth in complete silence: no music, no conversing between the doctor and patient, and of course no screaming. Additionally, they may not take any sort of drugs to alleviate the pains associated with child birth. After the birth, the newborn cannot be touched or spoken to for the first week of its life. Those who practice this believe that the silence is necessary to preserve the sanity of the mother and child. They believe that the baby goes through so much pain in its entrance into the world that any more sensory experience may scar them for life. Does all this really make sense?
Asking a woman to give birth in this manner is a hefty request, and some think there may be health risks involved for both the mother and the child. Child psychologist Robert Butterworth claims that there are no health benefits in delivering a child this way, and it may lead to problems later in life: “We are social animals… We need nurturing and holding when we enter the world.” He believes there is a special bond made between mother and baby in the first few weeks of its life, and this sensory depravation may lead to developmental problems later in life.
I personally do not see the point of these practices. What is the point of keeping it quiet for the baby? When he or she is born, they will undoubtedly be screaming themselves, and most likely would not hear or notice other sounds. When they are in the womb, they hear their mother’s heart beating, and the sounds going on outside. Why shock them with silence when they enter the real world? With no physical contact or interaction in the first week, no medical tests can be given to the baby to check their health. Should the baby have some sort of infection that needs to be dealt with, it will only worsen in that time. Hopefully they are fortunate enough to have a healthy baby, despite all these unusual practices. Cruise defends his stance: “I'm living my life. And I'm doing the best that I can, and doing it in a way that I feel is right.” Easy for you to say Tom, you’re not the one giving birth.
Asking a woman to give birth in this manner is a hefty request, and some think there may be health risks involved for both the mother and the child. Child psychologist Robert Butterworth claims that there are no health benefits in delivering a child this way, and it may lead to problems later in life: “We are social animals… We need nurturing and holding when we enter the world.” He believes there is a special bond made between mother and baby in the first few weeks of its life, and this sensory depravation may lead to developmental problems later in life.
I personally do not see the point of these practices. What is the point of keeping it quiet for the baby? When he or she is born, they will undoubtedly be screaming themselves, and most likely would not hear or notice other sounds. When they are in the womb, they hear their mother’s heart beating, and the sounds going on outside. Why shock them with silence when they enter the real world? With no physical contact or interaction in the first week, no medical tests can be given to the baby to check their health. Should the baby have some sort of infection that needs to be dealt with, it will only worsen in that time. Hopefully they are fortunate enough to have a healthy baby, despite all these unusual practices. Cruise defends his stance: “I'm living my life. And I'm doing the best that I can, and doing it in a way that I feel is right.” Easy for you to say Tom, you’re not the one giving birth.
2 Comments:
I most definitely remember reading in a high school psych class that children who are not held early in life develop major problems, quickly. That's the problem with adopting kids from, say, Russia, is they are already permanently damaged from lack of touch. Also, we all know that the ability to learn speech is depleted as a child grows up.
In that psych book, I read something about a couple who kept one of their daughters locked away and never spoke to her. I think she was, maybe... seven years old when the police found her? At any rate, she had psychological/behavioral problems all her life and could never learn speech.
Scientology just doesn't jive with me, really.
i had definitely read somewhere that a child bonds with their mother almost instantaneously.
it's ridiculous to think that secluding a newborn would in any way benefit the child's mental state.
to each their own i suppose. but, this seems like a bad idea.
Post a Comment
<< Home