Categories
Health

Kim Kardashian Says She Leaned on a ‘Surrogate Therapist’ Ahead of Chicago's Arrival


Kim Kardashian West’s journey to becoming a mother of four kids—North, Saint, Chicago, and Psalm—hasn’t been without its difficulties. During her first two pregnancies, Kardashian West experienced placenta accreta, a condition in which the placenta is stuck during birth. She then chose to use surrogates for her third and fourth children. Now, Kardashian West reveals that welcoming her third child, her daughter Chicago, came with the help of an unexpected resource just for surrogacies.

In an interview with divorce lawyer Laura Wasser for her podcast, All’s Fair, Kim Kardashian West shared she used a “surrogate therapist” to assist with Chicago’s birth, E! News reports.

The surrogate therapist, as Kardashian West explained it, acted as a mediator between herself and the surrogate who carried her daughter, Chicago. It was one of several professionals who came on board to ensure the surrogacy went smoothly: “You get your surrogate attorney, you get your surrogate broker and then the broker recommended that we use a therapist that would communicate with me first and then communicate with her and kind of be our liaison,” Kardashian West said.

With the surrogate therapist on her team, Kardashian West was able to ensure she and her surrogate were comfortable at every point during the pregnancy, from the early months to the delivery. She says they discussed “[t]hings like going through the birthing plan, so if anything was uncomfortable she would be that buffer to say, ‘This is who I want in the room. What are you comfortable with? How does this work?'”

As the surrogate’s pregnancy progressed, Kardashian West noted that she and her surrogate were able to communicate without the therapist’s assistance. “Towards the end we got close enough where we could communicate really without that,” Kim recalled. “[The therapist] would suggest, ‘Hey, I think you guys should communicate once a week through text, maybe on Mother’s Day. She’s a mother as well. Maybe get her a massage or something that’s appropriate for her to pamper.'”

Kardashian West previously has been open about the difficulties she faced during the decision to use surrogates. “Anyone that says or thinks it is just the easy way out is just completely wrong,” she told Entertainment Tonight before Chicago was born. “I think it is so much harder to go through it this way, because you are not really in control. And, you know, obviously you pick someone that you completely trust and that you have a good bond and relationship with, but it is still…knowing that I was able to carry my first two babies and not, you know, my baby now, it’s hard for me. So it’s definitely a harder experience than I anticipated just in the control area.”

Giving birth, Kardashian West said, was one of the most painful experiences of her life. So giving up control over the experience, however difficult, was a choice she stood by. “I am blessed that I am able to do this, and technology is the way that it is that we can do this,” she said.

Before Kardashian West revealed she was expecting her fourth child, Psalm, via surrogate, she told Elle that four kids would likely be her limit. “I don’t think I could handle more than that,” she said. “My time is spread really thin. And I think it’s important that in all couples, the mom gives the husband as much attention as the kids.”



Source link

Categories
Health

I Started the #AskAboutAbortion Campaign in 2016. Ahead of the 2020 Election, This Is the Conversation I Want to Have About Reproductive Rights


Abortion access is being decimated nationwide, and still not all of the Democratic presidential candidates have a plan to fix it. As someone who’s had an abortion, I find that unacceptable. During the 2016 presidential debates, I started the #AskAboutAbortion campaign for this reason—to have a conversation about the different plans candidates proposed to protect and expand the legal right to an abortion. Between then and now, we’ve been met with a landmark case at the Supreme Court, extreme bills intended to curtail or even eliminate access, worrisome moves from lower circuits, and another near-identical case now with the court that could reverse the 2016 decision and further hollow out access. In that environment, one would think that the candidates would be clamoring to spell out their plans to secure essential, basic health care for 51% of the population. But even as All* Above All Action Fund revitalized the campaign I started, I am still left wondering how most of the candidates would answer if the moderators ask about abortion tonight or in future debates.

