Response to article on line

I was advised to respond to the article on line as well and included today’s earlier post about the reporter. I don’t know if they will print it or not so here it is…:

Having discussed the title of this article with the reporter to express my concern of possible repercussions of article title and using “baby blues” in stead of using any of the following, post natal depression/psychosis/anxiety and prenatal depression,we had agreed to meet today to talk but it didn’t go to plan (see my response on my blog

When I mention repercussions of not using the proper terminology, you invalidate a womans experience and add stigma to an illness which has enough of that already. I am disappointed that you had not used poper terminology in the title, as the article itself is quite rightly detailing the plans to move to leverndale (give you a clue, there’s some stigma already but you need to do the work to find out why), but instead I have been informed that as baby blues is more identifiable with people, that this title was used (hint hint, there is more stigma in the response I received) .

As someone who experienced post natal depression, I am offended by your term as are many other women across the world(I communicate on twitter), are. I was told after the birth of my child that it was just “the baby blues” but knew it was much more than that and I had already began my long journey of PND at that point and it prolonged my experience because it wasn’t taken seriously immediately. Do more women need to die before those words are changed and the issue is taken more seriously? I sure hope not,

Next time , please do your research properly before dealing with such a sensitive subject.(directed at the headline)

Update: They printed *some of it, missing out the important points…. Very bad mr moderator

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...