WGBH Journal; Natural Childbirth, Changes In Filing Income Tax, Nutrition Education, The Panama Canal, Book Interview

Good afternoon and welcome to BBH just look at. The day's edition of The Journal. Because of this connection the the issue of natural childbirth. Or the peace which might provide some help in the filing of income. Homes. We'll have a report on depression education in Massachusetts public schools and finally look into interviews the author of a book called The Panama Canal. In recent years growing numbers of women have chosen to deliver their babies through methods of natural childbirth this trend raises many questions of doctors relations to the patient in the role which hospitals play. John Morgan looks at some of the issues raised in this report. I hoped and prepared for a natural birth. And like thousands of others the birth of my

child was quote a product not of my own efforts but of medical science. In the latest that a hospital could offer. The fact is that if a woman doesn't really feel that she's produced her child there's a gap between her and the child. And often a gap between herself and her body. And that's what happened to me. Ah the birthing techniques practiced in most American hospitals today. The most satisfying or just the most efficient way to deliver babies. Suzanne arms mother filmmaker and author of two books on birth and modern American obstetrics a season to be born and immaculate deception believes that birth is a very private and joyful experience and that it has been undermined by a modern medical mentality that emphasizes efficiency often at the expense of the mother and child. There are several. Several parts of modern obstetric care that there are really at the root of what's gone wrong with childbirth. The first is aggressive intervention. I don't mean the proliferation of machines and

equipment and skills to handle problems that are really serious that need that kind of equipment. But I mean the proliferation of unnecessary unwarranted dangerous intervention done to control a natural process that is meant to happen spontaneously. Five years ago many if not most of the births in Boston took place under what's known as twilight sleep which was a real euphemism for a form of anesthesia which rendered the woman absolutely senseless and out of her mind and like a raving animal. More recently Boston really has become the root of the increase of his area and at least on the East Coast so in Boston you see hospitals doing anywhere from 15 to 50 percent of their women with abdominal surgery to give birth. Doctor and Grace Barnes obstetrician and gynecologist at the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and assistant clinical professor at the Harvard Medical School. Points out there are cases in which medical intervention is necessary to ensure the

safety of the child. Often the safest thing for the child is the least intervention possible. On the other hand not everybody is has perfect bony structures or has the baby presenting actually perfectly and it may well be that the baby's advantage to hasten the process of birth at the very last stages so that it won't be hung up between the uterus and coming out of the blood supply and all the saving 15 or 20 minutes will make a difference when the auction anation to the baby's brain and time and it would justify a portion of the liver something else. Those are individual matters. In general however Suzanne arms things that prospective parents should investigate on their own alternative settings and methods in which to have their babies. She thinks it is possible to avoid unwanted intervention but it requires a change in attitude as well as a change in location.

Some alternatives are birth in an alternative setting within the hospital could be just an undraped unfettered birth in your own clothes in the own your own position that feels comfortable and that is easier to push to push a baby out right on the labor bed to be able to give birth spontaneously. Even if your labor has had to be induced to be able to do so free of drugs without stirrups without your hands tied down to be able to either touch the baby as it's coming out or have it put directly on your abdomen to be un separated from that baby. There's the change in the attitude of the professionals the use of nurse midwives or other certified midwives as they're used in Europe. Then there course there's home births. There's the alternative birth centers out of hospital to be able to have the people that you want there may not only be your husband. If you're single mother might be your mother. It seems to become an individual process seeking out the information in procedure that fits your needs and wants during the birth of your child. Because according to Susanne arms you can't depend on hospitals for this guidance.

Hospitals are not cooperative. They generally have to be pushed and that's because they're in a moneymaking business and they're also in a business to reduce the number of chances of malpractise suits. And of course what you have to remember is that hospitals are people women far too often are told they can have a natural birth hold their baby bathe their baby go home immediately afterwards to be literally subjected to intervention that they never asked for. And it's hard to fight for your rights lying on your back. You can't personify a hospital. It's too general a thing. There is no question that when you have to do that when you're sitting there for hours on end waiting for a delivery the human tendency is to get it over with and get on to the next thing. So it's inherent in any highly mechanized hospital or an association. To you what you have you got to also recognize that there are women of the want of the baby at their convenience. There are a lot of elective inductions and waivers and they

are not totally the convenience of the doctor they are in agreement between the doctor and the patient that this is what they want. Dr. Bynes is very encouraged. She is seeing great progress in childbirth procedures since the beginning of her own medical practice. When I started my training twilight sleep the combination of Apollo mean to give you amnesia to forget about what happened and then be told Worthing was in very common use and we had women that were essentially non-human they were were drugged and were screaming and writhing and had no memory of it in the delivery room was a zoo. And those women who wanted to participate in their delivery had to do it surrounded by this sort of thing and it was very difficult. And now we've gotten to a patient being awake with their family member there far less medication far happier brighter quicker babies just marvelous and much more human.