Tonight’s MSNBC–Washington Post debate, hosted by all women moderators, will take place at Tyler Perry’s brand-new state-of-the-art film complex in Atlanta. The state is, at present, hell-bent on passing an abortion law so outrageous it’s been blocked in other states. It aims to ban abortion as early as the six-week mark, before many women know they are pregnant (as was the case with me). A judge temporarily blocked the law last month, but its fate remains an open question. Once again, debate moderators have an opportunity to ask all of the candidates how they would contend with anti-abortion state legislatures that will continue to pass these restrictions, whether it’s a Democrat or a Republican in the White House. Would these candidates wait for Congress to act? What kinds of executive actions could they take? Do they believe minors should be able to access abortion care without the consent of a parent or guardian? The conversation is much deeper than whether or not presidential hopefuls believe abortion should be legal—it’s what steps they would be willing to take to ensure its accessible.

In the last debate, CNN and New York Times moderators asked several of the candidates (not all) what they would do to end six-week bans. While I was pleasantly surprised to hear their answers, I was deeply disappointed that Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) chose to revitalize the stigmatizing “safe, legal, and rare” mantra popularized in the 1990s to advocate for a ban on later abortion.

Afterward, recently fired Planned Parenthood CEO Leana Wen, M.D., tweeted that she appreciated that Gabbard “brought up the third rail for Democrats” and that it was “courageous” for her to highlight the “nuances” in opinions on abortion. I was quite surprised that the former president of Planned Parenthood would support outdated rhetoric riddled with stigma and call it nuance.

Since then, people have abortionsplained me, insisting that “safe, legal, and rare” is still a good, solid stance. Making abortion rare should be the end goal, right? But it’s not that simple.

Rare is not a number. The reality is abortion is on a steady decline, but nonetheless, we should aim higher. We don’t need to stigmatize the very people we want to support. And it does impact us; internalized stigma causes people who have abortions to second-guess their decision, feel guilty for not feeling guilty, or feel like they cannot tell a loved one about their experience. As Democrats, can we build a world in which those who can get pregnant are in a position to choose whether or not to do so, no matter their circumstances, wealth, class, race, or life choices? Demanding that abortion be rare places stigma on the person who needs an abortion, chastises them for seeking care, assumes the abortion could and should have been prevented, and underscores a pervasive myth that it’s somehow illegitimate to not want a(nother) child.





Source link

Categories
Health

President Trump Reportedly Called Meghan Markle 'Nasty' Ahead of Royal Visit


President Donald Trump is set to visit the United Kingdom, Ireland, and France next week, and in advance of his Monday arrival in London, he sat down with British tabloid The Sun for a wide-ranging chat—including his thoughts on Meghan Markle.

During the interview, Trump spoke to The Sun about his upcoming visit on Monday to Buckingham Palace. Although he’ll meet again with the Queen—and multiple other members of the royal family during scheduled events like lunch with Prince Harry—Markle reportedly won’t be joining.

Of course, Markle’s still officially on her maternity leave. However, in 2016, before she became a royal, she also spoke out about her dislike for Trump and his politics, calling him “misogynistic” and “divisive.”

During his latest interview with The Sun, the reporter told Trump about what Markle said in her old interview. According to the tabloid, Trump replied, “I didn’t know that. What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.”

Trump also said he thought she would be “very good” in her role in the Royal Family. However, he apparently wasn’t aware he wouldn’t be meeting her at Buckingham next week until his interviewer told him. The President mentioned too that he’d be bringing Ivanka, Eric, Donald Junior, and Tiffany with him because he wants them to hold a “next-generation” meeting with Prince William and Prince Harry.

Trump also spoke about meeting the Queen again, after a 2018 visit in which he reportedly broke royal protocol not just once but a few times (he kept her waiting for 15 minutes and walked in front of her after forgetting to bow to her). “It will be great seeing the Queen for the second time,” he said. “We had a very good talk the first one. We had a lot of interesting things to say. It really was a great visit. My mother also loved the Queen.”



