why did she?

mood: angry.
state i'm in: well slept.
tune: SOS band "just be good to me.



as usual, while waiting for the 333 bus yesterday morning, at my usual stop outside a coffee shop, i scanned the headlines of the newspapers on sale at the store's front door. i was completely disgusted to see the daily telegraph splashing around the headline "how could she?" with regard to the mother of baby 'catherine', abandoned at a melbourne hospital on mother's day. there it was, screaming in the boldest of type.

how could she? well i could think of a few reasons almost instantaneously, reasons that the 'daily tele' should have taken into account before publishing such an irresponsible and unconstructive headline.

by the time i returned home in the afternoon, a national furore had boiled over into the afternoon news bulletins, echoing my sentiments.

jeff kennett, chairman of 'beyondblue', a national initiative to counter depression, had already had sharp words to say, as had jo cavanagh, CEO of welfare group 'family life'. by later afternoon, published at the top of the daily tele's website, john howard too had chimed into the debate. however, mr howard only wished to throw more damaging words, akin to those from the tabloid, into the public arena, words unlikely to be helpful in the quest to encourage the mother to seek help herself and possibly seek favourable reunification with her baby.

mr howard saw fit to defend the daily tele, well known to be his favourite newspaper, declaring the headline to be precisely the reflex reaction that the general public would have thought, that it is the normal human reaction.

well, i for one did not, and i give the general public more credit that, even if that was the reflex reaction, a moment later other thoughts must have seeped into their minds and a collective grief felt for all involved, mother, child, and extended family.

clearly there is a greater issue available for debate here than the abandoning of a single child, howsoever tragic such a circumstance is. this event highlights more the question "why?" for what reasons would a mother abandon a child at all? clearly the mother had the child's intentions at heart, or she would not have chosen to leave the child specifically outside a major hospital.

so how could she? my recurring thoughts, as a normal human, not just as a future health professional, are that of a mother suffering enornmously herself, be it due to post-natal depression, major depression, anxiety, or simpy a family not willing to accommodate a mother in her predicament, or social circumstances inept for raising a baby. contempt for her is the thought farthest from my mind.

it is awfully sad that mr howard must use this child and mother's lot as political leverage in an attempt to make himself seem in tune with 'average australian' sentiment, and normal human reactions. might i say, mr howard, your's are are anything but normal human reactions, more those of someone desperately trying to cling onto media favour.


-------------------


aditionally, mr howard, if you would like to show your empathy towards normal human affairs, how about reconsidering your stance on removing caps for full-fee-paying local and international students at universities, making it easier for australian brains to be admitted to a higher education, not just australian and overseas dollars.

---

image: the daily telegraph