But Suzanne arms believes that the right of giving birth still has a long long way to go is the ability to create an experience that retains the D. Potential for joy and magic and privacy. That is what the creation of life is all about and doing so picking and choosing your way through technology so that you can say yes you know I'll have a fetal heart monitor because I'll feel comfortable with that but no I won't have an I.V. that's an intravenous drip so that I can't have any fluids or foods or. Well I'm you know I will not have any medication. I will eat and drink in labor as is comfortable to me I'll walk around in labor. I'll take my comfort being in the position I want to thank you. So there are many many options and unless you know what's available you really can't choose it and that's really what it's about. Author Suzanne arms with obstetrician gynecologist and brace Barnes. I'm Joan Morgan. Time to fill out your income tax forms is not quite the plan but the April

deadline is fast approaching and if you're one of the people who has been traditionally afraid of those official looking farms take heart. The government has promised simplified forms to fill out this year. We plan to feature more helpful hints about tax returns before the April 17th deadline and for the moment we have some information about basic changes in this year's forms. Reporter Peggy Banks spoke to Howard Greene in the Boston chapter of the National Association of accountants. I understand that the federal income tax forms are supposed to have been simplified this year is that true. Well they've simplified it every year lately and I can't see that they make very much change in it. They have simplified it this year to the extent that the earned income. Credit the general tax credit rather is built right into the tax table and your standard deduction is built right into the tax table so you don't have to make computations to

deduct those items from your gross income to arrive at your taxable income. What is this new terminology they're using. The so-called zero bracket amount. Well that's a new term that somebody invented this year. Actually it is the standard deduction. Nothing more nothing less. I find that as we go along into the year that term is being used less often and they simply refer to the standard deduction. What are well any other new things that might be coming up in federal taxes this year. Well for one thing. The deduction for a sick pay or the lack of a deduction for sick pay is new and the only person that can deduct sick pay on his return is a person who is permanently and totally disabled and retired before the age 65. When he arrives at the age 65 he can no longer take this deduction and the deduction is up to $100 a week or fifty two hundred dollars a year.

All right are there any other new new things what about the treatment of alimony has that changed. Yes it has alimony used to be an itemized deduction. And if you didn't itemize your deductions you didn't get the deduction for alimony this year. It is a I just went against your tax your tax so you can take the deduction and still use the standard deduction which is quite an advantage for a lot of people. All right and what about capital gains First of all could you define exactly what capital gain is what capital gain is a gain on the sale of a capital asset. And again the instruction book with the tax form is well defined I want a capital asset as it may be securities or it may be the sale of your home as a capital asset. The difference in the role is that previously if you held a capital asset for less than six months it was a short term gain or loss that you incurred. If you held up for six

months or longer it was a long term gain or loss and you only paid tax on one half of your long term gains. Now the change this year is that they've changed the six month rule to 9 months. So you have to have held a capital asset for nine months or more before it becomes a long term capital asset. Next year that will be changed to a year. So you have to have held that asset for a year or longer before it is a long term capital asset and you only pay on top of it. Of course on the state return you pay tax on the whole thing the state doesn't make any distinction between short term and long term capital gains and that's very unfortunate because the state tax is at the rate of 10 percent plus 7 1/2 percent surtax. And when you pay that tax on your long term gains on the full amount it becomes somewhat burdensome. Now what about the Massachusetts farms this year are there any major changes. Well there is a major change in this respect. Up until this

year. The Massachusetts law conform to the federal law as of 1971. And there are a lot of changes last year that were changes on the federal form for example example sick pay and childcare and so forth which the federal form is changed but the state form reverted to the old federal rules because masters hadn't changed the law in October of 77. They passed a law which conforms to the state rules to the federal as of May 23rd 1977. So a lot of things where you had to have a different consideration for the state and you did for the federal last year. You don't have to have that anymore. For example child care. The state now conforms to the Federal it didn't last year. Same thing is true on this. Sale of residence by the owner of the now it conforms to the federal law. Where is it conform to the old federal law