Source link

Categories
Health

Sophie Turner Hints At Sansa Stark's Fate Ahead of GOT Series Finale


In a new Sunday Times magazine article, Game of Thrones star Sophie Turner touched on mental health, her relationship with her now-husband Joe Jonas, and the series finale of GoT, which airs Sunday (May 19) on HBO. Specifically, she dropped a rare hint about how everything will wrap up for her character, Sansa Stark—and to be honest, it’s hard to know what to make of it.

Fans are still in shock from last week’s episode, which had a massive twist that left viewers reeling and wondering how it will all end (no spoilers here about all that, but feel free to read more on that here). As the end of the series approaches, Turner told the UK-based paper that the ending of the 8-year long television show was “satisfying” for her. However, there’s a huge “but” in there for the rest of us.

Stark’s long been considered a contender to take the throne—as is Daenerys, Jon Snow, and Arya. And while she’s definitely not giving anything away with her statement on the ending, it does leave us wondering. “It’s a great ending, from my perspective, it’s very satisfying,” she told The Sunday Times magazine. “But I think a lot of people will be upset too.”

We might not know exactly what’s happening, but at least one person outside of the cast does: Turner told the outlet that she spilled the beans to Jonas—much to his chagrin.

“I’ve just told Joe. But he’s so mad at me—he loves the show!” she said. “Well, I have to tell someone, otherwise I’ll burst.”

This isn’t the first time Turner’s dropped hints about tonight’s episode. She told 60 Minutes earlier this year that “some people will be satisfied, others not so much.”

Luckily, we only have to wait a few more hours to find out exactly what’s going to go down in Westeros.



Source link

Categories
Health

Cecile Richards: Words of Advice to Christine Blasey Ford, Ahead of Her Testimony


*In 2015, Cecile Richards, then the president of Planned Parenthood, appeared before the House Oversight and Government Reform committee and testified for close to five hours. (The showdown came after an anti-choice group recorded abortion providers in secret as the professionals discussed the sale of fetal tissue. Republicans used the videos to defend their wish to strip Planned Parenthood of the close to $450 million it receives in federal funds, none of which is used to paid for abortion services.)

In front of the congressmen, Richards explained how Planned Parenthood puts federal dollars to work, defended the organization’s research practices, and endured the endless GOP-led offensive with her usual grace and patience.*

This week, as Dr. Christine Blasey Ford prepares to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee to level her accusations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Richards draws on her experience on the Hill to assure Dr. Blasey Ford of at least this one truth: You are not alone.


Dear Dr. Blasey Ford,

I can’t imagine what you’ve been through over the past two weeks. The behavior of some United States Senators who sit on the judiciary committee has underscored how brave survivors must be to weather the hostility and public shaming they too often face. Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) has likened your decision to come forward to a drive-by shooting and 84-year-old Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has said you must be “mixed up.”

Nevertheless, it seems, you persist. I hope you have also felt the flood of sympathy and solidarity from women and men across the country—including many of us for whom your experiences sound all too familiar. If and when you walk into that Senate hearing, you will not be alone; we’ll be with you.

In anticipation of your possible testimony, I have been reliving my own five hours before a hostile Republican-led committee that wanted to end access to Planned Parenthood.

It probably won’t surprise you to hear that the name of the game that day wasn’t fact-finding. There was no search for the truth. Instead, it was an opportunity for hostile men in Congress to grill me on everything from my salary to my competency to my memory—and overall, to humiliate and shame me. And all of this on national television.

But as unpleasant as those hours were, I had on my side two things the hostile congressmen did not.

First, the one in five women in America who have been to Planned Parenthood, who depend upon the organization for life-saving health care, gave me courage that day. I knew they were standing with me, just as millions of women and men across the country are standing with you—including the many women in America who have themselves been sexually assaulted. When you speak, you speak for all of us.

Second, and most importantly, what you have on your side is the same thing I was armed with: the truth. No amount of bullying and finger-pointing can take that away. Even if the Republican leadership in the U.S. Senate doesn’t want to hear that truth, you will tell it, and the American people will be listening and cheering you on.

And know this: After my hearing, not only did I feel better for speaking our truth to power—I couldn’t walk down the street without someone stopping me and thanking me. The same will be true for you. And though your detractors may be loud, in the end, their anger will be overwhelmed by the love and support from women everywhere.

