Monday, November 17, 2008

A Biology Lesson

In November, 2003 (ironically five years to the day of this year's election) David Letterman's wife gave birth to a son. I was watching that night on November 4, 2003, when Dave came on stage. He sat down, looked at the camera, and said, "What a biology lesson that is!" I just laughed.

Yeah, childbirth is a biology lesson. It involves a lot of, at times, not particularly appetizing details regarding very private parts of the female anatomy. One reason, I believe, that some of this "deception" has been allowed to go on for so long is that no one will confront Gov. Palin on some of the "private" details, and just how implausible her story is on the specifics.

The single specific piece of information that we have that has caused the most scrutiny of her birth saga is that she traveled back from Texas to Alaska on April 17th leaking amniotic fluid. Yet, she has never once, as far as I can tell, been asked pointed questions about the very real specifics of this. It would be a bit like someone calling in sick at work because he has cut his arm very badly, then never showing any physical signs - like blood, or stitches, or going to the doctor, that it ever happened, yet being defensive about having to "prove" it.

The leaking of amniotic fluid is an indisputable, unmistakable sign of the onset of labor. Flying at eight months of pregnancy is ill-advised. Flying at eight months with leaking amniotic fluid is insane, particularly for a woman who has boasted about her easy (past) births.

According to one obstetric source that I found, a woman with Palin's trouble-free history had about a 66% chance of giving birth within ten hours from the time her membranes ruptured. Although different texts and sources might give slightly different numbers, this is close. I've stated this before, but it bears repeating: It was not possible that Palin would give birth before she got back to Alaska. It was PROBABLE.

First, though, a bit more of our biology lesson. What is amniotic fluid? Most people know it's what surrounds the baby, but where does it come from? It is not something the mother produces, at least later in pregnancy. By the eighth month, the majority of what makes up amniotic fluid is the by-product of the fetus's urinary system; quite bluntly, it's the baby's pee. By 34 weeks, in a normal pregnancy there is about a quart of amniotic fluid. The quantity diminishes a bit by 40 weeks.

Many labors begin with some leaking (or even a large full-blown rupture) of the amniotic sac. For other women, the sac will rupture at some point during labor. If labor is left to progress fully naturally, sometimes the sac never ruptures and the baby is born still encased in it, though most birth attendants now will artificially rupture the sac before this point. (Being born still in the sac (the caul) traditionally was considered good luck, even magical. Here's an article from Wikipedia about it. )

When membranes rupture prior to any other signs of labor, what does this mean? What should be done? I've read some more extreme comments that membrane rupture is an "emergency," and Gov. Palin should have immediately called an ambulance and rushed to the hospital. Most birth attendants would say that that is a bit much. However, it is considered absolutely mandatory that once membranes have ruptured, within a sensible time frame of an hour or two, someone needs to check the baby's heart tones. Why? Because as soon as there is any leakage of fluid, additional compression can be put on the umbilical cord. It's possible in rare cases for the cord to actually slip down between the baby's head and the side of the uterus, at times even coming out through the cervix. This IS a MAJOR EMERGENCY, and the only way to rule out cord problems is to check the baby - fairly promptly. However, it's pretty clear that almost twenty four hours passed from the time that Gov. Palin first has stated that she saw some signs of amniotic fluid until she actually saw a physician.

Where did the story come from that her membranes had ruptured? Interestingly, it seems to have come from her father, Chuck Heath. Let's do a quick review of a timetable.

1. April 17th - 4 AM Texas time, 1 AM Alaska time - Gov. Palin calls her doctor to report, "there was an idea there that he might come early." I am not sure exactly what this means. Did she have a dream that her baby might come early? A vision from above? Did a little bird whisper it into her ear? Or did she have some clear physical indications that she might be in labor?
2. April 17th - Around 11 PM Alaska Time - Palin arrives at Mat-Su after remaining in Texas to give a luncheon speech then taking two separate four hour flights, and having a two hour layover in Seattle.
3. April 18th - 6:30 A.M. Trig is born at Mat-Su Regional Hospital in Palmer.
4. April 18th - Afternoon - KTUU (Anchorage NBC Affiliate) goes to Mat-Su in Palmer and does an interview with Sarah Palin's parents. It was at this interview that apprently Gov. Palin's father states that her water broke in Texas. So while it seems that Gov. Palin might have wished to be a bit more discreet about the details, her father was not so reticent.
5. April 19th - The Palins leave the hospital with Trig.
6. April 21st - The Palins, at Sarah's office in Anchorage, give an interview. (This was not published until the next day, the 22nd.)

It was during this interview, that Palin was asked specifically about her water breaking, and was told that her father had said that. She clearly does not want to discuss it, but she doesn't deny it. Why? Because it's true? Or because it is the story that she gave her parents for why she left Texas early, and now can't backpedal or THEY will get suspicious?

Here's the exact quote from the Palin interview:

Reporter: So did your water break?

Palin: Well, if you must know more of those type of details, but, um…

Reporter: Well, your dad said that and I saw him say it so that’s why I asked.

Palin: Well that was again if, if I must get personal, technical about this at the same time, um, it was one, it was a sign that I knew, um, could lead to uh, labor being uh kind of kicked in there was any kind of, um, amniotic leaking, amniotic fluid leaking, so when, when that happened we decided OK let’s call her.

So, we have it, in Gov. Palin's own (convoluted) words, that her amniotic fluid began leaking at 4 AM in Texas, and they called her doctor. As has been stated so many other places, it is incomprehensible that a doctor would not have told Gov. Palin to go to a hospital immediately and get checked out. And it's also interesting to note that Dr. Cathy Baldwin Johnson has never confirmed that the Palins called her at this time. In fact, she stated that that "things" (a precise medical term if I ever heard one) had already "settled down," (more precision) by the time the Palins called. (Or, as my physician husband has quipped: "I must have missed that day in medical school.")

So... someone is lying.

Amniotic fluid "leaking:" What does this mean to the layperson? What it means is that they probably don't want to think about it. What does it mean to a birth attendant? It means, frankly, a rather untidy mess. When we would attend a home birth, we would set up in the birthing room a full-sized trash can. (Not the kitchen size, your standard outdoor size.) By the time wee-one came along, it was almost always full.)

How did Gov. Palin handle this mess? How did she protect the hotel furniture and bedding, and her business suit during her speech? Did Todd promptly call a cab or the hotel car, rush out to the nearest CVS, and buy hospital grade sanitary pads and/or some Surecare or Chux bed underpads at 4 A.M? When I was still a home birth "helper," we would sit the mom on disposable pads (no panties, and certainly nothing in the vagina like tampons, since that would increase the chances of infection) which were changed scrupulously every half an hour or so. And once membranes rupture, it's not just a drop or two of clear fluid. Women who are going into labor start losing mucous, also known as "the mucous plug" which has sealed up the cervix. What does this look like? For lack of a better description, it looks like bloody snot.

So, morning in Texas, April 17th, we have the Governor of Alaska, with small gushes of fetal urine and bloody snot leaking out of her vagina putting on her business suit (including pantyhose?) preparing to give a speech... which by all reports, she did.

(Good God, does anybody still believe this story?)

(And don't forget, this was a conference! Not only was there a luncheon speech, but I imagine there were panels or discussions or workshops during the "morning session." Never has it been indicated that Palin did not participate... it would have caused comment if she had not. My guess is that she DID participate. We don't have direct proof for that, but we do have the Governor of Hawaii's statement that “Nobody knew a thing. I only found out from my security detail on the way home that she had gone into labor and that she had gone home to Alaska.” Only the Governor of Texas suspected that something was up (probably where the rumors later heard by Lingle's security detail came from), and that was only because the Palins had rushed off so quickly after her speech, refusing to confirm either way whether she was in labor.)

And how would she have handled it if the "leak" had become a full-fledged rupture during the speech or while sitting in some workshop? "OOOPS. Sorry. My bad."

This has personally happened to me. (Not during a speech at a Governors' Converence, of course.) But I had some leaking which all of a sudden turned into a flood. I "popped." And if you don't think a quart of fluid is a lot, I suggest you all get up from your computers right now, take a quart of water, and dump it on the floor between your legs. Now picture that happening up on a podium in front of the other Governors. It would have been the most memorable Republican Governor speech on record, I promise you that.

That anyone would have taken this risk is so implausible it is ludicrous. But no one really wants to "go there" in terms of confronting Palin. (Not that anyone has really been given the chance!) No one really wants to confront her with questions like: How DID you protect your clothing, Gov. Palin? What WOULD you have done had you started leaking a lot of fluid on the floor during the speech? Did you need to call housekeeping and have your bed changed in the middle of the night?

Birth is not a tidy process. Gov. Palin has given, as "proof" of her labor, information that she was in the midst of one of the more untidy parts, yet has given no indication that she behaved in such a way that would support her own contention. And, because it's "private," we're not allowed to ask.

But... of course... the adventure is just beginning, because we are now supposed to believe that she sat on airplane seats for EIGHT additional hours, all the while the flight attendants not noticing anything out of order. People in Alaska knew she was pregnant. The flight attendants certainly should have been aware of it, though they may not have realized the exact due date. If Gov. Palin had been getting up and going to the bathroom every few minutes (clutching her carry-on bag, because of course she would have needed her bag to carry into the restroom the hospital grade sanitary pads she should have been changing), you don't think the flight attendants would have noticed? They would not only have noticed, they would have been worried. But no one observed anything unusual in her behavior during TWO four hour flights. This is completely inconsistent with someone whose "membranes are leaking."

And a note about infection: once it's been determined that there's no compression of the umbillical cord after membrane rupture, the next worry is infection, that because the sterile sac is now compromised, bacteria can enter and begin to grow. It's why most midwives in a home birth setting will not even do an internal exam on a woman whose membranes are leaking until labor is well-established; you do not want to do anything to risk introducing infection. You don't bathe (you shower) and observe very careful hygiene while using the bathroom. You keep everything as clean and dry as possible.

(Now... think about airplane toilets.)

I've read other places that perhaps the logical explanation was that it was not amniotic fluid at all; it was just a bit of urine. We should leave Gov. Palin alone because none of us know for sure. Certainly urine leakage can happen. You sit a six plus pound kicking baby on top of a woman's bladder and, yeah, you betchya, there can be "mishaps." But there are several arguments against this. First, Trig Palin was born at 6:30 a.m. on April 18th . If Gov. Palin had arrived at Mat-Su with no signs of labor (considering that she was just 35-36 weeks) they would have sent her home. There are easy tests that can detect the presence of amniotic fluid in the vagina. The physician would have performed the test and if none had been detected, they would have sent her home. The fact that a baby was born the next morning indicates that someone was in labor that night.

The second thing is that she didn't deny it. She was asked specifically about the "water breaking" on 4/21 and she confirmed her story. She could have told the interviewer on April 21st that her impression in Texas that she was leaking fluid turned out to be wrong; that she'd been mistaken. But she didn't. That she was leaking amniotic fluid in Texas is HER story and she is sticking by it. This is not something "bloggers" have fabricated out of nowhere.

So what do we conclude from all this?

If Palin's story is completely true, if she is Trig's mother, and everything happened the way she has claimed, she took utterly unacceptable medical risks with her infant's life. She did not have him checked when her membranes ruptured, to rule out the possibility of cord prolapse. She would have had to be dressed and to comport herself in a way that would have increased the chances of infection for almost 24 hours. She risked having to give birth with no medical assistance in the aisle of an airplane. She risked disrupting the travel plans of hundreds of other people. And, if Palin's story is completely true, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson should lose her medical license.

If Palin's story is partially true, what parts are a lie? My guess would be that she had no contact at all with Baldwin-Johnson, at least prior to their layover in Seattle. It's a complete fabrication that she called her doctor from Texas. She took utterly reckless chances with her baby's safety as well as the comfort of everyone else on the airplane... and she beat the odds. And THIS is why Cathy Baldwin Johnson has appeared to cut off most contact with Palin and her crazy birth story... because Palin's lies have actually jeopardized Balwin-Johnson's professional reputation. She can't come clean about the birth without telling the world that Palin is a liar. She's reluctant to do that. While I admire loyalty, in this case I would say it's misplaced.

If Palin's story is entirely a lie, and the physical realities of membrane rupture which I have seen and dealt with countless times make me lean very strongly in that direction, then the only answer is she was never pregnant at all.



137 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not really. She could have had leakage of urine. She would have waited for additional leakage, and when none came, she continued with her day. Maybe bought some protection so she would not have a burst of water at the meeting. That she did not have further leakage means her water did not break.

Once she got to Wasilla, she could have been in early stages of labor and then induced.

No one is saying she in anything but a careless person when it comes to her kids. I think she just decided to let things happen as they would. She's lucky she did not have the baby enroute to Alaska on plane.

Mary G. said...

Well, it's what any woman who has ever been pregnant and in labor has ever thought: this is not possible. Even if she thought for a moment that it was pregnancy incontinence, she would have had it checked out because as a pregnant woman, she would not have taken a risk. The human instinct makes anyone with the least amount of sense immediately focus on the situation--it's not: oh, I'll check later, after my speech.... It's: get me to a doctor! I cannot agree with those who say she may have wanted to "harm" the baby through recklessness because, first of all, she could easily have been called on such negligence IF Trig had been harmed, and second, she could hurt herself through a botched or careless birth. She could take a risk because HER body was not going through all that biology. But I do think the 4:00 a.m. call represents something: a terrified Bristol asking her distant mother/jailer for help? It is distressing to contemplate. mary

Anonymous said...

I'm surprised no one has filed a complaint with the state medical board over Dr. Baldwin-Johnson. IF everything Sarah Palin has said about the trip and the birth is true, then the doctor acted very recklessly and should not be responsible for managing anyone's pregnancy or labor.

I wonder, if forced to defend herself to the state medical board, Dr. Baldwin-Johnson's story would differ greatly from Sarah Palin's?

Annie

MC said...

EXACTLY! The fact that she supposedly gave birth within about 24 hours of first noticing leakage? How is that NOT the start of the labor process? Otherwise, she just passed a little urine (pretty common), and then just coincidentally happened to deliver 4 weeks early within 8 hours of getting off the plane in Alaska? Without having any labor signs prior to that. OK...THAT makes much more sense! Please.

Would any biological mother reading this would like to give an example of how, once they started noticing that telltale little "Hmmm...what is that?" leakage sign...if they could have done what SP did? And not have anyone know about it? I would love to hear it.

I had my labor start very much the same way as SP, and yes, it still took me about 12 hours to start "real" labor and another 12 to hold a baby in my arms, so I guess I had time to give a speech and then fly 2,000 miles. But give me a break! Breathtaking and beautiful? Yes, it was. Clean? NO FLIPPIN' WAY. Not from the moment I first said "Hmmm..what is that?" And that was with my first birth experience; this was her fifth.

If anybody has an example they'd like to share that is a completely different experience, I would love to hear it. And I'm not being sarcastic! ;)

Anonymous said...

For what it's worth when I had my FIRST child 37 years ago, my water broke suddenly while I was in bed at 7:30 a.m. one week before my due date. I got myself to the bathroom and then went back to bed with a towel under me in bed. We called the doctor and he said to wait until contractions started before going to the hospital. My husband got antsy and decided to take me there an hour later. Nothing happened all day and then I was induced at 5:30 p.m. and finally gave birth to a beautiful 7 lb. 11 oz. boy at 11:39 p.m. I cannot picture myself standing up, giving a speech and traveling from Texas to Wasilla, Alaska via airplane in THAT 16-hour period.

Another story: My daughter was due with her FIRST child on December 14, 2006. She was getting so big on December 4th that her doctor was worried she was carrying a 10-lb. baby. He put her into the hospital and started the procedure to soften up her cervix at 3:00 p.m. Her water broke in the hospital around 11:00 p.m. and she passed so much water it was like Niagara Falls coming over the side of the hospital bed. She delivered a beautiful 7 lb. 10 oz. baby boy at 5:34 a.m. In her case she must have been full of an exorbitant amount of amniotic fluid.

Neither one of us would have ever considered traveling so far from home a month before our due dates.

Ohio Mama

Anonymous said...

