It looks like model Chanel Iman is set to deliver the other half of Irish twins!
The IMG model confirmed to US Weekly that her family will grow by one addition when she and hubby New York Giants player Sterling Shepard welcome their second child next year, less than a year before welcoming their last child.
The UK Daily Mailpublished photos of Iman and her daughter with mom bearing a sizeable baby bump.
The couple only just celebrated the one-year birthday of their first child, daughter Cali Clay on August 12 with the most adorable birthday party!
Earlier, Shepard had stated he was anxious to learn what his baby boy would look like, but that his wife wanted to wait until fall 2019. Well here we are!
“They told stories we athletes know are true, but have been too scared to tell publicly,” Felix wrote of Montaño and Goucher in her op-ed published last week, on May 22. “If we have children, we risk pay cuts from our sponsors during pregnancy and afterward.”
She shared her own post-birth experience in the newspaper.
After severe pre-eclampsia that put her baby’s life at risk caused her to have to have giving birth and having to undergo an emergency C-section at 32, she alleged that Nike pressured her to return to training as soon as possible.
Then, the company wanted to pay her 70 percent less than before.
Felix pushed back, and essentially demanded that the athletic apparel brand change its policies.
“If that’s what they think I’m worth now, I accept that,” she admitted. “What I’m not willing to accept is the enduring status quo around maternity. I asked Nike to contractually guarantee that I wouldn’t be punished if I didn’t perform at my best in the months surrounding childbirth. I wanted to set a new standard. If I, one of Nike’s most widely marketed athletes, couldn’t secure these protections, who could?”
Nike didn’t accept her demands.
“My disappointment is not just with Nike, but with how the sports apparel industry at large treats female athletes,” she explained in the op-ed. “This isn’t just about pregnancy. We may stand behind the brands we endorse, but we also need to hold them accountable when they are marketing us to appeal to the next generation of athletes and consumers.”
Right before Montano and Goucher came forward, according to an article in The Wall Street Journal, Nike announced iot would change its maternity policy.
Sports Illustrated reported the changes will include protection in its contracts, while brands such as Brooks, Altra and Nuun pledged to also guarantee contractual support of female athletes through pregnancy moving forward.
Now to wait to see what those changes are.
“I look forward to specifics, from Nike and the rest of the industry who has yet to commit to contractually protecting women,” Felix concluded.
Meanwhile, Nike athlete and star of its female empowerment campaign Serena Williams
“I understand that Nike has been really lately supporting women a lot, and it started with making a statement with me, and they said they want to make a change,” Williams said Monday after defeating Vitalia Diatchenko in the first round of the French Open. “They want to support women that want to have families and that want to be moms. I’m glad that statement was made, and I know that therefore and going forward, they’re doing better.”
Comedienne Amy Schumer had photographer Heather Sten shoot some maternity photos of herself for a New York Timesprofile and it is awesome!
Personally, I do not like the feature because I think that it is all over the place and is missing meat and potatoes I wanted the author to get from the funny woman.
Anyway, I am still happy to see her get a profile whilst preggers.
It has had a bit of a roller coaster of a pregnancy for Schumer who is expecting her and hubby Chris Fischer‘s first child. It has been marked by hospitalization for extreme morning sickness.
So the bookend to her 40 weeks is this totally unconventional shoot that features the I Feel Pretty star in the puff undressing as she frolicked in the rain running towards a gaggle of geese.
She captioned a series of photos of the spread:
On a chilly Nola morning it’s best to chase ducks with nothing weighing you down except a baby. Photo by @heathersten for the @nytimes on a rainy night it’s also a good idea. Thank you @zinomanjason for your profile on me. Brutally honest. My favorite kind of honesty. See you in another 10 when you write about me again. Article on nytimes.com
In another photo, the mom-to-be covers her bare breast with clumps of Spanish moss set to a forest backdrop. Deep!
Being naked was no big thing.
“As someone who has been told a million times they are fat and ugly, it does not matter!” the comedian, who’s expecting her first child with husband Chris Fischer, told the New York Times. And she’s very much looking forward to meeting her little one, saying, “I think I will experience [some other level of joy] with a baby.”
A new study states that media coverage of celebrity pregnancies has destigmatized out-of-wedlock births especially among white, middle class women.
Analyzing PEOPLE magazine covers from 1974 to 2014 featuring celebrity pregnancy, researcher Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk, an assistant professor in the University at Buffalo Department of Sociology took note of the magazine’s reference to the parents’ relationship status at the time of the pregnancy announcement and the time of the child’s birth.
In the study, published this month in the journal Demographic Research, Grol-Prokopczyk looked at how media presentations of celebrities’ childbearing influenced larger society.
Indeed, there has been a rise in out-of-wedlock births. Between 1940 and 2009, the number of U.S. births to unmarried women increased from about 4 percent to nearly 41 percent.
