Saturday, December 18, 2010

Keeping it natural


Jeanette Ambush, a customer at Olive’s Beauty Salon, had her hair ironed by Arendas Myers.
Jeanette Ambush, a customer at Olive’s Beauty Salon, had her hair ironed by Arendas Myers.
Boston.com Mobile
Meghan E. Irons, Globe Staff / Dec 5, 2010
Natural black hair is becoming big business in Boston.
A growing number of companies are catering to local African-American women who sport their naturally kinky hair instead of using harsh chemical relaxers and other straighteners. These businesses are tapping into a burgeoning niche in the $154 million US black hair-care market.
More stylists are specializing in natural hairstyles such as curly up-dos, two-strand twists, dreadlocks (neatly matted coils of hair), and Afros. For instance, eight years ago, Martine Bernard of Roxbury was the only person in the city certified to do Sisterlocks, or finely dreaded hair. Now, there are nearly two dozen trainees and consultants — a boost that surprises Bernard, who has worn Sisterlocks for about a decade.
“It began as a hobby,’’ she said. “Now, it’s become a big business.’’
Natural hair salons are also popping up. Muriel’s Natural Hair Studio in Dorchester, which was the sole natural hair salon locally for more than a decade, launched a second salon in Dudley Square, and Fresh Start Natural Hair Studio opened in Dorchester.
Muriel’s owner, Dianne Princess Taylor, said salons are responding to demand. “People are just tired of the chemicals,’’ said Taylor, whose natural hair clientele is up 30 percent in the past seven years.
Aileen Allen, a 46-year-old Dorchester resident who stopped relaxing her hair eight years ago, said going natrual has never felt better. “A lot of women I know are living healthier now,’’ she said, “and the hair is just an extension of that.’’
As a result, traditional salons that offer chemical treatments are courting women with natural hairstyles, too. Olive’s Beauty Salon in Brighton is a 51-year-old shop that specializes in chemical straightening, but now 25 percent of its clients wear their hair naturally. Owner Stephanie Aguillar said there’s greater appreciation for naturally kinky coils.
“Society has accepted it more,’’ she said.
Even Target Corp. began stocking natural hair products in March, including Miss Jessie’s.
“Our sales have definitely increased in Boston,’’ said Titi Branch, Miss Jessie’s cofounder, who would not give specific figures.