To anonymous at 11.59.

The fact remains that when Sarah Palin first noticed any kind of leakage she should have sought medical attention. She is not a doctor and could not have known for absolutely sure that she was leaking urine and not her waters. A test would have been required and to be honest if it were my child and there was any hint/possible hint of premature/preterm labour I would have had no hesitation in calling an ambulance to take me to the nearest hospital to ensure my childs safety and wellbeing.

Also there is no protection other than a bucket under her legs that I can think of that would have been adequate should her waters have broken suddenly at the meeting. As Audrey has stated a pad would have been of little use in that event.

Sarah Palin, if she did just "let things happen as they would", has shown that she is an extremely unreliable and selfish person in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

Why would Palin even have concocted this cockamamie Texas story in the first place. Why not just go home and pretend she gave birth the next day? She probably did get a call early in the morning that set off this ridiculous farce.
Here's another weird Palin video:
"http://alaskapodshow.com/index.php/2008/02/20/my-visit-to-juneau-alaska/

This is a video from February 20, 2008 (6 months "pregnant") of Sarah Palin hiking and saying she loves to run uphill because "it really thrashes your guts." Odd comment for a "pregnant" person to utter.

In the blog (February 25th, 2008 at 9:32 pm)following the video, a poster says:
"I know that her son is in the army. Is he currently in Iraq?"
REPLY:February 25th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Yes! Sarah Palin’s son is serving in Iraq.

Maybe I am missing something, but I believe Palin said her son left for Iraq on Sept. 11, 2008. In fact, I have read that he left exactly one year after entering the service which would have been Sept. 2007.

Another thing, I have never heard that Baldwin-Johnson was the doctor who actually birthed Trig.
It's been alluded to, but not specifically stated. We can't assume CBJ was even present at the birth.

It's time for those responsible to step up to the plate and give Trig the honesty and dignity that all beings deserve.

-Ivy

Anonymous said...

If Sarah Palin had not been the GOP nominee, or the governor of Alaska for that matter, nobody would believe her story. This is especially true because of the March announcement of a 7-month pregnancy that nobody could believe, and that she hadn't told anyone about.

These two stories -- from SP herself -- add up to a lie, plain and simple. No impartial jury could reach any other conclusion, particularly since she could but refuses to produce unequivocal evidence that she is Trig's mother. No witness deserves nor receives such benefit of the doubt. Only magicians on stage enjoy as much suspension of disbelief.

I think it's clear that the water-breaking story is a fabrication that she couldn't deny on the spot, because she'd have to explain why she left the conference early but had to have labor induced at 35 weeks on a high-risk infant.

I try to explain this fact pattern to those not familiar with the details and they always find individual plausible explanations for each action by SP. Of course, they ignore the obvious inconsistencies in their (and SP's) explanations.

SP doesn't tell anyone she's pregnant and nobody notices? SP's story: She didn't want to be judged. OK, did she think it would be a secret forever? Implausible story.

This deception may hold in the MSM but we're not not all fools. She should just come clean about it and tell everyone which of her daughters is the birth mother, Bristol or Willow. She can claim she did it to protect her daughter and will probably get a pass from most people, although it's obvious she did it to protect herself, too.

Dangerous

Anonymous said...

Audrey, brilliant post! Well written and very logical. Add to the many oddities of the birth story that SP said she HAD to be induced. If your water has broken, you will likely not be induced. Your labor has commenced. Pitocin is not commonly given in active labor. It is not commonly given when a pregnancy is not yet full term, but more often when a pregnancy has gone over 40 weeks and there is a risk to the baby. When it is given to initiate labor, your amniotic sac is typically broken (if it has not done so on its own) by the OB to keep labor progressing or in some cases to kick it up a notch. It is not uncommon to have your water broken and you immediately dilate several centimeters. Could SP's water have not actually broken AND she made it to Alaska AND she was not in labor AND then she had to be induced? Why? As Audrey points out, if SP was not in labor they would have sent her home.

The fact remains that this is a woman who has birthed four children. She knew her body. She knew how fast her labor would likely be. Did she hear what she wanted to hear when she spoke to her doctor? Did she even speak to her?? No one knows but Sarah Palin. And she's not telling.

--Reader from Ohio

Anonymous said...

Palin chooses to do "softball" interviews with the Alaskan press who will not ask her the tough questions, with Matt Lauer who is not going to go there, nor is Wolf Blitzer (call me sexist but a man is not going to question her pregnancy), and Greta Van Sustern who works for the FOX right wing propaganda channel. I am sure Greta had strict instructions not to put Saint Sarah on the spot. She actually offered up the medical records with Lauer and he didn't even do a follow up question. There is a reason she picks the interviewers so carefully. So we are left with the questions which will not go away until they are answered, this will only get worse for Sarah as she attempts to further her career into the national stage.

Colleen said...

from Anonymous:
"Once she got to Wasilla, she could have been in early stages of labor and then induced."



If she were in the early stages of labor with membranes intact they would have done everything possible to stall labor...no way would they induce at 35 weeks. It's

The whole thing is a cover up that Palin thought she could spin her way out of. She wasn't planning on going toe to toe with Audrey!!!!

leu2500 said...

1) re "It was just urine leaking". But why call the dr at 4AM TX/1AM AK? Wouldn't she have experienced that for some months? She is of the age where a phone call in the middle of the night means someone's seriously ill or dead. If it was that serious, wouldn't the average person have gone to the ER?

2) Audrey, you mentioned the length of labor for a woman having her 5th baby before. But it never struck me as strongly as this time. The speech (assuming lunchtime = noon) was about 8 hours after the 4AM call (66 out of 100 women would have had the baby by then). And her labor lasted another 13, 14 hours (and that was with being induced, correct)? What is that, a 1% probability scenario?

Anonymous said...

Besides the ride home which sounds so silly and reckless, the fact that not a single picture would show up. Where were the news crews of Alaska, when their Governer was flying home? Are you telling me they didn't know? Could they have been bought to not be hanging out at the hospital to hopefully get a picture of the new mommy? Main stream media, where the hell were you?
You tell a lie, then another, and another, and another, and then you start getting angry at the people forcing you to tell another lie, and another.
You can't win Sarah Palin, if you told this lie. [I know your here Sarah]

Anonymous said...

I really think someone is lying about the birth but who? I had my children now over 30 years ago. With my first, I was sleeping in but woke having to go to the bathroom and I passed the mucus plug, immediately called the doctor's office and was asked if there were contractions, and since there were not significant ones, to rest, do nothing, eat nothing, call immediately if contracts started ... and I only live 10 minutes from the hospital!

Someone or several persons are lying about the clothes bought by the RNC also. Hopefully this will come to light with the audit of the books. I really think Sarah Palin is a pathological liar. She apparently (this past weekend) denied or tried to retract her statement that God would do the right thing on election day (meaning at the time that she and McCain would win ...if you heard her saying that, if you saw the interview which I did, it was obvious what she meant) and now that they lost, she says she did not say that exactly. (But the tape exists to show she did.)

As for Wolf Blitzer and Larry King, the interviews were not good; they both look at her with furrowed brow, yet they keep replaying them over and over. Then Wolf Blitzer interviews Valerie Jarrett and literally puts words in her mouth to elicit some kind of indication that President-elect Barack Obama would have a place for Sarah Palin in his administration. Valerie Jarrett "carefully" does not say that at all. Watch the interview and pay close attention to her words, but see how Blitzer trys to direct the commentary. I have written to Wolf Blitzer to call him on that, BECAUSE THIS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN ... if Mr. Blitzer has a thing for Sarah Palin, he needs to get THAT taken care of and cease trying to foist her upon us. (I don't mean to be tacky about saying this, but what else could it be?)

As long as they keep giving her 15 more minutes of fame+ we must continue with our minutes/hours/days of research!

Anonymous said...

I don't know how common it is, but I have noticed that pregnant women within a week of delivery seem to waddle. I think it has to do with the relaxation of the muscles near the pelvis. Wouldn't that have been apparent in the Texas meeting? From the picture of her at the podium it appears that she was at the height she usually is in high heels.

sandra in oregon

Sleuth for Truth said...

Well, I had leaking amniotic fluid with baby #2. The baby was 3 days past my due date when this happened. I was seeing the doctor every other day at that point.

I didn’t realize though that I was leaking amniotic fluid. I got up, went to the bathroom in the morning and thought it was just urine – me leaking. It’s not like you can “look down there” to inspect as you’ve got this HUGE baby bump in front of you, on the side of you…all over it seems!

I took a shower and got dressed and realized, “Gee, I’m wet again?” I put a pantiliner in my pants to “check things” and sure enough, it would get wet, about every hour. (This was when I got up at 7am and had a doctor’s appointment at 2pm.)

I did not call the doctor as I figured the baby is going to come some time and I am seeing him in less than 6 hours. (My water had not broken with my first child; they broke it while I was in labor at the hospital…making a HUGE mess in the delivery room as recounted to me by my husband.)

I proceeded to go out with my other child for a 45-minute class and did fine. I was not experiencing any contractions or discomfort.

We left the class and I went to my doctor’s appointment. I mentioned to the doctor the fluid and he tested it and returned to the exam room and declared, “You are going to the hospital and having that baby today.” He allowed me to go home, get my bag (and husband) and get the neighbors to come over to take care of my other child.

From what I understand it as a mom, the concern is that once you’re leaking, there is the concern of infection. In fact, since I didn’t know how long I was leaking (could’ve been all night, but my bedsheets were NOT wet), he was concerned that I was going to approach the 24 hour mark which is the “magic number” of when they want the baby out to avoid infection complications.

I got home, got my bag and went to the hospital. By the time I got checked in and settled, it was about 6pm. The doctor wanted me induced to get the baby out. So, they were setting me up to get the Pitocin. As they were doing this, I started feeling slight contractions. I told the nurse, but she said that they were so slight that they weren’t showing up on the monitor. (I am still not sure I believe that, but whatever…they were instructed to give me the Pitocin and my contractions starting naturally were not going to change the doctor’s orders.)

By 8pm the contractions were in full swing and my second baby was born at 11:11pm. The doctor had actually believed it would be the next day and they had to go find him to deliver the baby…. Labor actually went very fast and I believe whether I had the Pitocin or not, the baby would have come that evening based on me feeling the first “real” contractions about 6pm. (My first child’s labor was only 6 hours from first contraction to delivery. The theory I have always heard is that each subsequent child is born in half the previous’ labor time. Whether this is true or not, I don’t know, but it was about 3 hours for my second. I am scared to have a third child as I believe I would have him or her before I could get to the hospital!)

My point is…I had leaking amniotic fluid too and had to be induced. However….

1. I don’t think moms-to-be can tell definitively if it is amniotic fluid. If a doctor has to “test” it to be sure, we can only guess that it is amniotic fluid. Hence, Palin’s knowing she was leaking was simply an educated guess on her part without having gone to a doctor or hospital.
2. I did not have any contractions prior to going to the hospital (about 11 hours after I woke up and discovered my leakage). I do believe Palin could have gone all day without having contractions.
3. I felt fine all day, though dressing up in a business suit and standing in front of a group of professionals to give a presentation? Not so much. Socializing in a professional setting and attending other presentations? Again, I would be too antsy knowing I would need to check my underwear and could go into labor at any moment. (Is there anyone out there who wants to share getting their first contraction in a public place? Thankfully that has not happened to me or any of my friends so I’m curious how you and others handled it.)
4. Sitting on an airplane at eight or more months pregnant for TWO four-hour stretches in an airplane seat? Taking a car ride to the mall 10 minutes away was uncomfortable. I couldn’t imagine doing it while I was leaking.
5. Driving two hours from the airport to get to my home hospital. See #4.
6. Calling a doctor after waking up wet in the morning and telling him or her that you are leaking “something?” I don’t think they would recommend continuing with your day as planned. They (as my doctor) would be concerned with infection and make you go to the hospital ASAP like mine did.

I think that Palin could have done everything she claims. Was it wise? No. Was it safe for her, the baby or anyone around her? No. However, the many “uhs” and “ums” and “ohs” she peppers her birth story with are too weird for me. No one I know recounting a birth story hems and haws like that. It’s too real, too graphic and too imbedded in your head.

Sleuth for Truth

Anonymous said...

I have been reading these posts for weeks, and finally have time to comment. When I was 35 weeks with my 4th child, my water "broke." I was immediately admitted to the hospital, put on a fetal monitor, and given an ultrasound to make sure the baby had enough fluid to allow him to remain in utero a little longer (I was not in labor). If not, I would have had an emergency c-section. After 12 hours of no labor, and constantly leaking fluid, I was started on i.v. penicillin (and yes, I had to be induced after 48 hours without labor). My baby spent one week in the NICU after that. Based on this experience, I don't believe for a second that S.P. is giving a truthful account of what happened to her. The number of "huhs?" are too many - sitting in an airplane for 8 hours with constantly leaking fluid? A competent doctor telling her it was okay to fly in that condition? An airline that let her do that? It just doesn't add up.

Anonymous said...

People in Alaska need to stand up and show that they respect the truth. Someone up there knows the story and should let people in on how to get to the bottom of this secret! There ar many honorable and intelligent people up there that must be totally embarrased by this woman. She does not represent the good people of Alaska...
It's time already for the truth to come out.

Not Sissy

Anonymous said...

Some one should at least do it for the good Doctor who's in a position of not even being able to clear herself of this situation without violating patient/Dr confidentiality.

Anonymous said...

Can't someone bribe the hotel she stayed at in Houston/Dallas whereever to see her phone records that night??? *THEY* wouldn't be protected by HIPAA.

Anonymous said...

Great summary, Audrey. But what is being done about this?? I think you wrote somewhere on your site that there was one report (from ABC?) that was relentlessly investigating this story. Is that woman still working on getting the true story out there? Is there anyone else on this? I worry that after this flurry of media, SP will fade away for a while (to the extent that the public will forget about Bristol's current pregnancy?)
and the she will reappear in 2010 looking for the Republican nomination. While that would probably only be a good thing for Democrats, that woman is an insult to our country and makes us look like fools to the rest of the world. It is truly, as Matt Damon said, a Disney movie come true.
So,the real truth about this story needs to come out so that she is exposed for who / what she truly is. What media is on top of this???

Anonymous said...

No pun intended, but this story just doesnt hold any water Sarah.

I'm a guy, no kids, but still in posssesion a few connected brain cells.

Bristol is the mom, based on her huge breasts at the convention.

Birth timimg is probably a bit earlier than announced and the jaundice threw off the TX trip schedule and the unltimate birth announcement.

The possiblity with Willow doesnt add up as she didnt dissappear like Bristol. IF it was Willow then it WAS statutory rape.

Anyway, back to the convention and nomination pics. Bristol holds Trig and vice versa in a way that even an old dude like me can see the bond.

Sarah and Todd look at him like grandparents and hand him off to Piper, but when Levi kissed the baby, that was all she wrote.

Audrey said...

To Anonymous at 11:59: Here's Audrey's response:

Not really. She could have had leakage of urine.

Audrey: Yes possible.

She would have waited for additional leakage, and when none came, she continued with her day.

Audrey: Yes, possible.

Maybe bought some protection so she would not have a burst of water at the meeting.

Audrey: Yes, possible, but still negligent that she had not at least had her baby's heart tones checked to rule out the rare but possible complication of cord prolapse. Cord prolapse = dead baby. There's no other way to say this.

That she did not have further leakage means her water did not break.

Audrey: Yes, possible. If she had no further leakage, it would have strongly indicated that there was no anmniotic fluid.

Once she got to Wasilla, she could have been in early stages of labor and then induced.

Audrey: OK, this is where it all breaks down. What "early stages of labor?" There are only a couple I can think of. Either you're leaking fluid (with no contractions) which would necessitate induction. Or you would be having contractions, which would not then necessitate any "inducing" of labor.

The ONLY reason I can think of for them to keep a woman at 35 weeks gestation in the hospital and "induce" her is if there was clear indication of PROM with no contractions.

Anonymous said...