We believe you. We are with you.

In Solidarity,

Cecile Richards

Author and former president, Planned Parenthood Federation of America





Source link

Categories
Health

Fran Drescher—an Ahead of Her Time Three-Dimensional Hollywood Woman—Is Finally Getting Her Due


It was a Friday afternoon at the Soho branch of The Wing—the women’s community and coworking space launched by Audrey Gelman and Lauren Kassan in 2016—and the place was packed. In the space’s loft, hundreds of seemingly millennial women had skipped out of work and put on their 1990s best to watch the club’s most recent patron saint, Fran Drescher, give a talk. Gelman had been forecasting an appearance by Drescher at The Wing since it first launched, having pitched the facility as a place where anyone from “Fran Drescher to Issa Rae to Fran Lebowitz might possibly cross paths.” Now The Wing’s vision board was coming to life.

The 2018 Fran Drescher we were greeted by, though, was not the Fran Fine of 1993. Gone were the miniskirts, the leopard prints, the spandex, the bright 1980s makeup. In their place was a floral, knee-length dress more in line with the vibe of her current home of Los Angeles than her hometown of Queens, New York. Her face was natural, hair loose and not teased. But the voice. That voice. So familiarly whiny, so delightfully nasal. The second she opened her mouth and unleashed that stentorian of sound, all expectations for the day were met.

PHOTO: CBS Photo Archive

Drescher, left, alongside Bette Middler on The Nanny

Drescher, 60, addressed to the crowd for over an hour—and she was ready to talk, not unlike the way your aunt might be if she had too much Manischewitz at Passover dinner. She discussed the possibility of a Nanny reboot (currently not happening) and shared which outfits from the show were her favorite (anything by Todd Oldham). She then, also not unlike your Kabbalah-crazed aunt, took a bit of a heel-turn and warned us about the perils of corporate greed and doled out Goop-like wisdom about embracing indigenous medicine. But it didn’t matter how anti-capitalist her words were or how woo-woo the advice was. She was saying it all in that voice, and we were hooked.

She finished the chat by leading the group in a sin-along of The Nanny’s theme song. It was a spectacle to behold, this cool-girl chorus unabashedly warbling along to “she was working in a bridal shop in Flushing, Queens…” nearly 25 years after the sitcom’s release—especially since the majority of the crowd was too young to have even watched the show while it was airing (myself included). But in the age of social media, Drescher has never been more popular. There’s an Instagram account, @WhatFranWore, which catalogs outfits from The Nanny and currently has over 250K followers. Last year she did a guest spot on Broad City playing Ilana Glazer’s aunt. People on Twitter had even launched a campaign for The Nanny reboot starring, not unfittingly, Cardi B. The Internet’s propensity for nineties nostalgia and gentle irony feels as if it was tailor-made for a woman like Fran Drescher. Yet all the things we celebrate about Drescher now—the voice, the clothes, the body—were once roadblocks to her success.

Drescher’s guest appearance on the past season of Broad City

Growing up in Queens, Drescher had a high school teacher tell her she needed to fix her voice if she wanted to make it as an actress. Still, she knew she had something different that could work to her advantage. “The voice and my look made me like Lucille Ball, or those women in comedy who could be glamorous and beautiful—but also know how to deliver a joke,” Drescher tells Glamour. “My voice kind of made the whole package more interesting.” Despite her confidence, for a long time people just didn’t get her shtick. She scored smaller parts in era-defining movies like Saturday Night Fever and This Is Spinal Tap but was overlooked as a classic leading lady. “I didn’t always get the part. I’m very unusual, and while that [eventually] helped in making me a star, [it didn’t work] when people tried to put me in a traditional box.”

Which is why Drescher’s big break didn’t come from fitting herself into the mold of someone else’s script, or anyone else’s vision. There wasn’t a role that was big enough and unusual enough to contain all her multitudes—and comedic talents. So she went out and created one: Fran Fine.