While existing scholarship suggests that economic and cultural factors have contributed to this growth, Grol-Prokopczyk wondered whether celebrities might have been the trigger for that 10-fold rise.
“No one has actually tested whether celebrities in fact engage in more out-of-wedlock childbearing than the general public,” she toldScience Daily. “This is an important question to address because the power of celebrity culture to shape all kinds of decisions, including childbearing-related decisions, is often under-acknowledged.”
Grol-Prokopczyk concludes that celebrities might shape how we think about the nature of the family and the right environment in which to have children and used People magazine as a yardstick because it is a reliable source of data for exploring this issue. Also, it is heavily trafficked companion to its print edition with over 70 million unique monthly visitors.
The influence of celebrity news is undeniable. Consider that 74 percent of US adults became aware of Angelina Jolie‘s decision to have a preventative double mastectomy just weeks after her op-ed appeared in the New York Times in May of 2013.
The celebrity coverage has shifted attitudes particularly among white, middle class women who generally, have less out-of-wedlock births compared to women in other racial groups.
But unlike their regular folk counterpart, white celebrity women are more likely to have a baby while not married or engaged.
“If you compare celebrities to just white Americans — which could make sense given that until recently People magazine has disproportionally depicted white celebrity parents on its covers — you find that celebrities have the same rates of non-marital fertility,” she added.
Here is the link:
Grol-Prokopczyk also found that most celebrities featured on People magazine’s covers who got pregnant while unmarried did not marry before the child’s birth. Since the mid-2000s, many have declared themselves, “engaged.”
Instead of “shotgun weddings,” Grol-Prokopczyk sees this as modeling what she calls “shotgun engagements,” which if imitated in the general population could have contributed to a substantial rise of non-marital fertility in the U.S.
Award-winning Pop singer and YouTuber Ameriie and her Sony music executive husband of six years are expecting their first child. The “One Thing” singer announced the news on her Instagram account yesterday, which also happened to be her 38th birthday.
Though the DC area native is known for hit songs like “Why Don’t We Fall In Love“, she has been in the spotlight as a Book, Beauty and Make Up YouTube star of late, hence her collection of writings about villains out now. Get it for $12.45 at Amazon.com!
The Supreme Court of India issued a ruling on Friday denying abortion access to a 10-year old pregnant rape victim.
The court determined that girl, who is 28 – 32 weeks along, was raped by her uncle. A neighbor noticed the girl’s swollen belly and suggested that her mom get her examined, the New York Timesreports.
India law prohibits abortion after the 20th week of pregnancy but lawyers for the girl cited a case where another 10-year-old rape victim who was 21 weeks’ pregnant was allowe to have an abortion. They also argued that abortion procedures are much safer today than when the law was enacted more than 40 years ago, eroding the rationale for the 20-week rule.
Still the court refused, said Alakh Alok Srivastava, the lawyer who petitioned the court to allow the procedure.
“Going by the advanced stage of pregnancy, the court has declined to allow the abortion,” Mr. Srivastava said.
In the petition, he said the girl was about 26 weeks’ pregnant in mid-July; some local news reports on the hearing on Friday said she might be as far as 32 weeks along, the New York Times article states.
Deepak Yadav, the deputy superintendent of police, said cops arrested the uncle in Chandigarh and charged him with rape.
Doctors as the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research in Chandigarh examined the girl and determined that the fetus was “beyond that age” where an abortion would be possible.
“At some stage of pregnancy, baby has earned the right to live,” Dr. Vanita Suri, the head of the institute’s obstetrics department, said.
Last year, a 10-year old girl in Brazil, raped by her stepfather, gave birth after complaining about a stomach ache in school. A 10-year old girl in Colombia gave birth in 2012. In 2015, an 11-year old gave birth after a court in Paraguay denied her an abortion after she too was raped and became pregnant at age 10.
Makers of children’s non-fiction history books are struggling to create editions for the current president because they are unsure how to include all the controversial statements and positions Mr. Trump has made and whether to include them at all.
“After an election cycle whose divisive effect on voters is still being felt, publishing books for classroom use has been unusually perilous,” New York Timesjournalist Katherine Rosmanwrites today. “For Ms. [Beth] Sutinis [executive editor for the children’s division of Time Inc], the difficulty went beyond the time crunch to finding concise quotations from Mr. Trump’s campaign appearances that didn’t include contentious remark.”
One book had to edit its initial entry in one passage about Trump, “Troubling Statements.”
It initially read “Some of Trump’s biggest supporters were white nationalists. Their comments and actions during and after the campaign were racist and often dangerous. Trump did little to speak against them.”
The finished book was changed to “Campaign Statements.” The section about discrimination was modified to read, “Some of Trump’s critics felt he did not speak out against prejudicial people and groups strongly enough.”