Audrey,

Thank you for the "biology lesson" as to what "leaking amniotic fluid" actually means. If she had flown in that condition, not only would SP's anxiety and frequent trips to the lavatory have been noticed by the flight attendants; she would hardly have spoken of it later as if it had been a routine flight -- or rather two flights.

As you state at the end, this is a strong argument that the whole account is a lie, and SP was never pregnant. I agree, but I want to suggest that the one thing you are most certain is false is actually the one thing that is likely to be true -- the 4 a.m. phone call to Dr. B-J.

If SP simply wanted to fabricate a story to explain her hasty departure from the conference, she would have left out that phone call. One does not call a doctor, even a personal friend, in the middle of the night unless one believes there is an emergency. SP does not say that the doctor reassured her that there was no cause for worry, but she didn't go to a doctor in Texas to be checked out. Somehow there was just enough urgency to make her take an earlier flight home.

That doesn't fit, and it's obvious it doesn't fit. If SP were inventing a cover story, she would have claimed to have noticed the signs of impending labor the following day, and decided on her own that she could make it home. There would have been no call to the doctor, let alone at 4 a.m.

However, a person inventing a cover story has to work around those facts she realizes are known or may become known. In all probability, the hotel kept track of outgoing calls made from hotel guests' rooms and charged guests for them. SP could anticipate that there would be a record of an outgoing, long-distance call to Alaska made from her hotel room (quite likely showing Dr. B-J's phone number), and possibly similar records of local calls made to change her airline booking. This would not be a public record, of course, but it would be seen by hotel staff who prepared the bill. (And if SP planned to submit the hotel bill to the State of Alaska for reimbursement, or if she were using a state-issued credit card, it might become a public record.) So I think that the 4 a.m. phone call may be a part, perhaps the only part, of SP's story that is true, because it looks like something her story had to take into account, even though it made her story a lot less credible.

However, the record of the call would say nothing of the content of that call, leaving SP free to fabricate within the limits of confidentiality that would prevent Dr. B-J from correcting or contradicting her. So it is possible that SP received a phone call from Alaska (which as an incoming call would not be charged to her by the hotel, hence not recorded) regarding Bristol, Trig (if he had already been born), or even someone else, that prompted SP to call Dr. B-J at 4 a.m.

Postergirl said...

Wow, excellent post! It may be a long time before the truth comes out, but at some point, someone, somewhere will be told something, a slip of the tongue...or maybe seeing a photo in their photo album... If only there was someone close to them who'd be willing to talk... a friend of Bristol's, or someone who saw Sarah after that photo of her with the newsreporter, where she looks distinctively pregnant.

Think about that photo... I'm sure you know the one I'm talking about... she looks really pregnant in that photo. If no one at the convention in Texas noticed that she was pregnant, nor the airline crew... doesn't that seem odd? If she looks so pregnant in that photo, and she does, why doesn't a single person from the convention (or whatever that Governor's meeting was) in Texas just say that she definitely looked pregnant? Maybe someone has?
Silou

Anonymous said...

I found this post on newsminer.com from a blogger. I thought it was interesting and hit on some good points.

annieb39 said: I am a midwife, and am happy to comment on some of the information here. First, with all due respect to thehardway, there is no different to a medical professional between a women whose aminiotic sac is leaking and one where it is "broken." It might be more dramatic in movies but that's it. I have no idea what happened with your mother fifty years ago, but now any woman who had a similar circumstance would be hospitalized. In my midwifery career I have seen one mother on her fifth delivery give birth after two hours of "leaking" aminiotic fluid and ONE contraction. There is NO WAY an experienced mother who has had four previous deliveries leaking amniotic fluid would get on an airplane and no physician who would permit it. Period.

Second, IF Bristol Palin is the mother and did not breastfeed, it would have been theoretically possible for her to conceive again within six weeks of the birth. She easily could be pregnant again.. just not five months.

Third, it is clearly established on the Internet that the rumors that Bristol and NOT Sarah was pregnant began in Alaska BEFORE the birth, not after. No one can know if the Palins were aware of them, but they are well-connected and savvy, so it is certainly reasonable to assume they did. What did they do? Did they set up a photo-op of Governor Palin baby clothes shopping with her three daughters? Did they invited camera crews into the governor's mansion to show the family painting the nursery? One (ONE!) photo of a pregnant Governor with her non pregnant daughter would have shut all of the down, then and now. They didn't do it. It's valid to wonder why.

I agree totally with her.

Jack in GA

Anonymous said...

What will Sarah Palin have to agree to tell to get a $7 million deal for a book? For that amount, and with Todd's income, she could retire from politics if the electorate doesn't forgive her. -B.

Stephanie said...

In response to the posters who have mentioned licensing issues if Sarah Palin's version of events were true, some food for thought:

The Alaska State Medical Board (whose members are appointed by the Governor) may impose sanctions upon a physician if, after a hearing, it determines that a licensee "engaged in deceit, fraud, or intentional misrepresentation while providing professional services or engaging in professional activities." Sec. 08.64.326(2).

Alaskan physicians are bound by The Principles of Medical Ethics of the American Medical Association, p. xiv, 2002-2003 Edition of the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, Code of Medical Ethics, published by the American Medical Association. 12 AAC 40.955.

Unprofessional conduct, which may be sanctioned, is defined as an act or omission "that does not conform to the generally accepted standards of practice for the profession," 12 AAC 40.967. Professional incompetence is defined as "lacking sufficient knowledge, skills, or professional judgement in that field of practice in which the physician ...concerned engages, to a degree likely to endanger the health of his or her patients."

Unprofessional conduct specifically includes "committing, or attempting to commit, fraud or deception," and "falsifying, intentionally making an incorrect entry, destroying or failing to maintain patient or facility medical records for at least seven years from the date of creation of the record." 12 AAC 40.967(5) & (10). It includes failing "to report to the board or the board's representatives facts known to the licensee regarding incompetent or repeated negligent conduct, gross negligence, unprofessional conduct, sexual misconduct, or other illegal conduct by another licensee..." 12 AAC 40.967(19)(B).

And unprofessional conduct is enumerated to include "providing treatment, rendering a diagnosis, or prescribing medications based solely on a patient-supplied history that a physician licensed in this state received by telephone, facsimile, or electronic format." 12 AAC 40.967 If I'm actually the patient--an over-40 pre-term woman in Texas, carrying a Down-diagnosed baby and reporting over the phone that I'm leaking anything--and am advised without examination that I should shuffle on out after my speech, then perhaps there's a problem here. (On the other hand, of course, if I'm not the patient, that's not long-distance treatment or diagnostic assessment.)

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that any Alaska resident or perhaps a resident of another state could file a complaint against Dr. Baldwin-Johnson based on the several ethics rules that may have been violated in this case.

Stephanie said...

Another observation on Alaska law: the physician-patient privilege is fairly standard. Under Alaska R. Ev. 504, where the physician-patient privilege applies, it applies not only to the patient but also to members of the patient's family "participating in the diagnosis or treatment under the direction of the physician"; the privilege may be claimed not only by a patient but also by her legal guardian. Rule 504(b)&(c). Among the many exceptions (instances in which the physician-patient privilege would not apply) is any instance in which a physician's services "were sought, obtained or used to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan a crime or fraud or to escape detection or apprehension after the commission of a crime or a fraud." Rule 504(d)(2).

DestinyQuest said...

Where is the Enquirer when you need them...or the nosy paparazzi? I cannot believe that this is not being pursued by ET or Extra. It has all of the elements of a great scandal and yet those who specialize in scandal are no where to be found! You would think that someone…especially the extreme tabloid papers would find something!

And why can’t I find a single mainstream media source interested in pursuing this…let alone the tabloids. Why are they not diligently putting pressure on the local newspapers, citizens, friends, medical center, someone...anyone...who can bring this lie into the open.

I thought Sarah Palin was only going to be hands off during the election process and that they would dive head first into it afterwards. But this seems to be the only dialogue and place where anyone seems to be interested in finding the truth. I don't think we can continue to talk and speculate about what might be the LIES associated with this birth but now need to find the PROOF of this matter. So let's put our efforts into finding someone who has tangible information or who will probe into this coverup in a meaningful way that will produce either documents, photos, eye witness accounts, that we haven't seen and addressed before. This round and round makes me feel like I am becoming like Sarah Palin...just saying the same storyline and it remains the same storyline!

Anonymous said...

when my water broke it ran for nearly six hours....lots and lots and lots of water....on everything.

of course there were also the intense CONTRACTIONS that commenced once the fluid flowed.
...apparently she could go all that time with no noticeable contractions.

i never believed her story.

Anonymous said...

Just need to comment on a couple of things.

Regarding the fact that she could have been leaking and not worried, having had four other pregnancies, fine. But I do not believe for one second that her doctor wouldn't have had her go to a Texas hospital just to make sure. I had a moment in my pregnancy where I was leaking (turned out not to be amniontic) and was told to go straight to the hospital for the strip test. So the doctor knowing and not sending her, or if she never called or if she ignored doctor's orders is all part of her credibility sham.

As for large breasts on Bristol, one of the first signs of pregnancy is often an increase in breast size. I got many comments from friends about that when I was pregnant. So it's possible hers are large because of pregnancy. They just looked really odd at the RNC(oh, forgive me for talking about a teen's breast size).

Jennifer

Anonymous said...

Audrey, thanks for the medical details. Not every reader of this blog has given birth (or is a medical professional) and thus knows the specific details that you gave.

With the medical details in this latest thread, I believe the whole amnio fluid story is a total lie.

If there is any truth to it, Sarah was reckless and didn't care about her baby. Maybe she hoped he would die because she didn't want a 5th child. Or maybe she knew about the Down's and would have been OK with a "normal" child but not one with special needs. But why would someone so scrupulous about her public image risk giving birth in an airplane aisle with her panties off and her legs apart and her knees up and gushing blood? 60 years ago flight attendants had to be registered nurses. Not any more. Would she give birth herself like animals do? You can't guarantee that any flight would have medical personnel on board as passengers.

As a regular reader of this blog, I believe Sarah did not give birth to Trig. But playing devil's advocate, let's say she is Trig's birth mom. Perhaps she made up that whole cockamamie amnio story to make herself look like a hero. Maybe she had scheduled the birth ahead of time. But that doesn't explain the rush and change of flight plans.

Or do we even know for sure that she was in a rush and her flight plans were changed? Maybe the "change in plans" was a lie, too. It's not like you can go to the airport at any time of the day or night and, presto, there is a plane waiting just for you, Dallas to Seattle, Seattle to Alaska. Maybe a sneaky reader who works for Alaska Air can find out if her plans were actually changed. How long did she supposedly have to wait for her flight? Maybe someone can tell us what her flight schedule would have been. If she changed her plans, she would have called the airlines, but probably on her cell phone. Or she could have done it on the Internet. Lots of hotels have connections, and she could have travelled with a laptop; lots of people do.

If she did talk to her doctor on the phone, she probably used a cell phone. We don't know that she spoke to any doctor at all; we have only her word for it, and we all know what that's worth.

If we assume the amnio story is a total lie, I can see only 3 possible reasons for a rush: a planned birth, or someone else was giving birth, or Trig was already born and had some special need (such as jaundice treatments).

I have heard of Cesarean sections planned early, but not of planned vaginal deliveries a month early. Audrey, would this be unheard of? No way would she have been back at the office 3 days later after a Cesarean birth.

Sarah's birth story has more holes than a pair of fishnet stockings.

lk said...

Annie said:

"I wonder, if forced to defend herself to the state medical board, Dr. Baldwin-Johnson's story would differ greatly from Sarah Palin's?"

I know several people have mentioned HIPPA and privacy rights in regards to BJ, but I am curious as to whether or not that would apply in the instance?

If the physician did NOT talk to SP at 4 am that night before she gave the speech/got on the plane and was NOT present at this so-called birth is there still the doctor patient privilege? Can BJ say "No, we did not talk and no, I was not present" or is there something that would prevent her from saying that?

Any experts on doctor-patient relationships?

Anonymous said...

Someone suggested (perhaps on another thread) that maybe Trig doesn't have Down's but Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.

If they are lying about that, it will prove false in the future. Certainly as the child gets older, people will notice which condition he has.

So maybe this is the ONE thing that is the truth.

Anonymous said...

you are awesome, keep up the great work. I visit your blog daily and completely agree, something isn't rught.

Anonymous said...

Look at how huge Mercedes Johnston's hands are in the photographs of her holding Trig in the Palin kitchen. He looks about a day or two old.

I think Audrey's suggestion that he was born at home is probably right.

Trig looks larger, his face filled out, in the photo of him shot in the arms of Sarah's parents at the hospital. I'd guess he's a more than a day or two old in that picture.

Also, check out the KTLA TV interview (linked to by an earlier commenter on this post) with Sarah conducted in LA the same day in March that she was videotaped at the Newsweek forum, leaning forward and with her legs crossed at the knees.

Some shots of her at KTLA show her sitting from the side, with her scarf dropping in a vertical line to her lap. No bump. She was just a few weeks from delivering a 6 pound baby in this interview and at the Newsweek forum.

Anonymous said...

It's interesting that Sarah Palin says in the ADN interview published April 22nd, that Trig is doing so well... when Cathy Baldwin-Johnson says in the doctor's letter released the night before the election that Trig needed phototherapy in the days after his birth.

This seems inconsistent to me.

Then again, Sarah Palin is NOTHING if not consistently inconsistent!

Silver Salmon said...

I feel like I've lost several IQ points. So much so that I can't remember if anyone ever even proposed that this is Sadie's baby.

To the degree of 99.99%, it isn't. I've been reading Myspace comment sections from a few Wasilla-ites. On April 15, Sadie had weekend plans to go out partying. Sadie mentioned going out a handful of times in one particular blog between October of last year and now.

I think I would've gotten the vibe that she didn't go if she hadn't.

Sadie - she's the one listed as mercede - posts comments a handful of times here:
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=56220783

Read comments and explore others' Myspace pages if you dare. These are truly mind-numbing.

What I find even odder is that I've read about three comments sections from October-ish 2007 until July. The three appear be pretty much three different groups of friends with perhaps one or two friends in common.

Bristol's name hasn't come up once. Not for anything. Not in any context. I would have thought there would have been maybe a mention of her transferring schools or even being back in town not long after.

If anyone wants to explore more conspiracy theory, Palin originally said when she announced the pregnancy that she knew the sex of it, but had not told anyone. Apparently around April 8, she revealed that the child was to be a boy. The latter was gleaned from:
http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/

This has a bunch of links dating back several, several months.

Anonymous said...

Another great post from Andrew Sullivan:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/11/in-defense-of-h.html

"But again: the assumption here is that the Trig maternity story was obviously untrue. How do these reporters know that? I'm a little tired of being the asshole at the dinner party, but the truth is: we still don't know for sure. We only have a letter released a few hours before voting began from Palin's doctor, Catherine Baldwin Johnson, asserting that Palin was the biological mother of five. That letter could have been released in August, but wasn't. Why? Then we have three photographs showing Palin somewhat pregnant but certainly not seven or eight months pregnant. And that's it. Kurtz himself was part of a McCain-originated campaign to target other journalists to stop inquiring into the story. The circumstantial evidence was easily enough to have a mainstream journalist ask her about it. And yet none had the balls. Even when her own campaign told us she's a "whack-job." In the end, Palin herself brought it up only to dismiss it and none of the "journalists" followed up.

Matt Lauer and Greta Van Susteren really are embarrassments to their profession."

Emily said...

Here's a possibility.

(Just playing Devil's Advocate here, because I think her story is total BS)

What if, as has been suggested before, Mrs. Palin leaked urine, panicked for a moment (she was in her eighth month, so she was probably on watch for anything to happen), thought it was her water breaking, called her doctor, who advised her that it was urine ("Tell me what kind of fluid you're seeing, any blood?"), but that she should get back as soon as possible in case labor did start.

Mrs. Palin then goes about her routine, gives her speech, gets on her flight, has her layover, gets on her second flight, and perhaps once she landed, on the car ride home, she began having serious contractions and/or her water really broke? Therefore she drove to Mat-Su (being already in the car, which would somewhat explain the reason she didn't go to the hospital nearest the airport), and a few hours later had the baby.