before the treatment of sick pay the same way. You see last year alone the federal said they were changing it and they finally reversed the change. But we all had to file a separate form with the state for sick pay because the state law didn't change. Now this year the state laws on the federal are the same. This doesn't change the deduction for alimony you still can take your alimony deduction on the state the same as you can on the federal excepting on the federal they did change the location on the return. Your medical expense reduction is the same as it always was you can take on the state exactly the same amount that you take on the federal but you can't take any medical deduction on the state unless you itemize deductions on the federal. If you use the standard deduction on the federal You can't take any medical deduction on the state. Another very sticky wicket was the treatment of use of a part of your home US office and the federal change the rules on that last year

and made them much much much more stringent. But of course the state hadn't changed there was last year this year they have changed so the state now conforms to the federal. There's also a problem with a vacation home or a second home. The amount that you can deduct for expenses and it depends upon whether you have personally occupied the home for more than 14 days or less than 14 days during the year. Now the federal and the state rules are the same. Another situation is the IRA the individual retirement account and the Keogh plan. Retirement plans and we could not do duct contribution as those on the state return before and we still can't. However last year we didn't have to report any income earned on those plans as income to the state. This year we do not have to that is a change. You don't have to report the income from your IRA or your cure or plans

on your state return as you did last year. How. In the world do you get the kids to eat food which is nutritionally good. Talking young kids learn which the hell to be. These questions partially to do in nutrition education program in Massachusetts public schools. We can process more details in this report. A variety of meal programs exist in Massachusetts public schools but students often don't buy these meals or read all of the food served. That's why many educators think it's important to institute nutrition education programs to provide students with a

knowledge of what foods to select and eat for good health. Dorothy Callahan and when you go our of the Department of Education's Bureau of nutrition services our two nutritionist I believe nutrition ought to be a vital part of the learning process. They've been instrumental in setting up nutrition education programs across the state. One program that's seemed to prove successful so Geller is tasting parties tasting parties of all sorts to me are just the greatest kind of thing because the food is actually the opposite. You can feel it smell it taste it touch it and it becomes alive. In my experience if children prepare food themselves if they're busily working with it then they will usually eat it and enjoy it. Project munch or multi-unit some nutrition Karen health is a federally funded program in an elementary school in OK Massachusetts that successfully integrated nutrition into the curriculum.

When I was there quite recently the fifth and sixth grade students out of a language class which is rather interesting had been asked their working groups I think of three or four students to design their own cereal package of a nutritious cereal and also write their own advertising and do their own advertising campaign. I'm quite anxious to go back because the word to present their products but insists paid students to the first and second graders who are then going to vote on which product they would like to try. So that you have many variables going in to this you've got language arts you've got salesmanship you've got nutrition you've got artwork and all of that going together. Carole WINTLE of project outside insight another federally funded project located in some of the SO is one of the major goals of nutrition education isn't simply to teach children what proteins and carbohydrates are but how they can relate these nutrients to the foods which

they eat. That's the main point of nutrition is that they don't just learn what protein is and carbohydrates but they learn what is a high quality protein food and what you know Heidi what kind of protein is good to eat. What was the low cost. What are the low cost sources of it where the high fat sources of it and help them to figure out you know when they're going in a sub shop What's the best sub to buy that you know we're given the best nutrition WINTLE has also found that having kids work directly with food such as in cooking classes is a good way of bringing nutrition into the classroom. I know that one of the best ways to help children to develop positive attitudes about really wholesome nutritious foods is to do cooking with them and that you can teach all kinds of other skills of the same time or you can teach the masque girls by learning how to measure with different. Equivalence and whether they can improve their language skills by

learning how to read recipes then reprinting the recipes in a school I worked in last year we had one of the activities was to print recipes that they had made like the older children to print it for younger children to read and then to help them to read it and also to share the food that they had made with them. So it comes this whole social experience as well as living expenses for post age levels. A new law passed by Congress last year to appropriate funds for nutrition education has been well received in Massachusetts. It promises to bring additional money into the state in beefing up programs that until now have been working with limited budgets and staffs. The money is expected to be allocated after guidelines are drawn up by the Department of Education for GBH Journal this is Richard frost. With. That is a big statement. Now let me read one other thing. You know I

invite the attention of the Senate to page 2 1 3 0 up today's congressional record on the desk of every senator at the bottom of that page. This out of Massachusetts is the voice of United States senator. Take today from the Senate debates on the issue of the Panama Canal the canal has been in the news almost every day recently with the United States Senate currently debating the questions surrounding this country's treaties with Panama to provide some background for what's going on in the Senate. Lyons interviewed Walter Lefebvre author of a book the Panama Canal. Most of the favor your book on the Panama Canal is certainly timing. And the subtitle The crisis in historical perspective there is still a historical crisis of the present crisis. The crisis I guess began in 1003 when the treaty which is now being revised was drawn up and has been since that time that the