Arguably, The Nanny should’ve never happened for Drescher. The circumstances surrounding the show’s creation are all too perfect, forming a constellation of crazy coincidences that resulted in the smash hit. As she tells it, it started when Drescher was seated next to a CBS executive on a flight to Europe en route to visit her friend, Twiggy. “We talked literally for nine and a half hours, and I convinced him that I had ideas to pitch him for a show,” she says. “[On that trip] I was touring the city with Twiggy’s 12 -year-old British schoolgirl daughter, when she said, ‘Oh Fran, my new shoes are hurting me.’ And I said, ‘Step on the backs of them!’ She said, ‘Won’t that break them? And I said, ‘Break them in!’” That night Drescher says she called her then husband and told him, ‘What do you think about a spin on The Sound of Music only instead of Julie Andrews, I come to the door?’ He only thought for a second and he said, ‘That’s it.’” When she got back to the U.S., she reached back out to the exec to share her idea.

National Conference of Christians and Jews Gala

PHOTO: Ron Galella, Ltd.

Twiggy and Drescher at a Los Angeles gala in 1991

The pitch alone earned Drescher the opportunity to make her show, serving as its cocreator and star. To put into context what a feat that was, think about today’s media landscape—research shows that only 11 percent of TV showrunners during the 2016–2017 season were women. The call for inclusion riders—a buzzy clause to get more diversity in front of and behind the camera—only took off this past March. So to be a woman spearheading and acting in her own sitcom in 1993 was nearly unprecedented. And at first, Drescher says, the network wasn’t willing to give her so much control.

“At the very beginning, I was not an executive producer,” she says. “I don’t think they really knew that [even though] I was a woman, my producing contributions weren’t just going to be [something they took as a] mercy fuck—they were going to be an invaluable part of the show that helped make it a hit. Eventually I got the executive producer title and got to direct [episodes], but in the beginning I had to prove myself. They weren’t readily willing to trust me.”

Another hurdle for Drescher was that “I think they thought of me more as a star than a writer-producer,” she recalls. “[But] I always wrote on the show. I felt like they’d rather pay me, as an actor, more money than pay me as a writer, so the budget could hire more writers. And at the time I thought, ‘OK, that makes sense to me.’ But in hindsight, I should’ve taken my writing credit, because I would’ve had a lot more points in the union.”

The Nanny

PHOTO: CBS Photo Archive

The cast of The Nanny, from left: Daniel Davis, Fran Drescher, Charles Shaugnessy, Lauren Lane

Trusting Drescher behind the scenes wasn’t the only risk they were taking on The Nanny; the character of Fran was also a gamble. As Drescher describes Fran Fine, she’s like “a hooker with a heart of gold.” She’s also sexy, loud, working class, and Jewish. Which isn’t that unusual by today’s standards, when we have shows like Broad City, Insecure, or even Girls, where women are allowed, even applauded, for being complex, messy, and diverse. But in Drescher’s day it was relatively rare to see a Jewish woman portrayed on TV—let alone one in skin-tight Moschino dresses with sky-high hair and a classic Queens accent (which Drescher describes as sounding like a foghorn.) So much so that she says a global brand offered to buy the show outright—by supplying the commercial breaks for the show—but only if Fran Fine was portrayed as Italian, not Jewish. Drescher shot them down and never looked back.

She also sometimes had to spell out the humor in the show, placing an emphasis on the observation that yes, people were laughing at her—and that was OK.

“I had to show them that it was a joke…and not twist it into something negative; like, ‘Oh, I find her voice so abrasive.’ We’re making fun of the voice, you can laugh at it too, it’s funny.” From there, Drescher’s brand of comedy became “self-deprecating. Showing your soft underbelly is a great way for you to be endearing to people,” she says.

And it worked. The Nanny became a sensation—tying for household rating with the now infamous mega-hit Roseanne on Nielsen’s list of shows for the 1995–1996 season. By 1997 Drescher had been nominated for two Emmys for her work on the sitcom.