That would line up with her assertion of previous quick births, and Trig being the "easiest". A couple hours of labor is not uncommon for a woman on her fifth pregnancy. I know someone whose fifth child was born 45 minutes after her water broke.

The only trouble with this, of course, is that this story makes sense. The story she told does not.

It's always possible that she was embarrassed to admit that she wet herself, being a public figure and all. She was probably never going to even bring it up, except her father (to whom she perhaps fibbed, thinking he wouldn't know how serious your water breaking is) blabbed that her water broke in Texas. So she went along with the story, making up details along the way.




Does anyone know which came first, her father saying her water broke in Texas, or her statement of what happened?

Audrey said...

Emily, some good points but here's why I think you're probably incorrect:

1. Amniotic fluid is mostly clear but often has a slight yellowish tinge. A small quantity of urine vs a small quantity of amniotic fluid would be indistinguishable. A doctor, receiving a phone call at 4 AM from an experienced mom who says she "might" be leaking amniotic fluid will tell her to go the hospital and be checked. 100% of the time. She would never try to diagnose over the phone in a case like this. But SP did not go to the hospital. This means that she either ignored her doctor's advice or never really called. There's no way the doctor could have known what the real deal was over the phone and she wouldn't have tried. There are good hospitals and doctors in Texas. Why guess when you can have a definitive answer?

2. What you suggest is possible... that she wasn't leaking amniotic fluid in Texas (maybe she just "felt weird,") flew home with no signs of labor, and then miraculously went into labor in the car after landing, at the point on the highway where they would have been closer to Mat-Su than to hospitals in Anchorage, thus also conveniently answering criticism as to why they drove to Mat-Su when there were closer and better equipped hospitals in Anchorage.

But if that's what happened, then why not say so? Sarah Palin told her father that her water broke in Texas and that's why they came home early. That's a pretty clear statement. There was a reception that evening; I don't know her original travel plans but my best guess, examining flight schedules, is that they changed their flights from the MORNING flight the next morning (April 18th) to the afternoon flight on the 17th. If there was wrong info out there, she could have corrected it easily in the ADN interview on 4/21. She didn't.

The interesting thing here is that this is ONE AREA where we actually have a fair amount of information in Sarah Palin's own words. She went on record with a great many details about this birth three days after it happened. This is her story. This is her version of it. In many areas, we have to "guess" based on conflicting information from other media sources. But in this case, we have Gov. Palin's statements.

kitchnwitch said...

Everything you say makes sense... But here's what I don't get. Let's say she's NOT pregnant. Let's say she MUST get back to Wasilla to "have the baby" by a certain time. Why not just leave Texas as scheduled without any silly stories and then just - oops! wow! go into labor the second she got back? She could have just said she was having some twinges and early contractions if she wanted to play the "in labor" card - why go all the way and say her water broke? Irresistible drama, perhaps? I don't know. The whole thing still stinks.

Anonymous said...

What did the Alaska Airline people say about SP during the flight back to AK? That her "condition was not obvious" to them? Did they mean her pregnancy was not obvious or the fact that she was having signs of labor? This is important because in the only photo where SP appears obviously pregnant, there is no WAY airline staff could miss it. BUT, if as Audrey suggested previously, SP did not wear a prosthetic belly on the flight since she had to go through security, it would make perfect sense that her condition was not obvious!
~BG

Mary g. said...

Silver Salmon, you are helpful! I will check some of those things out; and I checked some of the flickr images noted by Patrick, but there are soooo many.... My eyes hurt.
Silver Salmon, I noticed on the Frank Elan video clip used by Fox (see Audrey's main site--maybe part 4?) that Palin says "it's a boy"--but her voice is--well, I don't know. It sounded higher-pitched, or rushed. and I thought when Elan followed up immediately by asking Piper if she wanted a brother, Piper looks rather baffled. She IS very little, of course. but I think it is a very recent piece of news to her, too.

Marcy said...

Concerning the 4 a.m. phone call from the Texas hotel: another poster mentioned that it would be recorded on the bills that would be submitted to the State. That would be a good reason to make the call.

Do I believe that Dr. Baldwin-Johnson gives out her home number to any patient? NO. Do I believe that Sarah Palin actually reached that doctor and spoke with her? NO.

More likely, Palin called the office number and left some kind of message. Nothing but a CYA.

However, Chuck Heath's comment about the water breaking sounds to me as if someone who was in his vicinity actually did have that happen. Like a granddaughter.

Thank you, Audrey and Morgan, for keeping this blog going. grammy

Anonymous said...

Why doesn't someone hire a private detective to get to the bottom of this?

Palin will never tell the truth, and I would think an experienced PI could get the truth in a very short time.

Anonymous said...

I would advise anybody to have a look at the photostream with the title "Whole Truth Campaign" of the flickr-user "DAKOTAFINE". You will find lots of pictures of Sarah Palin there, taken on the 26th February 2008 (the event on which those pictures were taken was a press conference of the Whole Truth Campaign on the 26th February 2008 which took place in the National Press Club in Washington DC, with Sarah Palin and Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler attending). BOY, does Sarah Palin look pregnant there!

The link to the photostream of DAKOTAFINE on flickr:

http://flickr.com/photos/dakotafine/sets/72157604011843036/

Patrick

Mary g. said...

Silver Salmon has found some interesting stuff. I think I am too old to appreciate he myspace "information" and too easily shocked, perhaps... anyway, I did not get far into it. The blackout on Bristol's name is extremely telling--the friends either had a code name for her, or....??? or someone scrubbed the accounts and left enough to keep them "authentic". The palinforvp website is also fascinating--some potential sources and pictures of palin in feb-march, plus her very busy doings in april-may. Mary
PS about Sadie/mercedes going out--I do wonder if she didn't do some activities with Bristol as a privileged friend, and sleepover buddy.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Governor's office? My guess is that Sarah has a cell phone that is paid for by the state... and that comes under the FOIA. Obviously if she used a personal cell phone while in Texas, we won't learn anything, but it would be interesting to see her government phone records during the time shortly before and after Trig's birth.

Another thing to request under FOIA: detailed reimbursements, state credit card charges, and other expenses from the month of April for which Sarah billed the state. If she had to suddenly change her plane tickets to return to AK, there should be an extra charge for that, which should show up on a credit card somewhere.

Annie

Anonymous said...

To anonymous at 4:41pm 11/17,

I appreciate that you still have functioning brain cells but you speculate on many things and then rely on them as facts for conclusions. That is not a good investigative method.

Of most interest to me is this assertion:

"The possiblity with Willow doesnt add up as she didnt dissappear like Bristol. IF it was Willow then it WAS statutory rape."

First, Bristol did not disappear, as Audrey has documented copiously on this site. She switched high schools and then dropped out, apparently. But those who saw her in early 2008 didn't think she was pregnant. Rumors started, but there's no evidence that Bristol was pregnant then ... yet.

Do we have concrete evidence of Willow's whereabouts? I don't think we have that on the record. the only evidence is a listing in a newpaper of her on Honor Roll for a middle school in Juneau. We have actual sightings of Bristol, including a traffic accident at the end of February.

It is on record that Willow had an 8th grade boyfriend, supposedly spreading rumors that Bristol was pregnant, but we don't have a date on that nor confirmation. I'm not sure of the law, but I doubt there would be any prosecution of an 8th grader having consensual sex with a 7th grader, if that is what happened. So it need not be that statutory rape caused a pregnancy, if that's what happened.

I think we all have to be cautious to challenge our own conjectures as strongly as we challenge SP's story and seek the facts to either prove or disprove any particular element. I, for one, welcome any discernable facts that either prove or disprove that Willow is Trig's mother, or Bristol, or Sarah for that matter.

Dangerous

BTW -- At SP's convention speech, it was Willow holding Trig at the start. NBC's Andrea Mitchell was confused, however, and said it was Bristol, because Willow looks awfully mature and both are very pretty. That's when I recognized that Willow could not be ruled out as Trig's mother without evidence.

Anonymous said...

About the amniotic fluid leaking... maybe this is different b/c I was on child #1 and past due, but my water broke around midnight, and I called my midwife, who told me to come on in the next morning unless I started having contractions in the meantime. So she was willing to let me go ~8 hours without being seen after the water broke, though she did confirm that I was Strep B negative first. How standard is it to be told to go immediately to the hospital upon water breaking? Is that only for premature ROM? (Or, was my midwife an idiot?)........

Anonymous said...

So many random thoughts...

1) From an ADN article Apr 22:

"Because of prenatal testing, most families now know beforehand, said Judy Waldron, president of the Alaska chapter of the National Down Syndrome Congress, a support and education group that delivered a parent packet to the Palins in the hospital."
Has anyone spoken to her? Did she see Trig? Did he look like a newborn? Did she see Sarah? How and when did Judy first hear that Trig had Down Syndrome?

2) Regarding the 4 AM phone call...
Did Sarah say that she used the hotel phone to call the Dr? Most people use cell phones. I bet those phone records would be very interesting... maybe there was an INcoming call that started the entire thing. Maybe there were calls between Bristol and Sarah.

3) Could we put together a "REWARD for TRUTH"? ( maybe get a sponsor who would get publishing rights ! ) ... for whoever first comes forward with irrefutable proof of what really happened -

Colleen said...

It's been so long..I can't remember if Bristol having "mono" is a rumor or if it is "on record". Does anyone know?

In old photos Bristol doesn't appear to be "overly busty", Her breasts at the convention are way out of proportion to her "pregnant" body. Look at Sarah's "7 month pregnant" breasts....I had my 5th baby at 40 and my 15 year old daughter asked, "is this what I'm going to look like when I'm pregnant?" I said, "yes, it's usually like mother, like daughter!" Even if you look at the old photo of Sarah when she really was pregnant (circulating on the net) you can see she wasn't as busty at the end of her pregnancy as Bristol "appears" to be in the convention photo, at what?- "5 months preggo"?.

Emily said...

Hm, you also make some good points, audrey, and you would be in a better position to know these things than me. I've not given birth nor witnessed a birth save for dramatized ones, so I really wouldn't know any of the intricate details. :)

Here's another scenario:

Mrs. Palin feels fluid leakage while in Texas. She doesn't feel contractions, so she waits for something else to happen - it doesn't.

She goes about the rest of her day, but switches to an earlier flight "just in case". Perhaps she had called her parents and told them that she thought her water broke, so she was coming home early.

And, as I said in my previous post, once she landed and was in the car her water ACTUALLY broke, and she started having contractions, so they drove to Mat-Su. She realizes upon this point that it must have just been urine back in Texas, but lo and behold, her dad already thinks her water broke in Texas.

So, embarrassed to admit she wet herself, she goes along with the story, adding in that she called her doctor, who said she should be all right to finish the conference. I don't believe C B-J has ever said definitively that Palin actually called her. So her silence on the matter might speak louder than words.

This story seems more realistic, as it lines up with what we know about Palin:

-Idiotic (what woman, even suspecting her water had broken, wouldn't head to a hospital? Perhaps she really is just that ignorant on these matters.)
-Proud of her public image (unwilling to admit what actually happened...she wet herself...and would rather make up some grandiose story of enduring labor on two flights and a car ride)

And it would absolve C B-J from giving horrendous advice. Granted, it would also make her guilty of staying silent.


I don't know....there are just too many inconsistencies to make this story plausible in any way, shape or form.

Something is fishy.

Emily said...

Also, as regards Trig's size differences in the pictures of Mercedes Johnston holding him, and the Heaths holding him, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it common for newborns to lose a little weight shortly after birth? They're no longer getting fed continuously, and are burning more calories.....at least I know it's common with puppies right after they're born.

I have more experience birthing puppies than humans, obviously.

Anonymous said...

My amniotic fluid leaked with my first child. Never got the burst of water breaking, just slow leaks until I was well in labor 24 hours later when induced.

I think SP had leakage of urine. She took a chance, a big one in my opinion but won out. She may have leaked, waited and not gotten any more leakage and decided it was just urine. She then decided that she would get home and get induced and have that baby so she would not have to worry anymore about when it would happen. I don't think she was really in labor.

I don't think she thinks when she talks either. She says the most foolish things that make no sense at all. Who even knows if she had anything at the Governor's meeting. She was determined that her pregnancy would not detract from her job and reputation. Too bad it has since she did handle things very badly. But I don't think she is in any cover up for Trig. I'll bet she went to Wasilla, was not in labor, and said, just get me going, want this baby now, can't deal with it anymore, and so was induced. Not a very nurturing move. Maybe why she did not want her med records out. She has gotten a lot of heat as it is for her trek after leakage.
I would not even swear that she knew the baby had DS. Some of those early tests are just screening tests for elevated or depressed levels that may put you at risk for things like DS. It was probably a shock when the baby did come with DS, and something that she need to acclimate to. That is not unusual. I know many families who went through this. Also as governor, she probably wanted privacy and was not interested in having her son's birth on the hospital sit.

Marky Mark said...

Are you saying that the child is likely her daughter's?

I don't think lying about such a thing is remotely relevant to someone's qualifications for office and it is dwarfed by lying under oath in a sexual harassment lawsuit....

But leaving that aside, are you also saying that her daughter is not (again) pregnant? If she indeed is pregnant, how does that fit with the delivery of Trig? Is there a plausible timeline where Bristol delivered Trig and then again became pregnant?

Matoko said...

what if...Palin downplayed her pregnancy because she was initially embarrassed about an unplanned pregnacy.....and what if....knowing Trig was Downs....she just.....she just Jesus take the wheel?
Put the whole thing in God's hands.

Anonymous said...

This is a great post.

There is one thing I ponder. If you conclusion is correct that Palin was never pregnant, and Bristol delivers on-time, and there are no adoption records, who's Trig's biological mother?

Has anyone checked adoption records?

Walloon said...

David Letterman is not married to longtime girlfriend Regina Lasko, the mother of his child.

Anonymous said...

It's certainly possible to have a small leak at the top of the amniotic sack. Noticeable, especially for someone who has already given birth 4 times, but by no means a show stopper in terms of going about your day. Of course anyone who is remotely familiar with child birth knows that if you suspect the leakage of amniotic fluid, you go to the doctor/hospital. So she ignored a small leak. Careless, risky, thoughtless, etc... Come on, we're talking about Sarah Palin. No surprises here.

Anonymous said...

I imagine the hotel phone path might not go anywhere since SP probably did her calling on her cell phone. Has anyone thought about contacting the other governors at that convention? Were they the same ones who were at the one in Florida last week?

peacay said...

The (admirable) cause that seeks to irrefutably prove serious lies so as to remove the Wasilla buffoon from future misconduct and stupidity that may have wider consequences in all our lives is done a great misservice by the degree of speculation that is attached to the commentary about the birth and perinatal events. The doctor is also being unfairly maligned with no evidence. We do not know what was said during the call so we can make no judgement about the advice given. Seriously, you people make the possibility of the truth ever coming out (or being substantiated) that much more unlikely because the speculation prejudices the public atmosphere thereby justifying more victim card playing and intentional obfuscation and ultimately more latitude for such sidestepping to be allowed because SP is being unfairly attacked. We don't know all the facts, so don't just pull stories out of your... memories or wikipedia articles.

See, to my mind, SP has done so so many other demonstrably twisted things that the whole Trig 'thing' hardly rates a mention.

I'm not saying I believe everything about Texas &conference etc etc, I just don't know. And the more bs that gets bandied about the less chance we ever will.

avocadoinparadise said...

Wow, what a well written and convincing story! This should be all over the news shows! Because Palin lied so much and should be held accountable! There's no reason for that kind of lieing to the american people.

Anonymous said...

If they are not the parents:

Unless someone in the records department of the Mat-Su hospital committed fraud on his birth certificate; at some point in order for the Palins, Sr. to continue to pass themselves off as Trig's parents, a formal adoption is going to have to take place. Schools, insurance companies, the State's Permanent Fund Dividend program, etc require a birth certificate to establish parentage and/or custody.

CK said...

Let's assume that everything Palin said was true, except for the calling her doctor part.