Friday, December 17, 2010

Mom defies doctor, has baby her way


CNN Health

By Elizabeth Cohen, Senior Medical Correspondent
December 16, 2010 1:28 p.m. EST
Aneka gave birth to a healthy boy this month at home, after she had given birth to three children through Cesarean section.
Aneka gave birth to a healthy boy this month at home, after she had given birth to three children through Cesarean section.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Aneka decided to give birth vaginally after having C-sections
  • She was told her actions were irresponsible and that she could die
  • Vaginal births after cesarean sections pose some risk, but so does having another cesarean
(CNN) -- On Thursday, December 2, as Aneka sat at home nine months pregnant, the phone rang.
It was her obstetrician wanting to know where the heck she was. Did Aneka forget that today was the day for her cesarean section? How could she have forgotten?
No, Aneka hadn't forgotten. She hadn't shown up intentionally.
"She told me, 'You're being irresponsible. Your baby could die. You could die,'" Aneka recalls. Then the doctor hung up.
Aneka (she doesn't want her last name used) had already resolved to not have a C-section, even though the doctor told her it was absolutely necessary. She wasn't going to be opened up surgically, no matter what her doctor said, no matter what any doctor said.
In some online communities, Aneka is a hero who defied the obstetrical establishment and gave birth her way. To many doctors, however, she's a risk-taker who put her and her baby in peril by giving birth at home.
'No, no, no, you can't do this'
Aneka's story begins nine years ago with the birth of her first daughter, Nya. After 10 hours of labor, her doctor told her she wasn't progressing quickly enough, and she needed a C-section.
"I didn't know any better, so I said OK," Aneka says.
In a postpartum visit six weeks later, the doctor told her she'd needed the surgery because her hips were too small to pass the baby.
"I thought to myself, what's she talking about, I don't have small hips," Aneka remembers.
Four years later, doctors told Aneka she couldn't deliver her second child vaginally, since Nya had been delivered by C-section. Studies show when a woman gives birth vaginally after having had a previous C-section, there's a higher chance her uterus will rupture since she's pushing against scar tissue.
Then again, when Aneka was pregnant with her third child, son Adasjan, she had a C-section for the same reason.
When she became pregnant with her fourth child, a boy named Annan Ni'em, she expected to have a fourth C-section. But about seven months into her pregnancy, Aneka started to read more about childbirth online, and noticed a documentary by actress Ricki Lake called "The Business of Being Born," a film released in 2008 that questions the way American women have babies.
Aneka made a controversial health decision by giving birth vaginally to her fourth child after three previous C-sections.
Aneka made a controversial health decision by giving birth vaginally to her fourth child after three previous C-sections.
"I was a little bit angry after watching documentary," she said. "It made me realize I'd been robbed of the birthing experience. If possible, all women should be allowed to birth naturally."
"I asked my doctor if I could try delivering vaginally, and she said no," Aneka says. "I called the hospital and they said they wouldn't allow it, and I called three other hospitals and they wouldn't let me deliver vaginally, either."
The closest hospital that would let her try to deliver vaginally was in Manassas, Virginia, about 90 minutes from her Maryland home. She and her husband, Al, decided that was too far.
So just seven weeks away from her December 1 due date, Aneka contacted the International Cesarean Awareness Network, an advocacy group that promotes vaginal births after cesareans, or VBACs.
"She asked me if I could find someone who would deliver her vaginally," remembers Bobbie Humphrey, who works with ICAN. "She started to cry because she'd heard 'no, no, no you can't do this' so many times."
But Humphrey told her yes, that she knew of a midwife who would be willing to deliver her baby at home.
An article in Midwifery Today, written by Barbara Stratton, the National VBAC ban chair for ICAN, lists several approaches women have used to protest a VBAC denial.
On December 5, three days after the C-section that never took place, Annan Ni'em was born at home. He weighed 9 pounds, 6 ounces and was delivered after 20 hours of labor, and, she says, just four minutes of pushing. He was completely healthy.
"We were all crying at the delivery," says Humphrey, a doula who assisted the midwife at the birth. "It was very emotional. I was just so proud of Aneka."
Soon, word spread on e-mail lists and chat rooms about the healthy delivery.
"People were e-mailing Aneka saying 'congratulations, you're a role model," Humphrey says.
"Potential for catastrophe"
Vaginal births after cesarean sections pose some risk, but so does having another cesarean. After weighing the risks of each, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists came out with a statement earlier this year saying it's reasonable to consider allowing women who've had two C-sections to try to have a vaginal delivery.
The group added that there's limited data about what should happen with women, like Aneka, who've had more than one previous cesarean.
Despite the ACOG statement, many doctors and hospitals refuse to do VBACs because of the risk. Women who try to deliver vaginally after cesarean have between a 0.5 percent and a 0.9 percent chance of having a uterine rupture -- a potentially deadly complication for both mother and baby, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Women with two previous C-sections have a 1 percent to 3.7 percent risk of a uterine rupture, according to ACOG.
Studies show the risk for a uterine rupture goes up if the woman's labor is induced. Aneka's was not.
Dr. Jeffrey Ecker, a spokesman for ACOG and director of obstetrical clinical research and quality assurance at Massachusetts General Hospital, warns against reaching too many conclusions from Aneka's successful VBAC at home.
"Anecdote is no way for folks to make plans," he says. "Just because something turned out well for one patient doesn't mean there are no risks and it will turn out well for you."
He says there's a reason that uterine rupture is more likely when a woman's had a C-section.
"You cut into the muscle of the uterus during a cesarean, and it heals with a scar that is often weaker than the muscle that was there before surgery," he says. "The scar can be weak enough that the contractions cause it to separate."
In that case, blood flow to the placenta can be interrupted, and the baby doesn't get enough oxygen.
In its latest position paper, ACOG recommended that VBACs be attempted "in facilities with staff immediately available to provide emergency care."
"There is potential for catastrophe if [a uterine rupture] happens in a home environment," says Dr. William Grobman, an ACOG spokesman and associate professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University.
Grobman says he understands Aneka's desire not to have another C-section.
"This was a last resort. This was a choice because she had no other options," he says.
But Aneka says if she has another child, she'll give birth at home.
"Once you have that experience there's no other way to go, being in the comfort of your home without any unnecessary interventions and feeling like you're in charge," she says.
CNN's Sabriya Rice contributed to this report.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

64 pct of elderly black Americans face risk of poverty



By IB Times Staff Reporter | December 14, 2010 3:24 AM EST
As much as 50 percent of Americans between the ages of 60 and 90 will face at least one year of poverty or near-poverty going forward and that poverty will not be evenly distributed across the population, according to a new study.