Editors of Scholastic, Penguin Young Readers, Scholastic, Time for Kids are wrestling on how to frame his tough immigration stance that has been seen as anti-Muslim. Some are just deciding to maybe skip the Trump edition of their book series altogether or to wait it out to see how things pan out later. It’s still too early, a few book editors have decided.
There are 40 million cases of unintended pregnancies in the U.S. each year yet access to birth control remains a very highly controversial political topic. And now there are at least 6 ventures or private companies (including Planned Parenthood)that have released desktop or mobile apps that enable women to get birth control without a doctor’s prescription.
The apps only require users to answer questions about their health online or by video. All of the apps prescribe birth control pills, and some prescribe patches, rings and morning-after pills. Some ship contraceptives directly to women’s doors.
The app makers only have to follow state telemedicine laws and are not tied by federal regs and ongoing political wrangling.
Some of the apps, like web-based Nurx and mobile app Lemonaid, accept insurance, including Medicaid for women with low incomes; some charge modest fees. Some send prescriptions to local pharmacies, where women can present their insurance information when picking up the contraceptives, the New York Timesreports.
The apps are said to eliminate the time and cost for some women to go to the doctors.
The apps also enable teens to get around their family doctor and having their parents find out they are having sex. No more intimidating or embarrassing trips to the clinic when your mom thinks you’re going to the movies. Whoa!
While these are great for convenience for many women, we can easily see where some parents may oppose these apps. They really do cut the parent out of the equation. Even if a mom or dad has opened up a clear path of communication, a lot of teen girls simply will not feel comfortable going to a parent for birth control.
And there is the case of a 15-year old girl whose mom did approve but was turned down when the family doctor told them “oh you don’t need to be doing that.”
There are some great anecdotal interviews with women who benefit from these apps in a NYT piece that was released today. Check it out there.
For those who are unfamiliar, SIDS is an unexplained sudden death of an infant in its sleep before the age of one. The cause is really unknown, but recent conventional wisdom, based on researchers, is that being placed on the tummy combined with being overheated are causes. There is also a school of thought that pillows, crib bumpers and stuffed animals may lead to suffocation.
So in recent history, women have been told to rid their cribs of bumpers, blankets, stuffed animals and to instead swaddle their newborn babies and place them on their backs.
Why the swaddle? Babies have several reflexes including a startling reflex where they jerk their arms outward or above their heads when they feel they are not secure. Swaddling them in a blanket gives them a feeling of being snug and secure similar to the way they were in the womb prior to being born.
The study in the journal Pediatrics states that swaddling increases the risk for SIDS in about 1/3 of the cases of pooled data from four observational studies of SIDS and swaddling that included 760 SIDS cases and 1,759 controls.
However, the lead author of the report, University of Bristol in England research associate Anna S. Pease said that the results should be interpreted with caution given the fact there are so few studies in this area and there is limited evidence.
“We already know that side and prone sleeping are unsafe for young babies, so the advice to place children on their backs for sleep is even more important when parents choose to swaddle them,” she told the New York Times.
The risk also increased with the age of the infant, according to the study.
“We suggest that parents think about what age they should stop swaddling,” Dr. Pease said. “Babies start to roll over between four and six months, and that point may be the best time to stop.”
There you go new parents! New information to keep you worried. Good luck. I know so many women who do not sleep normally because they constantly wake themselves up to make sure their babies are still breathing.
The SIDS anxiety is real and with this news, we can assume it is going to get worse. le sigh.
Today, in The New York Times,actress Angelina Jolie revealed that she had elected surgery to have her ovaries and Fallopian tubes removed as a preventative measure against cancer.
“A simple blood test had revealed that I carried a mutation in the BRCA1 gene,” Jolie wrote in the OP-ED piece. “It gave me an estimated 87 percent risk of breast cancer and a 50 percent risk of ovarian cancer. I lost my mother, grandmother and aunt to cancer.”
The philanthropist said recent test results showing she was at a higher risk for ovarian cancer caused her to speed up her decision to have the surgery.
“I had been planning this for some time,” Jolie wrote of her ovarian excision. “It is a less complex surgery than the mastectomy, but its effects are more severe. It puts a woman into forced menopause.”
She explained the reasoning for her decision in the piece.
“Last week, I had the procedure: a laparoscopic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. There was a small benign tumor on one ovary, but no signs of cancer in any of the tissues,” Jolie wrote “I feel feminine, and grounded in the choices I am making for myself and my family. I know my children will never have to say, ‘Mom died of ovarian cancer.'”
A couple of years ago, in 2013, the Oscar-winning actress had a double mastectomy as a preventative measure as well based on her increased cancer risk. She wrote about that experience to in the Times as well. The awareness she raised after the piece was credited for saving the lives of many women who followed in her footsteps and got themselves checks. Some discovered conditions they may not have been aware of but for Jolie.