I have considered that maybe she took those risks because she wanted the baby to die of "natural causes"? She knew she was going to have a child with Down Syndrome. While that is not a death sentence in and of itself, it is years of difficult care.

She was an over-40 mother giving birth to an unexpected fifth child that would have extremely difficult needs. Her religion keeps her from aborting it, but it would be okay if the child was lost due to natural causes during childbirth.

Assuming it's all true, that is.

Anonymous said...

This whole issues reminds me on the old saying if it walks like a duck ect....we know 1 true fact regarding Sarah Palin. She is a liar.
She did not sell a plane on Ebay and she did support the Bridge to Nowhere yet she continues to state she did and didn't. She is lying which makes anything she states open to question.
A 44 year old woman who has birthed 4 children? not showing at 6 months? LOL Give me a freaking break! Why would anyone even believe this for a minute?
Sooner or later someone will give in to the big bucks that publicantions like National Enquirer will offer and the facts regarding this lie will come out.
What scares me the most? Is why the lie? People would have been more admirable if she had stepped in to raise her Grandchild with Down's.
If she was attempting to save her daughter from the public being aware? Kinda hard to believe when she did not care that her son dropped out of High School to enter the army, she did not care that her daughters boyfriend has dropped out of High School to marry and she pulled her 7 year old out of school, with no tutor, while she ran for VP. Does anyone really think this woman cares about these kids? Love'em she might in her own way but above herself? LOL Really?
She will never be President or VP. She has set herself in stone as a liar that is incourious and simply not capable. Over the next 4 years the Republicans will move away from her frightening persona.

Jen said...

to anonymous at November 18, 2008 7:43 AM

you state that bristol didn't disappear -- yes she did.

when palin won the governorship, the whole family moved to juneau to live in the mansion, all the kids transferred from their wasilla schools to schools in juneau.

that would have been the 2nd semester of Bristol sophomore year.

In fall 2007, bristol 1st semester of jr. year, all the kids went back to wasilla and attended their old schools, then in the middle of the year, Bristol moved to anchorage to live with heather bruce and started going to school there, until she was disappeared for no reason, then later was reported that she was out with mono

nobody saw her between 2/18 (the accident) until some time in april (the prom picture)

there's also nobody that says they saw Bristol after feb 18th -- not sure where you are getting that.

and now to patrick -- we all know about that pic and no she does not look pregnant, it's just an odd angle -- you can't claim that she looked pregnant on feb 26th when nobody knew she was until she announced on march 5th.

i can tell u with absolute certainity that on the day she announced, she still did not look pregnant to even those that worked with her on a daily basis.

also the rumors about Bristol being pregnant started before xmas 2007 -- i have confirmation of that.

truthzone said...

It's my understanding that Palin gave an interview of some kind after the birth where she stated something along the lines of being determined to give the speech in Texas regardless of the fact that she had gone into labor. Also, she did inform some participants at the Texas conference tht she was "in labor", because someone at the conference asked her if she wanted an ambulance or to be taken to the nearest hospital, and she said no. I have always known that this entire story was a farce, long before reading this excellent post. It did not even cross my mind about the "mess aspect" of her clothing being stained, thick pads or towels that would be needed if her water had indeed broken. The stewardesses on the long flights that she was on said that she never told them that she was pregnant or in labor, they did not even know she was pregnant. Also, she did not get up repeatedly to go to the toilet on the plane, show any discomfort, nor was her clothing stained. What I love about this story is that it is Bloggers that is going to end up exposing one of the biggest farces in modern political history and nail the coffin shut on the legitimacy of the mainstream media, once and for all. The true story is going to come out very soon and when it does, many more than Sara Palin will be exposed for the frauds they truly are. Kudos to Andrew Sullivan for not letting up on this. This is about the ethics, character, and integrity of who is running our country and this woman could have been a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

Anonymous said...

First, let me say that this whole thing reads like an episode of Law and Order. I can't wait to see it--ripped from the headlines!

My birth story, baby #1: I was full term and in the evening I noticed some wetness. I assumed it was urine. Around midnight I woke up, uncomfortable and suspected that maybe I was having very slight contractions. Maybe. What did I know as a first time mom? After a little while I went back to sleep. I got up at about 6:30, pretty sure that I was having contractions, but still quite minor. I called my OB (actually the on-call OB, who had never examined me), who wanted me to come in for a cervical exam. I refused, knowing that any labor was early and that if my fluid was leaking, an exam would just introduce bacteria. I was advised that I should make sure I keep tabs on the baby's movement and to call if things changed. So, I labored very gradually for the next 11 hours and then went to the hospital at about 7pm. I refused additional cervical exams at first, but did consent to the amniotic vs urine test. I was allowed to labor without constant monitoring. Finally, after 34 hours (if you count the from the midnight awakening) I gave birth to a healthy girl, without medical inducement or other drugs.

As Audrey and a few others (note those with midwives vs strictly OB care) have mentioned it is feasible to delay the hospital after leaking amniotic fluid until labor is better progressing, especially if you take care to avoid the introduction of bacteria to the vagina. Would I have done this as a 5th time mom, in potentially early labor with a high-risk baby? Very probably not.

As for Trig's light therapy, jaundice and the resulting light therapy is not inconsistent with a baby's overall well-being, so SP's comments on "he's doing so well" are not necessarily inconsistent. What IS inconsistent, to me anyway, is that a special needs child born at 35 weeks would be doing so well after such a short period. My son (baby #2) was born at 35.5 weeks (induced by my doctor after a misdiagnosis of HELLP syndrome--a kind of pre-eclampsia). Although he had a very good birth weight, he still needed significant oxygen support for the first 12 hours in the NICU and then spent the next 5 days weaning off oxygen, having light therapy for jaundice, and finally proving to the doctors that he could nurse sufficiently to go home. So, while I really do not consider my son to be a preemie, in the traditional sense, we were lucky that he did so well being born just a smidge too early.

Anonymous said...

I have noticed that all the pictures of SP after she announced her pregnancy show her in the same black suit. She started the scarves before that, and it certainly fits with what she has said about her frugality with clothing. I don't think this is super important, but I would think that someone who has to wear maternity clothes for two more months would have invested in a second outfit.

I'm also wondering about the timeline on the planning of the trip to Texas. Apparently SP was asked to speak at the last minute. If Trig had been born before the Texas trip, was it probably wiser to continue the charade for a couple more days to have the exposure to the other governors? If she had just given birth before taking the trip she would have had to take Trig along so she could nurse him. That would have been very inconvenient.

I think the arrival of Trig on the 18th at the hospital was connected to the jaundice treatments.

Chuck Heath seems to keep saying things that don't quite fit with the main story. I don't think he's clued in and tells what he has heard because he thinks it is true.

Lots of pieces to the puzzle. There must be one on the floor that we've overlooked. (If you don't do jig-saw puzzles, you won't understand that analogy.)

sandra in oregon

Punkinbugg said...

Followup to Silver Salmon's Myspace work -- good job --

Here is Mercedes Johnston's current Myspace page:

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=63524358

Most of her friends are set to private. Here is an interesting "friend" named Victoria - Who is that girl in the middle?

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=83287152


This girl named Kaila is not set to private; she is a friend of Mercedes Johnston:

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=21244691

Getting drunk seems to be a popular thing to do!

DPolitico said...

I had the doctor rupture/shred my membranes to move things along. That produced a tiny gush of fluid a couple of hours later, but no active labor until another 7-9 hours had passed. She could've had one of those, but never gone into contractions. Remember, she was walking the halls at the hospital in Alaska trying to move things along. She's had so many kids she probably knew better than anyone that it was going to be a long process before that kid showed up.

That being said, only an idiot would get on an airplane in that condition.

Anonymous said...

The simplest explanation is that Palin told her own father a story to cover up something, and she was stuck with a silly story--one she intended for Dad, not for the world--from that point on. Perhaps a leakage of urine would have drawn some pretty cold-hearted teasing from her father and she wanted to avoid that, so she told him some baloney. Grown parents can still push their kid's buttons. We all know that.

No rational person would have done what she did if there had been amnionic fluid leakage. She would have gotten herself to a physician, period. She may be an idiot in some respects but nobody is stupid enough to get on an airplane in labor.

Ergo, there was no leaking amionic fluid.

I'll make it clear: I'm no supporter of Palin in any respect, but this is one subject I don't think is worth pursuing.

Anonymous said...

I've given birth twice, and there is a HUGE difference between urine leakage and amniotic fluid. Huge. I find it very difficult to believe someone who had given birth four times previously would not have known the difference.

Rox said...

my personal theory is she didn't have the baby at all. The 4am phone call was from the real mother saying she was in labor and that is why Sarah could not go to a Texas Hospital or an Anchorage Hospital - she had to go to Wasilla so she could pretend to be the mother. So there were no leaks and no labor to be observed and no hospital announcement - all she had to do was appear with the baby at the end. Her snap back figure was also a clue that she didn't just have a baby - full term or not. No amount of exercise or starvation diet covers the changes a woman's body goes through after birth including sagging stomach muscles, swinging emotions and thinning hair. Sure didn't look like a person who had been pregnant to me.

I hope the real mother emerges and reveals the whole thing as the sham it is - could be her daughter's but doesn't have to be -
any woman that was pregnant and suddenly isn't without a baby or had come into some money in that area would do.

Anonymous said...

I was 37 when we had our first baby. I went into the hospital when I was in early labor. The doctor decided to break my water, to speed up the labor. She expected the baby would come about six or seven hours after that. But actually it only took about half that long.

I was 43 when our fourth baby was born. Late on a Monday afternoon my doctor told me that the baby was in the right position and ready to come any time. The next morning at about 8:30am, as I was using the bathroom, I noticed that I seemed to be leaking amniotic fluid. I soon had to stuff towels in my maternity pants. I wasn’t having any significant contractions at the time, but we knew what to do next. My husband put a towel on the seat of the car, and we were off to the hospital. He dropped me off at the front door. As I approached the door, a man was just about to enter. He looked at me and said something like, “You need to get in there worse than I do.” I wasn’t embarrassed at all, in spite of my wet pants stuffed with wet towels. My weight and my waddle would tell any onlooker what the wetness was coming from. But I WOULD have been embarrassed if I had been giving a speech in front of a bunch of people, looking like that. I went up to the nurses’ station, and of course a nurse looked at me and correctly observed, “Her water broke.” It was soon discovered that the baby had turned and was now transverse. The doctor did not want to take the risk of trying to turn the baby after my water had already broken, so I had a C-section. The baby was born at 11:20am.

I want to share just one more story, this time about a friend of mine (M). M and her husband C went to the midwife’s office for one of their very frequent visits, as it was about time the baby should be coming. There wasn’t any alarm or hurry ... until the midwife realized the cord was in a dangerous place. (She apparently detected the heartbeat that was coming from the cord, and figured out what was going on. I don't understand all that part, but it had something to do with the heartbeat.) She called the hospital to say they were coming, then led the way down the freeway in her little car, with C and M following. In the backseat of C and M’s vehicle, M was lying down with her arms and legs spread out, bracing herself to try to keep from rolling off the seat. At the hospital, she was put on a gurney, and two nurses were with her. One nurse started to say, “You know, if your water breaks...” At that moment, it did! Nurse #1 jumped up on the gurney, and quickly and forcefully put her hand in the appropriate place to keep the baby and cord from being pushed out by the water (because if that happened, the cord would tighten around the baby’s neck). Nurse #2 started pushing the gurney (with both M and Nurse #1 on top of it), speeding toward an operating room, almost knocking over C, who had just returned from parking the vehicle. The doctor was ready, and started cutting before the anesthesia had even fully taken effect. It was rather hard on M, but the baby was delivered safely, thanks to a quick-thinking midwife, quick-acting nurses, a competent doctor, and the grace of God.

I have dozens of cousins, and many friends who have had five or more children. I haven’t yet heard of anyone (except SP) daring to risk dressing up and giving a speech while leaking amniotic fluid, or traveling thousands of miles to a comfortable little hometown hospital, delaying medical help (and even examination) by several hours when labor and delivery could be imminent. The best planned birth plan goes out the window when your baby’s life (or your own) is in danger.

If SP is the mother of Trig, and if she did start leaking amniotic fluid in Texas, she must care very, very little about privacy. She positioned herself up in front of an audience -- not a private place to have water coming out. Then she positioned herself on an airplane, with no place to give birth but the aisle -- certainly not a private place for a delivery. So, if she cares nothing about privacy, why not at least let people see some pictures of her in the hospital ... ?

Personally, I think it's safe to say that one of the following is true: Either
1) SP did NOT start leaking amniotic fluid in Texas, but thought she was, or
2) She did NOT start leaking amniotic fluid in Texas, and she knew it, or
3) She DID start leaking amniotic fluid in Texas, holds a record now for the slowest, tiniest leak, decided to take her chances on winning the record rather than making sure both she and the baby would survive, and also cares nothing at all about privacy (as mentioned above), or
4) SP is NOT the mother of Trig.

As Audrey has pointed out, if possibility #1 were true, SP would have corrected her story. And there would have been no reason for inducing her, unless something happened after she got to Alaska, to necessitate that. But then again she would have corrected her story, and hasn't. So if #1 is true, she is lying by not correcting the story.

If #2 is true, she is lying by saying her water broke in Texas.

If #4 is true, she is lying by saying she is the mother of Trig.

The only possibility, to keep from having to say she lied, is #3. But then, if on April 17th she cared so little about the life of her baby, how can we put her up on a pro-life pedastal? And if she cares so little about privacy, why has she not made public the actual medical records and/or pictures taken of her in the hospital?

This whole thing has bothered me a lot. My husband and I are Republicans. Neither of us were comfortable about the choice of Sarah Palin back in August (even apart from this whole question about Trig). We sent an email to her office, in an attempt to encourage her to withdraw, indicating that with her on the ticket we would not vote for McCain. We never got a response. When I learned more about the strange birth story, I was more concerned.

As the election drew very near, I was even more concerned. I emailed one conservative leader that I thought would be able to influence people. I will not give his name, except to say that it was NOT Dr. Dobson. I referenced this website in the email. (Note: I wrote the email on Nov. 3, and of course had not seen the CBJ letter yet, not that that made much of a difference.) Following is part of what I wrote:

"It seems that the prevalent mentality among Christians is that we need to vote for 'the lesser of two evils.' My great concern is that we may not actually have an accurate understanding of 'the lesser of two evils.' Which would truly be worse -- a man that we do NOT vote for (as Pres.) because of his socialist/communist leanings, etc., or a woman that we DO vote for (as V.P. and possible future Pres.) only to find out that she is a liar and a hypocrite? What would that do to America? To the church in America? I don't know the answer to that.

"Of course, I hope that Sarah Palin is NOT a liar or a hypocrite. But I am very disappointed that she has not chosen to put the matter to rest by offering concrete and certain proof that she is the mother of Trig. To say, at the beginning of Sept., that Bristol was about five months pregnant at that point, and therefore could not be Trig's mom, doesn't do a thing, because there has been no proof of this 'current' pregnancy. If you want to prove something, you can't use as proof something which is in itself not proven. Also, for Sarah's doctor to say something like, 'I didn't think it was unreasonable for her to fly back,' doesn't say anything, because of course it would not be unreasonable if she wasn't even pregnant.

God doesn't allow any temptation without providing for us a way of escape. If Sarah Palin is lying, then the way of escape may be to vote for Chuck Baldwin. If she is NOT lying, why won't they give us some solid proof????

And why are Christians not asking for it???????

Thank you for all you're doing. Please do consider this. Could you somehow try to get an answer from the McCain campaign (a REAL answer, with proof)? Or, if they won't give it, would you consider encouraging Christians to pray about whether or not they should vote for Chuck Baldwin instead of McCain/Palin? It may be that what we think is the 'lesser of two evils' is actually worse than what we think is worse."

I appreciated the fact that this leader DID respond, although he did not share my concern. Here is what he said,

"In all due respect to you, I find your email to be deeply disturbing. You are buying into accusations that have no base in fact and are being promoted by the far Left who not only hate people with Sarah Palin's values, but hate people with your values. There is nothing Sarah Palin could have said that would have put the matter to rest, just as there is
nothing one can say or do to stop the conspiracy nuts who think that 9/11 was an 'inside job.'