Panamanians have been rather desperately trying to get the canal back to the present to go she really began with the crisis in 1964 when four American soldiers were killed and 24 Panamanians were killed in about four days of rioting over the issue of sovereignty in the Panama Canal Zone. That really triggered the negotiations which have now climaxed with the Treaty of this past fall. Well you also make the point that. That it's become a kind of a symbol in our relations with Latin America that colonialism has gone out and most of the world. And this is a symbol of imperial. Yes this is looked at as a colonial enclave particularly by Latin Americans. I think that if the present Panama Canal treaties are ratified by the United States Senate it certainly is not going to clear up our major problems with Latin America. There are many fundamental problems protecting the economic realm that will remain. But if these Canal

treaties are not ratified this spring by the United States Senate then there will be rioting in Panama there will be clearly I think firing by American soldiers on Panamanians who are riding around the zone and in our relationships with Latin America will be poisoned it will be very difficult to deal with the Latin Americans on other issues if we do not get this issue out of the way. How important is that going to now and the longer it's important the distinction is usually made here I think it's a useful one is that the canal is important to us commercially and militarily but it's not vital. If it was vital. Like Boston Harbor or New York City we would not be making treaties in the area in regard to the area but it is important. About 1 percent of the state's gross national product goes through the canal which sounds like a small percent but actually it's about 14 to 15 billion dollars and for a lot of the farmers in the Midwest the waterway is important which is why the treaty is also important I think the administration argues

quite persuasively that since it is important the treaty safeguards our interests including the interests of say Midwestern wheat producers are not New-England shippers through the canal who use the canal. Well Governor Reagan stirred up a great deal of opposition to this in fact if it is a symbol of nationalism to Panamanians it's become some kind of a symbol of flag waving to much of the United States. As the polls recently show but I believe you make the point pretty clearly that. The United States has never had ownership of it can now control of the United States has controlled the canal and we've controlled the operations in the canal. And I think it's important to understand this is what the you know Roosevelt wanted he and his Secretary of State John Hay and a secretary of war William Howard Taft were always insistent that the United States have total right of control in the area but as Taft and hay put it

we understood that Panama retained what was called titular sovereignty that is to say that the area was always considered to be sovereign Panamanian territory and in the treaties that have been made since 1983. And in the diplomatic relations between the United States and Panama we have recognized that Panamanian sovereignty as for example when President Eisenhower in the late 1980s over the Panamanian flag to fly within the canal zone along the canal in certain places. Because I think I mentioned in the book this is something we do not allow in Texas or Alaska so we have always recognized that Panama the Panama Canal Zone is is different from Texas although now Boston and Baker stipulate some changes in the treaty if they don't support one of them I think is guaranteeing the American right to defend the kind I forgot and I maybe want to whether the administration doesn't seem to take this very seriously.

I think the problem I think the administration takes the issue seriously I think the administration's position is that those points are adequately covered in the present treaty. They also say they are right to have a resolution. Sense yes. What would you say as to that. I I I must say when I first looked at this I tended to agree with the administration I thought that the treaty was explicit enough. But the more I look at this the more I'm beginning to think that it probably would be well if what Senator Baker and Senator Byrd want. It would be done and that is that the two points that Mr. General to Rio's head of the Panamanian government and President Carter agreed upon in middle in the middle of October the so-called memorandum of understanding in October that that be written directly into the treaty that memorandum of understanding as you say would allow the United States to use military force to intervene in the canal area although not in Panama itself not in Panamanian internal affairs. And the second thing that understanding would allow would be that in times of an emergency. For

example another Cuban Missile Crisis American ships would be able to go to the head of the line. Now the administration argues that this is spelled out in the treaties but actually it's not as spelled out as as in details it is a memorandum of understanding. But I think this it's very it's going to be very important as far as American politics are concerned that this be written into the treaty I think is going to make it much more acceptable to the American people and damp down the debate. Well your book is very interesting background for it. Thank you. That's today's deviate durning because I'm Margaret and I'm in my Go Garrison and her through. But never going for it.