25th Annual International Emmy Awards

PHOTO: Ron Galella

Attending the Emmy Awards. During her tenure on The Nanny, Drescher was nominated twice for lead actress

But while Drescher’s career was skyrocketing, her personal life was struggling. Her marriage was crumbling and she says she lost about 30 pounds from stress during the show’s run. “When I see myself so thin [on The Nanny], I remember how unhappy I was. There was a time where I was really burning my candle at both ends, going between rehearsals, tapings, writing sessions, and press sessions.”

There was also an even more painful and private trauma brewing beneath the surface: Drescher has been raped at gunpoint some years prior, and with her newfound celebrity, the press had just gotten wind of her attack. “There was a whole segment on one of those tabloid-esque magazine TV shows that made it seem like the incident had just happened,” Drescher explains. “That [Hollywood gossip] show actually went to the jail and tried to speak with the rapist and fortunately he didn’t want to. I kind of had a post traumatic stress break after. It was an extremely difficult time for me. All the fear from the experience came up, all the pain, tears. I had to start all over again,” she says.

Yet Drescher, an eternal optimist, claims this dark period only made her stronger—and made her a symbol of hope for other women. When she published her 2002 memoir, she addressed her attack. “When I wrote my book [Cancer Schmancer], I talked about the rape, and you’d be amazed that when I went on my book tour, how many women asked me to autograph that chapter. It was something I realize had a very powerful impact on women who were all kinds of victims. Spousal abuse, rape, emotional abuse, you name it. It definitely helped people to see me blossom, knowing that ‘If that happened to her and look at her now, then maybe I can climb out of the depths of despair,’” Drescher said.

Now she’s just glad that society is making a collective effort to expose abuse, and that more women are also standing up and saying “Me too.” “Look, I’m not the only one, [it happens to] one out of three women, that’s the facts. So the more we talk about it, the better off we are. The less there’s a stigma or a curse that you feel like you’re damaged goods or did something wrong. It’s very important we bring it out of the closet.”

Gilt x Livelihood Launch Event

PHOTO: Gary Gershoff

Drescher at an event in New York City in late 2017

That’s the other thread of Drescher’s life: taking her roadblocks and turning them into rallying cries. Seven years after winning her battle with uterine cancer—she recently celebrated her eighteenth anniversary with a clean bill of health—she started an organization, also called Cancer Schmancer, to promote early detection, prevention, and policy change. Sometime after her first husband came out of the closet, she got ordained as a minister to marry LGBTQ couples. You can call her Rev. Drescher, thank you very much. While she still acts—appearing on Broadway in 2014’s Cinderella playing the “less-wicked-than-obnoxious” stepmother) and lending her voice to Sony’s animated Hotel Transylvania franchise, she spends much of her time planning health summits and events to educate people on organic living and disease prevention. About her activism she says, “I’m not glad I had cancer, or got raped, and I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. But I am better for it. I try and take the high road and be the better person at every opportunity.”

Though with the cool girl’s reclamation of Drescher, the acting offers keep rolling in. “My last four jobs were two indie films, and two comedy TV shows, and all of them was me with a millennial,” she says. “Now I’m in development on a show that will pit me with a millennial, [again]. I think the signs of the universe are speaking to me.”

While the Internet mostly recognizes Drescher for The Nanny’s fashion—a quick Google search will reveal everything from a guide by influencer The Blonde Salad on “How to Dress Like the Fran Fine a.k.a. The Nanny”, to an Elle listicle “13 Times Harry Styles Was Actually Fran Fine”—Drescher’s cultural impact is much greater than the sum of her costumes, and she knows it. “It’s just a journey,” Drescher explains. “I just did Broad City, and those girls [cocreators Abbi Jacobson and Ilana Glazer] said to me, ‘If it were not for you, we wouldn’t be here, without question.’” And they wouldn’t be. Not without the “flashy girl from Flushing” who created a part that would have never otherwise existed, and who opened the floodgates for actresses to be both racy and funny, or any contradictions they embody.

Samantha Leach is Glamour’s assistant editor.





Source link