"It is astonishing to me that you are wasting a second on this when we may be hours away from electing the most leftwing president in our history--a president who will devote himself to destroying everything you believe in."

Now, as I write my comments here, I realize that there may be many reading this who do not share "my values," and probably many who voted for Obama. (BTW, my husband and I voted for Charles Baldwin.) So I ask myself, why am I even writing this? Okay, here's the main thing I want to say -- by God's grace, I hope I never cave in to fear and vote for someone who may be lying, just because I don't want someone who may "devote himself to destroying everything [I] believe in." Whether times are easy or hard, my hope is and must always be in Jesus Christ alone, not any political leader.

And Sarah, if you're reading this, please, I beg you, just tell the whole truth, and please make available the medical records or whatever it takes to prove what the truth really is. If you need to repent, do it now. If you need to repent for recklessness and putting Trig's life in danger, do it now. If you need to repent for lying, do it now. There is forgiveness in Jesus. Please, bring this out in the open. "But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin" (I John 1:7).

mother of 4

Anonymous said...

I'd never seen the Flickr account and am interested to hear Audrey's take. The only picture she looks remotely pregnant in is the last (but inconclusive) but she looks absolutely NOT pregnant in several where she has her hands clasped over her stomach, pinning her scarf down, and there's no sign of any pregnancy at all.

Kate said...

Here's the photo of Trig published in an Alaska newspaper the day he was born. Might be a little jaundiced, but doesn't look that just-born.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/380134.html

Back this spring Sarah addressed the Republican governors and they learned soon after that she had (ostensibly) been oozing amniotic fluid- one of those female states that make men nervous, if not appalled.

This week the videos showed the governors eyeing Sarah sideways like a herd of wall-eyed horses about to spook. I wondered how many couldn’t resist horrified speculation on her capacity for unpredictable birthing even as she speaks.

Anonymous said...

Could someone summarize this post in plain english?

lk said...

On another note, I've been reading through back comments (only just recently discovered your blog, Audrey) and have been interested in comments about Palin running in 2012.

In 2004, after Bush defeated Kerry, who was the name being thrown around to run in 2008. Certainly not that of a state legislator from Illinois... at least not until his inspiring speech at the Democratic Convention in July of that same year.

But that aside, a LOT can happen in 4 years and learning the truth about baby Trig's mother is just one of those truths that may emerge, which is why I am thankful you are staying with it! I am extremely interested in seeing the truth/evidence come out, for everyone's sakes. For Bristol, for the doctor(s?) Sarah P has dragged into this, for Willow and Piper who are left to raise the baby while "supermom" gets her 15 minutes... but mostly for Trig, because he is so young and desperately needs the love and attention he deserves.

Anonymous said...

I find your web site and blog to be outstanding--the factual analyses are worthy of a first-rate trial lawyer. ... I think the evidence overwhelmingly shows that Trig is Bristol's biological child. I had thought that the Palins would annopunce a miscarriage or still-birth shortly before Bristol's upcoming supposed due date. However, with suspicions publicized regarding that possibility, I now think that the Palins will abandon that subterfuge for a more air tight story. I think they will announce, after the due date, that Bristol gave birth and that she and Levi decided to give up the baby in a closed adoption, because they were too young to raise a child. The pro-life community will be satisfied, and the Palins can insist upon privacy, not only for their family but also for the anonymous (and fictional) adopting family. Sound reasonable?

David in NJ

Jen said...

to peacay said...
The (admirable) cause that seeks to irrefutably prove serious lies so as to remove the Wasilla buffoon from future misconduct and stupidity that may have wider consequences in all our lives is done a great misservice by the degree of speculation that is attached to the commentary about the birth and perinatal events. The doctor is also being unfairly maligned with no evidence. We do not know what was said during the call so we can make no judgement about the advice given. Seriously, you people make the possibility of the truth ever coming out (or being substantiated) that much more unlikely because the speculation prejudices the public atmosphere thereby justifying more victim card playing
---------

obviously you are new to this blog - i assure you that the person running this blog and the palin deception site is not getting their info from wiki sites and she is not the only one that has been collecting data.

as far as 'you people' making the truth come out more difficult by asking 'where is the proof that SP is Trig's birth mother' that is an impossiblity -- SP has been given every chance to show 1 piece of evidence to the contrary and not only did she NOT ever show any proof, she threw Bristol under the bus to announce her 'current' pregnancy specifically to quell the rumors that bristol was trig's mom... why would someone do that?

also, i have confirmation by a very very good and inside person that says that the rumors about bristol being pregnant began in wasilla before xmas 2007 -- long before any of us really knew who palin was.

if you are not interested in finding out the truth, so be it, but dont rag on the rest of us that are trying to get to the bottom of this.

all sarah has to do is come up with 1 definitive proof thing and it'd be dropped, but she cant or wont even do that, but keeps talking about people making up the story.

wayofpeace said...

OFF TOPIC but i thought
you bloggers would want to read this piece by a teen from Wasilla, titled:
Valley teen has some big questions

http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2008/11/17/opinion/columnists/doc491d0c71aa9b4424387056.txt

Anonny said...

I appreciate that the author of this blog tries very hard to keep things factual.

This is important because, as much as I'd love for this to be a big coverup, in reality there are very simple explanations for the evidence we have.

Namely: that Palin and her father are pathological liars who make stuff up on impulse.

Let's start with the first problem: the whole story about the leaking fluid. What if none of that ever happened? Suppose that she did have a mildly tough time of it. Say, she went into labor as she was taking off from Seattle and decided to not tell anyone, then furthermore decided to skip going to a local Anchorage hospital in favor of a trip to Wasilla. Now, that is a story that shows "toughness", but it's not as impressive as the leaking-fluid story that her father told the press the next day.

Now, you may ask, would her father just lie like that? Well, consider that we know from Palin's various interviews and public statements that she a) has little regard for the truth, to the point of being seriously pathological about lying, and b) will make stuff up on the spot even if it contradicts what she said the day before. (As one example, consider the story she told Hannity about consulting with her daughters before accepting the VP nomination.)

But, you may ask, so that's true about Sarah, but what about her father? Well, dig into the first troopergate investigation, especially the detailed interviews with Wooten, and yes you'll see the father is a real piece of work. He routinely lies as a matter of course.

So, Palin's father makes up a crazy, easily-disproven story about water breaking the day before in the hotel in order to make her look like a hero. He tells these kinds of fish-that-got-away stories all the time.

The next day the press asks her about it and she is surprised, but she's also used to her dad's lies. She's also used to making up stuff herself, so she doesn't contradict him but she also doesn't try to get off the topic.

Of course, if you know any pathological liars you also know that they don't back down. Their lies tend to get more and more convoluted over time. And that's what happened here.

You see, in April Palin was still a new Governor and not yet used to real press inquisitiveness, so she didn't anticipate that they'd contact her doctor to confirm. Lucky for her the doctor is an old friend who Palin has nominated for state awards and done other favors for. So, her doctor is of course shocked when asked the question, but does her best to cover for her.

However, once she does this she realizes that she's endangered her career. If Palin's story is true, the doctor is toast. But if she admits she lied to cover up for Palin, she's also toast. So, the doctor contacts Palin privately and explains the situation. They both agree to try to keep it quiet, hoping it will blow over. And it would have if the VP thing didn't come up, but it did. At that point her doctor effectively goes into hiding, realizing that there is no answer she can give that won't get her into serious trouble.

Regarding the other evidence? The photos? Not conclusive. Bristol out of school? Still haven't confirmed. The rumors reported to have been swirling around Anchorage? Not conclusive.

Even the Mercedes myspace photos can be explained if you postulate that she and Track are secretly married or engaged. In that case Sarah is indeed the mother-in-law, Bristol the sister-in-law, and Trig her baby brother[-in-law]. And her relationship with Track doesn't even have to be formalized, if you consider that these are two fundamentalist households, both apt to use heavy doses of Jesus jargon, so that kind of family terminology fits right in.

Nope, I see this as just another case of Sarah getting caught lying in public and trying to worm out of it. Like she's done on so many, many other occasions.

Anonymous said...

I went and looked the pictures from the whole truth campaign that commenter Patrick posted about from February of this year. I found one shot where Palin does look like she has either gained weight or is pregnant:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/6maj5d

It reminds me of the shot Audrey has from April 10th of this year:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/572ah2

Now it well may be a clothing or camera angle issue but, she looks bigger to me in February than she did in April.

XXXX

Anonymous said...

Hello,

when I mentioned above "BOY, does Sarah Palin look pregnant there" regarding the photo collection on flickr of the user DAKOTAFINE, I was being ironic!! Of course she doesn't look at pregnant on those pics at all! When I saw those pictures first, I even made a little "real life test" and was holding a large folder close to my belly - I am having a little "man's belly", and even with this moderate belly ;-) I cannot hold a paper folder as close to the belly as Sarah Palin does in the those DAKOTAFINE pictures - because of the "belly bumb", such a folder would somehow "stick out" - it wouldn't lie "so close" to the belly! Don't know how to better describe this ;-)

I have started my own photo collection on flickr under the username "palinandnoend" - as a next step, I have to add descriptions to the pictures. The photostream is here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/32527116@N06/

The mainstream media will only pick up this story after at least one LIE of Sarah Palin has been proven - then journalists would have a good reason to investigate further. Apparently pictures are not sufficient so far to prove the lies - although the pictures show Sarah Palin with a perfectly flat belly until 14 March 2008! Just one month before she gave birth to a six-pound baby...I wonder where Trig was hiding inside this flat and slim belly!

When I looked at the myspace-pages of Corey Cottrell, the boyfriend of Sadie/Mercedes Johnston, and his friends, I also noticed that despite of a massive amount of pictures available of their close circle of friends, Bristol Palin was NOTABLY ABSENT on basically all of those pictures!

The profile of Corey Cottrell is here:

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=186744286

By the way: Somebody had taken lots of screenshots of Sadie/Mercedes Johnston myspace page before it went private and posted it here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30092115@N02/

One remark at the end: In the "hunt" for the real "lonelygirl15" in September 2006, myspace-pages played a decisive part in exposing the 'scandal' (very small scandal compared to Sarah Palin's actions...). It could well be that in the end myspace will be the key to solve this puzzle. Examine these myspace-pages closely. Maybe it would even be a good idea to contact some of those teenagers? Some might have some interesting things to tell...

Patrick

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 10:08 on 11/18/08 writes:

"There is one thing I ponder. If you conclusion is correct that Palin was never pregnant, and Bristol delivers on-time, and there are no adoption records, who's Trig's biological mother?

Has anyone checked adoption records?"

The story and the incidence of Bristol's pregnancy, combined with the low rate of Downs Syndrome amongst women younger than 40, has me leaning towards an adoption scenario: Someone else, who did not want a Downs Syndrome child, made an arrangement with SP, and SP had a number of reasons for adopting this baby. Short of SP being incredibly reckless in her behavior after leaking fluid, and all the other fishy things about the story, the adoption scenario makes sense.

Consider the high improbability of the following things:

(1) Woman going into labor behaving as SP says she behaved.

(2) Woman all of a sudden "showing" and people all around missing all the cues and signs of a woman in pregnancy and/or labor.

(3) Downs Syndrome occurring in a teenage birth.

I say adoption. What better, simpler explanation is available at this point?

Anonymous said...

Addition to my last post: The user "palingate" on flickr has just 3 photos of the sadie/mercedes johnston myspace page online any more (it were many more pictures, originally)...God knows why!

Patrick

Jeremy Steven said...

While I agree that there are a lot of unanswered questions regarding this affair, there are a few points which make it almost impossible for Trig to be Bristol's child.

1. Down's Syndrome. In a woman of Sarah's age, the chance of having a Down's Syndrome baby is about 1 in 35. (http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/downsyndrome.cfm) The chance is actually pretty good that the child will have Down's. The chance is higher for subsequent pregnancies than the first and older fathers appear to further increase the risk. The chance for Bristol to have a Down's baby is less than 1 in 2000.

2. Trig's Birth Date. Trig was born 4/18/08. Bristol is due with Levi's child on 12/16/08. Even if Bristol got pregnant two weeks after giving birth to Trig (5/1/08), she'd have her current baby in February, not December.

3. Hiking at Six Months Pregnant If you're in shape, this is a non-issue. Olympic Marathoner Paula Radcliffe could still run a 7 minute mile and did an hour of running a day at six months pregnant, including hill work (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/03/sports/othersports/03runner.html?ref=health). My 105 pound wife was only about 115 pounds at six months, and we went hiking throughout her pregnancy, excepting the last couple of months. She was 40 at the time.

4. Willow's Baby? That she would have become pregnant is highly unlikely, as Willow would have conceived Trig at age 13 and given birth at age 14 (who would the father be?). She has been consistently seen over the past two years and no attempt was made to hide her, so this is just not in the realm of the possible.

Occam's Razor I oppose almost everything Sarah Palin stands for and would love for her to be out of office, but the simplest answer is the correct one. Trig is her child.

Alex said...

I leaked amniotic fluid for 24 hours before my doctor demanded I come in for inducement (I was following a radical feminist childbirth book that said to wait for contractions, no matter what.)

I wore 4 Kotex pads at a time and it was like walking with a bucket of water between my legs.

There is NO way I would have gotten on a plane, given a speech, or carried on as if life were normal. I stayed in constant touch with my doctor.

Every woman who has ever delivered a baby under similar circumstances knows SP lied about the Texas trip. The question is why.

Did she tell a little lie to Dad to cover up the baby's real birth (he's clearly a blabbermouth and couldn't be trusted with a family secret.)-- and then find herself stuck with the silly story?

Did she concoct the whole story to detract from the baby's real birth? Perhaps if we spin our wheels on this, then we won't find the real truth. In other words, if she spins a tall tale about a crazy plane trip and car ride, then the birth itself is fairly anticlimatic.

Several things are irrefutable.
1. SP prevaricates by spinning words into nonsense.
2. There are too many unanswered questions about Trig's birth to assume it was routine.
3. SP is such a media whore that she would have milked the pregnancy for all it was worth, as another commentor mentioned.
4. The Palin family shuttles children around much the way their mother speaks: chaotically and with little regard to routine, schedule, or order. Who went to school where or when is almost impossible to figure out. Clearly the children's stability and education are not family priorities. So why would Trig be treated with care?
5. Sarah Palin never leaked amniotic fluid all the way to Alaska. Audrey proved it just by discussing it openly, and she's SO RIGHT. No man will cheerfully discuss that subject.

Anonymous said...

Audrey,

I maintain that it could be that Heather Bruce, who already has one disabled child, is Trig's birth mother.
Todd falls under the Native American insurance for life, as do his children. Perhaps Bruce needs lifetime care for the child and is unsure if she can provide, perhaps Bristol was sent to Aunt Heather to help her and to help with her autistic son. This also would've gotten her away from Levi. I believe that Heather is the one person Palin might go to those lengths to cover for, provide for and protect. I doubt she would have done it for Bristol. She would have simply outed the kid and passed it off, just as she did during the campaign. Why would it be ok to make public a Bristol pregnancy during the campaign, but not previously? Nope, I think we need to look at other relatives who needed lifetime health care for this infant and whether Palin would have covered that for them.
+

Anonymous said...

If you want to know more about Heather Bruce, Sarah's sister, here is a long long interview with her on radio (she apparently also gave quite a lot of TV-interviews, I have seen some transcripts).

Website:

http://specialneeds08.blogspot.com/2008/10/heather-bruce-palins-sis-speaks.html

Audio:

http://www.autismone.org/radio/mediafiles/102208%20waters%20heather%20bruce.wma

Two observations:

1. Heather is a big (shallow) chatterbox, just as Sarah.

2. She is 150% loyal to Sarah.

One theory is that Heather was hiding Bristol during Bristol's pregancy which led to the birth of Trig. In the interview, I couldn't find any clues so far, but one gets a pretty good impression about Heather Bruce in general.

Patrick

delver said...