Research done by Mark R. Rank, the Herbert S. Hadley Professor of Social Work at the Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis, found that the risk of elderly black Americans facing poverty was double that of elderly white Americans. It says that although 32.7 percent of older white Americans will experience at least one year below the official poverty line, the corresponding percentage for older black Americans was double that at 64.6 percent.
Rank's study also finds that prosperity levels of married elderly people are much higher than those of their unmarried counterparts. While as many as 51 percent of unmarried older Americans were likely to face poverty, the married ones face half the risk.
He has found three reasons why elderly Americans will face poverty, a statement on the website of Washington University in St. Louis explains.
Foremost is the fact that Americans are living longer. Secondly, the influx of Americans entering their senior years, coupled with a declining percentage of workers in the prime earning years, will put increasing pressure upon the benefits and sustainability of the Social Security and Medicare programs as well as other social safety nets programs directed at the elderly. Thirdly, economic trends show that Americans have not been accumulating adequate savings for retirement.
Education is also a determining factor, the study points out. "For those with fewer than 12 years of education, the percentage experiencing poverty was 48.4 percent compared with 20.5 percent for those with 12 or more years of education."
Rank published the result of his studies in his article “A Life Course Approach to Understanding Poverty Among Older American Adults,” in the current issue ofFamilies in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services.
The challenges faced by the elderly are not limited to just poverty; a large number of them will face difficulties dealing with financial emergencies. “Fifty-eight percent of those between the ages of 60 and 84 will at some point fail to have enough liquid assets to allow them to weather an unanticipated expense or downturn in income,” Rank says.
Rank also offers his views on how the problem can be addressed. He says the need for more savings among working-age population must be driven home. Also important are cooperative living arrangements among the elderly and the establishment of fair terms with respect to reverse mortgage programs, and strengthening the Social Security and Supplemental Security Income programs, the statement says.
Rank used data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, the longest running longitudinal data set that contains in-depth information on family demographic and economic behavior.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

FDNY's Black Firefighter Problem



How would you perform in a test of logic and reading comprehension, even if the terms used in the questions made no sense to you?
Here’s what we mean: try to come up with the answer to the following strange question:
Q: When operating in an exocraft which uses a multidefraction system, it is necessary for an exoditer to maintain adequate defraction at the combinator coupler of the exoditing ray. The correct defraction is calculated by adding 5 picograms of inert matter for each micrometer of additional aperture that is being used, to a constant starting base of 50 picograms.
An exoditing team is operating with a multidefraction system and is in the process of using 4 additional micrometers of aperture. The correct defraction that needs to be applied in this situation is: A) 50 picograms, B) 60 picograms, C) 70 picograms, D) 80 picograms.
Did you figure out the answer? It might seem a little confusing at first, but the answer should become plain. It’s not really difficult to figure out that “70 picograms” is the correct response, even if you don’t have the slightest idea what “exoditing” or a “multidefraction system” is (terms that we invented). Getting the right answer is simply a matter of following the logic of the question and doing some simple math.
If there really were “exoditers” who practiced “defraction,” you could argue that they would have an advantage in answering this question. But even without that knowledge, it’s easy to get the correct answer—and there is only one correct response.
Now, why bother you with this made-up example? Because very similar test questions are at the center of one of the longest and most contentious court fights in New York City’s history.
We’ll put back the original words from the actual question, the one we used to create that sample above, and it should immediately become clear what we’re talking about:
Q: When operating in a building which uses a standpipe system, it is necessary for a firefighter to maintain adequate pressure at the nozzle of the firefighting stream. The correct nozzle pressure is calculated by adding an additional 5 psi (pound per square inch) for each length of hose that is being used, to a constant starting base of 50 psi.
A firefighting team is operating in a building with a standpipe system and is in the process of using 4 lengths of hose. The correct nozzle pressure that needs to be applied in this situation is: A) 50 psi, B) 60 psi, C) 70 psi, D) 80 psi.
Yes, that’s an actual question from an entrance examination used to screen candidates for the city’s fire department. And, as in our previous sample, the answer should be easy for you discover: 70 psi.
New York City’s firefighting exams have historically been full of these kinds of questions. On the surface, they seem to require an awful lot of familiarity with firefighting equipment and procedural jargon. But when you look closer, you see that in just about every case, the answer can be determined with straightforward logic. In this example, you really don’t need to know what a “standpipe system” is or how pressure is added at the nozzle of a fire hose. You just need to add 5 psi for every length of hose on top of the base pressure of 50. In other words, this is a simple question requiring only basic math. (See also, "The 10 Most Idiotic Questions from FDNY Entrance Exams.")
It may surprise you to learn, then, that this question (and many others like it) have been found by the federal court system to be part of a virulently racist entrance process that has been designed to keep blacks and other minority New Yorkers from becoming firefighters.
The question above was taken from a test that was discarded as too biased against non-whites. The most recent test, we have every reason to believe, is very much like it. (The test is under court seal so we are not allowed to see it.) And even though the most recent use of the entrance exam resulted in a higher number of non-white successes than in recent FDNY history, a federal judge declared the test just as biased as its predecessors and initially refused to allow the recruits who passed it—white, black, Latino, and otherwise—to become firefighters. (By the time he gave the city a way they could hire the test-passers with conditions, the city had chosen not to.)
There’s no question that there is something very wrong with how the FDNY adds new employees. For nearly 40 years, various courts have issued injunctions to correct the miserable record of non-white hiring. New York’s fire department may, in fact, be the whitest large institution run by a major city in the United States. Your chance of becoming a firefighter in New York if you aren’t white, Irish, or Italian, and come from a family of firefighters has traditionally been very slim.
But is the entrance exam really to blame? And can it be called racist simply because blacks and Latinos don’t score as well as whites, even when the questions have no discernible racial component to them at all? And why is it taking decades for the city and the courts to come up with some way of recruiting new firefighters that reflects the kind of success of the NYPD and other city departments?