I don't think anyone yet mentioned the theory that Sarah Palin wanted the baby to be born in Alaska and not the "rest" of the USA, in keeping with the ideals of the Alaskan Independence Party.

Also, what about the oddly minimally-pregnant appearance of Palin during her pregnancy, which led some to speculate that she was just covering for Bristol (who is now pregnant for real, upending that theory but still not answering the original question.)

Also, I don't know if anyone explicitly said, this post was linked off Sullivan's big-time blog:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/11/be-not-afraid.html

Anonymous said...

Wow, lots to comment on today!

If Sarah (illegally) used a personal email account to handle state business to avoid subpoenas and transparency, you can be darn sure that she would have used a personal cell phone to call the doctor from Texas, if indeed she called at all.

Would a doctor give his/her home or cell phone number to just any patient? No, but perhaps there is a special relationship between Palin and that doctor, so maybe Sarah did have her home or cell number.

Why are there no references to Bristol on Sadie's MySpace page? Maybe they were removed, just as all the pictures of the Palin family got removed from the Alaska state website: to avoid scrutiny. Would there be a way to recover material that used to be on her site but no longer is?

I like the comments about how Sarah, after the birth, did not appear to have given birth recently. It's easy to recover from childbirth if you outsource it to your daughter.

I wonder how far outside the family circle the truth is known? Surely if Bristol or Willow or Track's girlfriend is Trig's mom, her closest friends must know. But teenage friendships can be fickle and brief. Maybe "mom" and her best girlfriends will have a spat, and ex-friend will spill the beans, hopefully before the 2012 presidential election. Or a "friend" of Sarah's or Todd's (or of Sarah's parents') becomes an ex-friend and spills the beans.

Wouldn't this be a good subject for a Michael Moore movie?

Anonymous said...

Hello All,

The more I read about this case, the more convinced I am that Gov. Palin has not been telling the truth about Trig Palin's birth and who Trig Palin really is.

I know I read somewhere here about Trig Palin's photos at different occasions.

Now, I look at this photo at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/us/politics/08baby.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
The Palins and Trig in May at Ms. Palin’s baby shower(Photo by Kristan Cole).

Then I look at this photo at:
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/380134.html
Trig Paxson Van Palin was born at 6:30 a.m. April 18, 2008 and weighs six pounds, two ounces.

Note: He looks like a big baby to be only 6 pounds, two ounces.

I go back and forth, studying both photos carefully, I still cannot see that these two photos illustrate the same baby. Is it only my perception? They don't seem to be identical. In fact the baby at the baby shower does not even seem to be a baby with DS and he/she seems to be much smaller and with darker hair(as far as judging from the photo)

Besides, why would Gov. Palin keep this as a secret until almost the last moment? Why wouldn't she share her pregnancy news with her best friends and family members?

By the way, like many people I also checked this: There is no record of the birth of Trig Palin on the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center website.
Did anyone ask Gov. Palin why the hospital doesn't have any records for her son's birth?
Either this child was born somewhere else and/or born earlier or born under ANOTHER NAME and later adopted by Palins.

I am surprised that the reporters are not pursuing this story. Have they been threatened wih lawsuits, etc? Perhaps they are afraid to pursue this story that the entire world is interested in finding the truth behind.

By the way, something else yet related to the ethics:
Zane Henning(the Wasilla man who made a public records request for thousands of e-mails from Palin aides), has filed a new ethics complaint against Gov. Palin:
http://community.adn.com/adn/node/134626

Anonymous said...

Has everybody seen this?

Video of Sarah giving a speech at the Alaska Republican Convention on 15 March 2008:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQe3JFWPbEo

I found the link in this very interesting article - there is also a new picture of her which I hadn't seen before, taken on 15 March:

http://alaskareport.com/news31/z49194_republican_convention.htm

Patrick

Palin Pregnancy Truth said...

One of the main problems I've had with Palin's story is that if she was trying to hide the fact that Bristol's the real mother, why make up the wild ride?

Relistening to the interview, I've decided she didn't have her story straight with her father. Her father blurted out the time Bristol's water broke and Sarah had to make it up on the fly. You can hear it in her voice about how uncomfortable she is.

Anonymous said...

At some point this will come to a head because Trig will need to be enrolled in school, or for health insurance or even for an Alaska State Permanent Fund dividend. All of which require proof of parentage/custody.

So, if Trig really is not Sarah's biological son (and unless someone at the Mat-Su hospital committed fraud) they will eventually have to legally adopt him. With all this speculation already happening in a state this small, how do you keep this from leaking?

Here's something I've also been wondering: what is in it for Levi and his family to keep such a secret?

pegd1213 said...

peacay is so right. Really, guys, every birth is individual. I leaked amniotic fluid for days until they finally induced because any rupture of the sac raises risk of infection. Of course I got to the hospital within a couple of hours of the leak starting and sat there dribbling--not gushing--for 2-1/2 days. Even if by some wild chance SP is lying about the circumstances of Trig's birth, that's not a crime against the state -- like claiming (taxpayer-funded) expenses one is not entitled to, or associating (pallin' around, so to speak) with secessionists and telling them to "keep up the good work."

wayofpeace said...

PATRICK,

I went to your FLICKR file and it is a good idea to collect the photo evidence.

one suggestion: you may want to consider making the title of each photo the DATE that the picture was taken, since THAT is what is going to make the picture relevant.

just a thought.

Anonymous said...

What's in it for the Levi and his family to keep such a secret?

-glk in Alaska

Anonymous said...

Down's children have a very high heart defect rate, ultrasounds can miss that. Why would a doctor tell someone to fly home after delivering a speech while in labor knowing this?

Older women have a higher chance per pregnancy of a Down's baby but the majority of Down's children are born to women under the age of risk.

peacay said...

jen said: "..SP has been given every chance to show 1 piece of evidence to the contrary.."

A written statement from her doctor is evidence. It may not rise to the level of documentary evidence that you insist upon, but it IS evidence.

Again, everything else is just speculation. I don't care what birthing histories people have had. I don't care what people have read in text books or had described to them by medical members of their family. EVERYTHING being discussed here (of a medical/obstetric nature) is PURE SPECULATION.

It is NOT evidence. Of anything.

Statements by SP's father - hearsay. Tick-tock on the day of the birth - speculation and hearsay.

This is 3 people's highly personal medical histories that are being commented upon. It is a witch hunt. If we don't have the medical records, we cannot make assertions as to the factual nature of the circumstances.

Go look up a dictionary for the difference between FACT and SPECULATION.

Again I say: there is so much other incredibly weird, hypocritical, contradictory, lying FACTUAL information out there with respect to the train wreck that is SP's history in public life, that this incessant victimising and guessing and drawing of inferences can only HELP SP be stronger in her demented obsession with wielding power.

Why can't you ('you' being anyone/everyone, including Sullivan, that insists on substituting rumour and innuendo for very private information that is NOT in the public domain) see that???!!!! Not everything in life operates according to reality tv/tabloid standards.

LoafingOaf said...

I sure didn't read all of this long-winded and rather mentally-deranged blog post, but:

If Palin's story is entirely a lie, and the physical realities of membrane rupture which I have seen and dealt with countless times make me lean very strongly in that direction, then the only answer is she was never pregnant at all.

Yes, this blog is for the mentally deranged. Or maybe you just watch too much Desperate Housewives.

Anonymous said...

Quote by Punkinbugg November 18, 2008 12:04 “Followup to Silver Salmon's Myspace work -- good job --

Here is Mercedes Johnston's current Myspace page:

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=63524358

Most of her friends are set to private. Here is an interesting "friend" named Victoria - Who is that girl in the middle?

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=83287152


This girl named Kaila is not set to private; she is a friend of Mercedes Johnston:

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=21244691

Getting drunk seems to be a popular thing to do!”


Mercede Johnson’s MySpace page is set to private, so I don’t know how you can view her friend list. How is Victoria an interesting friend, her profile is also set to private so you cant view ANYTHING on her page. As for the girl names Kaila – she doesn’t even have Mercede on her list of friends – how do you know they are friends? When I sign into my MySpace and view their profiles I get the same results, so where did you find this info out from?

Dipsydoodlenoodle

Jen said...

to peacay:

SP's medical report put out by her FRIEND, is not evidence.

I happen to have inside information about some of SP's medical history that is missing from that record, so that record is incomplete as was presented to us by her FRIEND, the family physician, NOT ob/gyn.

i do not need to look up 'fact and speculation' in the dictionary.

we have facts, lots of them, supported by, now, over 2 months of investigating by thousands of people.

And I would be the first to admit if it's proven that I am wrong. But I dont believe that I am, but I'm willing to say it... Now i'm not going to get into a pissing contest over this, because you're not going to change my mind, I have hundreds of documents just myself that show that something is fishy, you obviously do not have all this information. And if you are not interested in this story, so be it, nobody's forcing you to come to the site. But please be respectful of the others that are here trying to find out the truth.

Something is rotten in AK either way, and some of us want to find out the truth -- that is all.

peacay said...

jen, the opinion of "the family physician" is evidence, whether or not she's a friend. Where does your entitlement to SP's O&G opinion derive from? A doctor's report is on record. End of story.

"something is fishy"

Innuendo, supposition, inference, surmisal, speculation.

You don't want to get into a pissing contest about the public speculation regarding someone's most intimate private medical records and history because you know, deep down, I'm sure, that this is really dreadful behaviour. What if it was you or your sister or your friend eh?

Anonymous said...

Jen. If you have confirmation of Bristol pregnancy rumours circa December 2007 you should release the information in order to move this situation on.

I also note that you mentioned knowing some sort of additional information regarding Sarah's medical records. What is that information? Why do you feel that it is imperative to keep facts to yourself?

By the way I am extremely skeptical of Sarah's story with regard to the birth of Trig and believe that the truth surrounding the entire issue will be revealed eventually.

I ask you once again, please reveal any true facts that you have Jen. Indirect intimations, such as yours, really just complicate an already difficult situation and may give rise to allegations of incorrectness. Thankyou for considering my request.

PolySciSuzie said...

All of the newcomers to this website need to type in www.palindeception.com to get to the actual website and not JUST the blog. On the actual website you will see lots of photos, newspaper articles, etc. which detail why there are so many questions surrounding Palins pregnancy. Sarah Palin is a public figure who brought all of this to the forefront by using her children and Trig as props to further her political career. We simply want answers regarding her mysterious pregnancy and the questionable decisions she made regarding that "pregnancy". And as soon as those questions are answered it will be dropped.

Punkinbugg said...

Hi dipsydoodlenoodle,

You're right -- Mercedes Johnston's Myspace is set to private, but I looked at two other kids' Myspace accounts (Kaila and Johnnie - Silver Salmon's find) and they have Mercedes listed as THEIR friend. Her user name starts with an asterisk *..mercede..* , so it is not listed in Kaila's "M" friends, it is listed under her "#" friends. IOW the friends whose user names start with a symbol or number, not a letter.

So I started with Silver Salmon's post and went on the "mind-numbing" adventure of looking at Wasilla's various Myspace accounts. Again, even though Mercedes' personal Myspace is set to private, anything she POSTS on a "public" Myspace is readable, and she left quite a few comments on Kaila's Myspace and a few on Johnnie's, and I know it's her.

Here is one of her messages, posted to Kaila on June 22, 2006 - This was cut and pasted verbatim, but I have ***'d the bad word for her:

22 Jun 2006 12:33 AM
Babe, i love you to death BUT WAHT THE F*** IS THIS, ....8..I AM HURT!!

Love always and Forever, yours truly:)
mErCeDe MaRiE jOhNsToN


Also, even if a kid's Myspace profile is set to private, you can see their picture and their "motto". I thought the middle girl on "Victoria's" Myspace page looked a lot like Bristol. I'm still poking around because you KNOW Bristol, Willow and Levi all still have Myspace accounts to keep up with their friends. It's just a matter of finding what alias user names they are using...! None of Mercedes' posts mention the Palin's, but I copied them into a word doc, just in case they were erased later on.

You said you were logged in to Myspace, which is necessary to view these posts.

This is exactly why my kids' profiles are set to private!!

Anonymous said...

Wow, lots of new comments and speculation that certain posters seem ready to decide is conclusive on all sides.

Having pursued this investigation actively for several months now, and with Audrey's very intelligent lead, we can effectively dismiss many of the newly posted conjectures:

1) Downs Syndrome -- Any assertion that Trig's DS is either evidence or proof that SP is Trig's mother because of the odds is a complete fallacy. It's cart-before-the-horse reasoning. My wife is over 40 but that doesn't make her any more likely to be Trig's mother.

2) SP has two conflicting stories, both of which belie her assertion that she is Trig's mother.

a) When she announced to the world she was 7-month pregnant she didn't look pregnant (a near impossibility to hide given her frame and her being closely observed by dozens of people) and hadn't even told close family nor friends. Her reasons for not doing so are implausible on their face. (See available coverage on Audrey's web site.)

b) Her labor and delivery story is implausible on its face (again, see info on Audrey's site) and any explanation ot either the defending the accuracy of her account or to explain away the story while still asserting that SP is Trig's mother produced more inconsistencies.

3) Nobody can present a plausible reason why SP, the high-profile person who would be closely watched and whose reputation was critical to her life, would fake a pregnancy for anyone other one of her daughters. This central issue refutes any speculation that someone other than Bristol, Willow or Sarah is Trig's mother.

So I welcome everyone to the party, but we are WAY ahead of you on refuting any speculation that doesn't address the core issues above. This includes defense of SP's assertion that she is Trig's mother, which she could easily prove to anyone with unembarassing documentation, but hasn't.

One party baldly asserted that Bristol and Willow have been watched closely for the past two years so they can't be Trig's mother. Audrey has painstakingly documented Bristol's whereabouts and some credible eyewitness testimony that seems to indicate some contrary conclusions. They are that a) rumors Bristol was pregnant spread from late 2007 into 2008 and b) witnesses who would have known did not observe Bristol pregnant.

There has been little to no prove of Willow's whereabouts during the crucial time frame in the beginning of 2008 -- no pictures or records or accounts or eyewitness testimony. I'd love to have some since although she is very young, she is capable of having a child and there are no other facts in evidence that would rule her out as Trig's mother. There is an ick-factor of people not wanting to go there.

Dangerous

Anonymous said...

Dangerous,

I'm with you except on this:
"Nobody can present a plausible reason why SP, the high-profile person who would be closely watched and whose reputation was critical to her life, would fake a pregnancy for anyone other one of her daughters."

What if Track was the under-age partner in statutory rape? Sarah might go to great lengths to avoid her family being entangled in that scandal, or maybe just the scandal of Track fathering a child.

Even more so, Sarah might adopt her sister Molly's child. At age 42, Molly was a little more likely to get pregnant than Sarah at 44, but with similar odds for a DS child. Molly was beginning (or soon to begin) her third marriage, with children from her two previous marriages. It's possible she couldn't provide health care for a DS child, while Sarah and Todd could (through insurance and the lifetime Native American care). It's also possible that a pregnancy or special needs child could have affected Molly's ugly custody battles with Trooper Wooten, especially if she were unwed. (I'm not sure when she married Hackett.)

Certainly the Heath and Palin families stepped in to aid Molly's divorce and custody fights -- resulting in the politically-damaging Troopergate. They likewise could have stepped in to rescue family baby Molly from this situation, especially if she were considering abortion, by having Sarah raise Trig.

And just as Bristol "disappeared" almost a year ago, Molly Heath McCann Wooten McCann Hackett, unlike sister Heather Bruce, seems to have "disappeared" until she had to testify this fall. -B.

Anonymous said...

To peacay, loafingoaf, etc -

If you don't like what is being said here, why are you here? Do you really think your naysaying is going to change anyone's mind? Or do you just get your kicks sniping at people who don't agree with you? Your insults are like walking into someone's house and criticizing their furniture. Move along and start your own blog if you don't agree with what's posted here.

Audrey - long time reader, first time poster. I'm not sure Andrew Sullivan did you any favors linking to your site, especially considering that you post comments and he doesn't. Anyway, I've long admired your thoroughness, diligence, and objectivity in your posts here. I am amazed that you are able to find the time to devote to this, but I am one of the many that are glad that you do. Have you ever considered a career change from lactation consultant to either investigative journalist or lawyer? :) Keep up the good work, and remember that lots of us here appreciate what you're doing.

S. in Chicago

Anonymous said...

Here's how I see it:
1. SP's story is all true--This would mean that she is a) Incredibly stupid to put herself and her baby at risk. So stupid as to disqualify her from public office, not to mention parenthood. b) mentally ill to the point that she should be on disability (arguably, being a politician is the same thing) c)so loyal to Alaska that she does not deem the rest of the United States as good enough a place for one of her children to be born, to the point that she thinks it would be better for the child to die than to be born outside Alaska, and that it would be better for her to die in childbirth attempting to have that child in Alaska and her children grow up without a mommy (although they're essentially growing up without a mommy as it is). In this case, she shouldn't even want to be VP of the United States d) She didn't want a Downs kid, but couldn't abort, being an anti-abortion Christian and all. Instead she gambled that she would go into labor on the plane home in hopes of Trig dying. This wouldn't technically be an abortion, although the intent and end result would be the same. This raises the question of whether the state should be involved in pregnancies to ensure such abortions are prevented, or even just to ensure that the unborn are protected from negligent or reckless mothers.
2. SP isn't Trig's mom--In this case, she's not just a liar, but a truly bizarre person. If Trig is Bristol's baby, SP is so old fashioned that she believes in sending away pregnant teens to have babies, give them up for adoption, and pretending nothing happened afterward so as to protect the girl's reputation. Is this the type of person anyone wants running a daycare, much less a state or a country?

But let's get back to assuming the kid is SP's. Let's also assume that SP was right and reasonable in giving over her and her unborn child's fate to God. If I read Leviticus correctly, because she gave birth to a son, she should have waited 41 days before going to church. Are there any records of her going to church before the 41 days were up? When the 41 days were up, she should have then sacrificed a lamb and a dove (Leviticus 12). I haven't seen any mention of her having done this. Other "abominations" that SP has committed, according to Leviticus, include failing to testify at the first troopergate hearing (Leviticus 5), not returning all of the clothes the RNC bought her (Leviticus 6), getting on the plane and dripping amniotic fluid onto a seat in which others would sit (Leviticus 15), sacrificing poor pregnant Bristol to the god RNC (Leviticus 18), telling lies, such as insisting the troopergate report that actually found her guilty of abusing her authority had found her completely innocent or insisting Harry Potter hadn't been written while she was mayor (Leviticus 19), gossiping about Obama (Leviticus 19). Again, I'm no Biblical scholar, but according to Leviticus, it would appear that God's will is that for these transgressions SP should be cast out, stoned or otherwise smote. At least the majestic moose has cloven hooves and chews its cud, so she's safe on her dietary choices, as far as that goes (Leviticus 11). Unless she didn't properly drain its blood, in which case it's her bad (Leviticus 17)

Anonymous said...

Another perspective that I haven't seen here...

If Trig was Bristol's son, and if Bristol went "missing" for a while, I don't know why Sarah necessarily had to fake a pregnancy. It would make a lot more sense and be a lot more politically astute to choose to adopt a DS baby. This way, a baby could remain in the family and SP would look like a heroine for saving this child while standing up for the option of adoption.

Anonymous said...

Quote peacay 8.24pm Statements by SP's father - hearsay. Tick-tock on the day of the birth - speculation and hearsay.

I think there is actual evidence of him saying it rather than someone making it up.

So peacay you believe someone on her 5th pregnancy would make a speech, take 2 flights, drive to a small hospital way past a big hospital to give birth?

In regards to what other people have said SP wanted Trig to be born on Alaskan soil, it may well be true, but wouldn’t she have just went to the bigger hospital rather than to mat-su hospital? Both are on Alaskan soil!

I apologise Punkinbugg about the myspace thing, I did read the comments on Johnnies site but not the one I said I couldn’t find her on, I never thought she’d come under a symbol *doh* (I thought her name would have came up lol). This is exactly why my kids' profiles are set to private!! ditto for my account lol. I’ll have another snoop at it later.

dipsydoodlenoodle

Anonymous said...

For the anonymous poster above, I still don't see any plausible reason why SP would fake a pregnancy for Molly and keep the baby. I can understand adopting Molly's child, maybe, but why the subterfuge of faking a pregnancy, which only raises the stakes for the plot to be foiled.

The thin reasons you posit for such a scenario could just as easily be overcome by Molly giving up the baby for regular adoption. She would still have to be pregnant and anyone near her would have to explain what happened to the baby. So there's no logic in that scenario at all as a motivation for either Molly or SP!

As far as SP faking for Track's indiscretion with a young girl, where is the girl's motivation for going along with it? Again, she still has to be pregnant and have the child, not matter the circumstances of the pregnancy, then agree to give up the child. This just increases the potential level of scandal, not decrease it. Maybe that girl's mother would do it, but SP's motivation is also dubious in your scenario.

I place these sorts of theories under the 'wild speculation' banner because they don't address the entire fact pattern. SP covering for one of her daughters, however, aligns both the parties' motivations and explains their actions then and now.

The similarities of these circumstances to the much-mentioned 'Desperate Housewives' episode doesn't indicate that covering for a daughter's pregnancy and having a "family baby" is the stuff of fiction. Instead, 'Desperate Housewives' used rare but real life situation and fictionalized it somewhat because viewers would relate to the characters' motivations.

That's the critical part of any theory. One must ask whether people would really act as they have AND what would motivate them to act that way to serve their own interests. If the plot you concoct would not be believable by the audience, it will not ring true and, hence, is false.

Dangerous

Windy City Woman said...

Someone asked:

"Does anyone know which came first, her father saying her water broke in Texas, or her statement of what happened?"

Excellent question. If her father said it first, why would he do so? If Sarah was not pregnant with Trig, and she had called her parents to say she was returning to Alaska for whatever reason (Bristol giving birth? Jaundice treatments?), then Mr. Heath was trying to give details to make the childbirth story plausible. (Lies told by 2 people are more plausible than lies told by only 1 person.) And this assumes that the Heaths were in on the hoax, which is a reasonable assumption.

If Sarah said it first, then Mr. Heath was simply confirming the tale by adding his input.

Anonymous said...

Here's my theory:
Trig is Bristol's baby. The original intent was to have Bristol give up the child for adoption. Bristol was hidden away with "terrible mono"-tho stories were going around she was pregnant. They wanted to give up the child for adoption, and hide the fact that SP, the "no sex before marriage" and "no sex education" queen, could have a child who had gotten pregnant. But, with adoption,pre-natal tests are conducted. There was an early indication in the sonnogram that the child had DS. The real test would come from an amniocentesis, with the results coming in around the 6- 6 1/2 month time period. The adoption's off-few couples want to adopt a DS child. So the Palin family, having thought the child would be adopted, had to think fast. After a few weeks Sarah announces she is pregnant. Sarah, being the most driven/ambitious person most of us have ever seen, goes ahead and goes to the conference, looking her glamorous self, her daughter goes into labor, SP has to fly home and arrive at the hospital in the middle of the night when no one is around, and get the baby. Because, how long can you hide a baby? The hand over had to happen quickly-babies cry-tho none of us has ever seen poor Trig cry.
So. that's my story and I am sticking to it.

Anonymous said...

Dangerous,

I suppose Track could have impregnated an underage girl, but I mentioned him as the underage partner, of an older woman. Someone has commented several times that if Sherry Johnston were Trig's mother, that would explain both Mercedes calling Trig her brother and the likelihood of DS. A potential criminal charge could motivate both sides to hide a pregnancy.

There's also that reference to Track's girlfriend traveling with the Palin campaign as a babysitter. Could she be the mother, and want to stay near her baby?

If Molly Heath had a need to hide a pregnancy, perhaps because of her custody battle, a simple adoption by Sarah wouldn't work. Also, Sarah adopting a DS baby thought to be unrelated to her at a time when she is trying to run a state wouldn't seem wise to many voters.

Sarah needed to give birth to Trig so that Todd would be the biological father so that the lifetime health care option would apply to Trig. Not so if adopted.

I don't think Sherry and Molly need to be dragged into this drama; I just disagree with you that mothers other than Bristol and Willow can be totally ruled out.

I also disagree with you that Willow is a prime candidate. She, unlike Bristol, appears to be normal and happy, which she almost certainly wouldn't be if she had recently gone through a pregnancy and delivery at her young age.

Probably Bristol had Trig earlier than 4/18 and is due later than 12/18. But speculating on Trig's mother just goes to Sarah's motive. The real question is whether she lied about being pregnant and giving birth. -B.

Dutchess said...

it was my understanding that
1) she received a phonecall
2) she then said: MY water broke
3) she insisted on giving her speech
4) flew home, flightattendants served a happy chatty lady

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 6:47 PM: I think you've nailed the most likely scenario. So when do you think Bristol conceived Trig and who do you think the father is? I do agree that the lifetime health benefit is something Sarah would have sought for Trig, since she seems to be so adept at taking everything she can from the state. It will be interesting to see when Bristol delivers this time around...

Liz from NH

Anonymous said...

she looks totally pregnant to me in that hiking video. her face is fuller, and she's wearing a very big jacket that doesn't go a little concave when she's walking swiftly outside in the wind. she's an odd one, for sure, but i think she's sporting a baby bump in that video.

Windy City Woman said...

Regarding comments by Anonymous from 11/20 at 8:10, p.m.:

You suggested that the baby, if adopted, would not qualify for lifetime care based on Native ancestry.

There has been debate back & forth on this blog about whether someone with 1/32 Native ancestry would even qualify for this.

Does it matter if the baby is adopted or not? Sounds like a weird question, but is the guarantee of lifetime care based on Native heritage based on blood or culture/family? What if a Native family adopted a white baby? Yeah, it probably would not happen, but if it did, would the child qualify because he was raised in a Native culture, or not qualify because he was "biologically" "white"?

And if Bristol or Willow was the mother, Trig could also have some Native ancestry on his biological father's side, increasing the percentage of Native ancestry. If we don't know who fathered Trig, we wouldn't know this.

I think I read somewhere that a governor of Alaska who serves X number of years (5?) has lifetime health insurance. So Sarah might have lifetime health insurance along with, presumably, her spouse and dependant children. Bristol (and Trig if he is her son) would not be dependant forever, but Trig would be if Sarah & Todd adopted him, as Trig most likely will not ever be totally independent. So if Bristol birthed Trig & Sarah & Todd adopted him, Trig would most likely have lifetime medical insurance, Native ancestry or not, due to his mom's job.

Anonymous said...

The lifetime Native American health care requires a blood connection, but no particular %. So adoption wouldn't be good enough.

If Trig were Bristol's child, he could be covered. But if he is Bristol's and is claimed to be Sarah's and Todd's, he's covered, but sounds like fraud. If he is Sarah's sister's child, for example, he's not covered.

I read about the "state-based, federally funded program, Alaska Area Native Health Service" at washingtonindependent.com.

I don't know about a governor having lifetime health insurance coverage, but whatever Sarah's policy, I doubt it would cover a grandchild. (Bristol may even have to remain unmarried to be covered.)

Health care could be part of Sarah's motive in saying she gave birth to Trig. She is not dumb (just inarticulate), and DS is an expensive lifelong condition. -B.

Windy City Woman said...

To Anonymous who wrote on 11/22 at 4:55:

If Sarah has health coverage, but adopted Trig, he would be covered, probably for as long as his mom is covered, since he would always be a dependent.

Anonymous said...

I think that Trig looks like Levi Johnston. Levi has a very flat face and some other features very similar to a person with downs.

Also, if Trig weighed over 6 lbs at birth which was 1 month early, he's a pretty big baby. (By the looks of him in new born pictures, I have to question this weight). Anyway, what I'm getting at is that most downs babies have relatively low birth weights. Trig looked like a pretty hefty newborn...especially considering he was born a month early.

I think Sarah is lying. But I'm not sure if she does it intentionally. I think that by the way she rambles incessantly and says nothing that she may have some sort of mental illness.

Anonymous said...

WSWoman, I have read that many insurance policies exclude coverage for conditions like DS, and I don't know whether the age limits for covering dependent children are waived when a disabled child who remains dependent. So the Native American care could help eventually. Trig is apparently covered by insurance now as Sarah's child, but I doubt he would be as Bristol's child. You are right that the same would be true if Sarah adopted him. -B.

Anonymous said...

If Palin adopted Trig from one of her kids, Trig would have health care on her policy. I don't think that Bristol, for example, would continue to have health care on her mother's policy after she reached age 18 or so.

If this is what happened,though, why not just announce that you have adopted a child? If there was a clamor to know when this adopted baby was born, have a reputable doctor announce the time and date of birth. End of story.

Instead, Palin avoided the birth question entirely by announcing (in front of the world no less)that her daughter Bristol was 5 months pregnant and thereby couldn't be the mother of a 4 month Trig.

This to me is the key issue. Why not just announce an adoption back in March or April (whenever the baby was born) and skip the goofy water breaking in Texas and cloak and dagger nonsense?

Ivy

Anonymous said...

Sarah Palin is telling a lie! I had 6 children! Her story is impossible! Since she is seeking the highest office in the land, the truth should be told!! Keep Digging!
If she adopted Trig for political reasons, then the story should be told, if he his her daughter's child, the truth should be told.
The American people are sick of lies!!
Jackie, in Jacksonville

MimiTabby said...

all I can say is THANK YOU.
having given birth after my water broke twice, the Sarah Palin birthing story including the flight from Texas to Alaska AFTER a speech does nothing but infuriate me every time I've heard it.

Anonymous said...

Fascinating reading! But I still think Trig is SP's child.

The reason I don't think the child is Bristol's is because he has Down's Syndrome. Very rare for a mother of her age, but extremely common in mothers over 40.

I can't imagine why SP would fake a pregnancy for anyone else, except Willow, and the evidence here seems to rule that out. Faking a pregnancy is totally bizarre, requiring extraordinaty reasons.

Furthermore, SP is an absolutely terrible mother, who would certainly put her own career and convenience before the health and safety of any child she was carrying.

She also has no trouble lying. She does, however, have a lot of trouble getting facts straight and keeping them straight. However, she thinks that once she has said something, it must be true and so she will not admit lying or even mispeaking. Hence she has gotten into a tangle with respect to the story of the birth. Anything more she says on the subject will show what a wretched mother she is and so she won't say anything more.

Just my opinion. But I'm curious enough to read more on the subject!

Anonymous said...

SP also downplayed the seriousness of her getting on a plane by discounting her contractions. She admitted in one of the news accounts that in addition to the ruptured amniotic sac and leakage, she was having contractions, "but not active labor". It's a bizarre comment from a woman who had been through four previous labors and deliveries. Non-productive contractions can turn into hard labor in the snap of your fingers.

One thing that I haven't seen anyone talk about is the science involved in flying itself on a human body, particularly the fetus's body. When a plane takes off and cruises at 35,000 feet, then descends and lands, and then does it all over again, that creates tremendous pressure on the uterus and the fetus. It's bound to move the labor process along, and without amniotic fluid to cushion the fetus, I'm shocked that this wasn't widely discussed at the time as an opportunity to talk about today's modern independent business women, pregnancy and travel. Yes, the cabin is pressurized, but anyone who has flown with a head cold against doctor's orders knows the agony of clogged eustacean tubes and the permanent damage to your ear drums that can occur.

To be candid, I don't understand anything about the editorial decisions that were made during the reporting of this story by women or men in the media. This was a lapse that was grossly obvious to anyone in the health field, in business, or who have had babies and rely on flying as their means of transportation.

Anonymous said...

About Dr. Baldwin-Johnson. My understanding is that she's not an OB-GYN, and not on staff at the hospital where she is alleged to have delivered the baby.

I can't imagine that her insurance company is too happy about this. Her comments have been measured and careful -- I question whether she was the attending physician at the delivery of Trigg.


I see from the online nursery at the hospital that the only birth she is listed as attending is one on the day before Bristol was cited in a car accident outside of the family health center she was a patient at (when she was supposed to be home for mono), on 2/7/08.


It's extremely peculiar.