Log In | Register
There has been a lot of discussion in the past two weeks about every aspect of vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's life from her mayoral and gubernatorial service to her family. After much speculation about the maternity of Palin's youngest son, Trig, and the revelation of her eldest daughter, Bristol's, pregnancy, both the McCain and Obama camp said, in no uncertain terms, that candidates families, especially their kids, are a forbidden subject.
But, if the vice presidential nominee' daughter's pregnancy is off-limits, then so is the military service of her son, Track. She can't have it both ways. Either her family is off-limits, or they are not.
If we follow what is, and isn't, being covered in the media: we can't talk about how Palin handled the birth of her son, Trig, but we can talk about how her husband is 1/8th Yu'pik Eskimo (not Inuit as some have claimed). Bristol's pregnancy is a no-no, but her engagement to Levi Johnson is fine. Palin's choice to have carry to term a baby with Down Syndrome is more than acceptable, but don't mention anything about her other son's motivations behind joining the military.
It begs the question, if Palin's family is such a taboo subject - then why did she spend over five minutes of her vice presidential acceptance speech talking about them?
All families have their good times and their bad. We all have something in our lives, and the lives of those that we love that inspire pride, and others that inspire embarrassment. But all of those things combine to make up who we are and the fabric of our families. It is admirable that Track Palin is joining the military, that he's deploying to Iraq in a time of war. It is something that most any family would be proud of and it does indeed give Palin a unique view of the war and of military service. However, she is not the first mother to send her son off to war, and she will not be the last. She's not even the first parent in this campaign to watch his or her son go off to war, specifically, this war. Both John McCain and Joe Biden have sons who are active military personnel, and are either currently serving or preparing to serve in Iraq. McCain's son, Sidney, joined the Marines in 2006 as soon as he turned 18. Biden's son, Beau, is a member of the Delaware Army National Guard, and will be deployed to Iraq in October. Both of these men have sons who will be risking their lives for their country on foreign soil - yet neither has felt the need to highlight this fact. They seem unwilling to whore out their sons' service in order to further their political careers. They recognize that it is what they, themselves, have done that has the most importance in this campaign.
And yet Palin seems to have no qualms about mentioning her son's choice frequently. And since it seems okay to talk about her son's choice, what about her daughter's choice? It's clear that the Palin children have been raised with a sense of duty to country (despite Todd Palin's alleged involvement with a separatist political party) and respect for service (political and military). So it's not a surprise that Track would have chosen to enlist. However, the children were also raised with a strict religious, "abstinence only" emphasis at home. Therefore it's should be more surprising that 17-year-old Bristol Palin is five months pregnant. This is a subject that both the McCain and Obama camps have said is strictly forbidden from being discussed. Why? Palin wants to parade her son's service like some badge of honor upon her own chest, then why can't the pregnancy of her unmarried, minor daughter be a badge of shame? But let's get it straight - we are not saying that Bristol herself should be scrutinized or that she should in any way be made to suffer during her mother's campaign. She is already facing an incredibly tough task - that of motherhood and marriage at a very young age - she has enough on her plate. The reason that Bristol's pregnancy is so important is that it shows that even in the staunchest of abstinence only households, that form of "sexual education" does not work. It's an issue of policy, not privacy.
To move to the subject of privacy, what about the birth of the five month old Trig? Palin kept her pregnancy a secret from even her family until the seventh month and then, knowing that the fetus was trisomy 21 and the pregnancy was high risk, Palin still chose to give a speech in Texas, fly back to Alaska, and pass up at least two hospitals between her water breaking and delivery. OB/GYNs agree that the chance of infection greatly increases the more time spent between the membranes rupturing and the baby being delivered. In a high-risk pregnancy, it is even more crucial to make sure the mother is in as sterile and safe an environment as possible after labor sets in. Luckily, Trig was delivered safely and appears to be a very healthy baby boy. However, there are laws all across the country that limit what a mother may or may not do during her pregnancy. Will Palin uphold these laws putting fetal rights above parental rights? It's not a question she's addressed, but it's a valid one none-the-less. Afterall, she opposes abortion even in the case of rape or incest, another issue of reproductive rights. She has also participated in a protest outside of an OB/GYN's office who opposed banning abortion with the goal of disrupting his business and harassing the women practice (which is a federal crime). Why does she feel she has more of a right to privacy than the women who went to that clinic that day? She refuses to answer questions about her decisions during the pregnancy with Trig, but seems to have no problem confronting women going in to see their OB/GYN.
But back to the subject of choice. There are rumors circulating about Track's enlistment in the military. These rumors have been disputed, but have yet to be disproved. They are that Track got into trouble with the law because of vandalism of school buses and underage drinking. In a plea-bargin, he agreed to join the army rather than face charges. Since the Governor's office at the time of the enlistment refused to discuss some of the details of his enlistment, and the McCain campaign will certainly not respond to these allegations, they will remain in the relm of speculation. However, if we take them to be true, then it would mean that Track Palin did not choose to join the army out of sense of country or honor, but rather joined the army because there wasn't a better option. You could even go so far as to say he was forced to join the army considering what a conviction and possible jail time would do to his mother's political career. Now, back to Bristol Palin. The most her mother's campaign is willing to say about her is that she has "chosen" to keep the baby and marry the father. Again, the question of how much of a choice this really was is raised. We know that Palin opposes abortion in all cases, but does her daughter? Her daughter clearly didn't buy into the abstinence only view of sexual education, just as her mother rejected her grandfather's science teachings. Maybe Bristol always planned to keep the baby - or maybe even to carry to term and then give the child up for adoption - again, these are things we'll never know. The fact is that she is pregnant and is planning on keeping the baby. Then we bring in Levi Johnson, who is almost certainly being used by the campaign so that Bristol isn't portrayed as a single mother and that they appear more of the "traditional" family. Of course, this is a sort of family tradition as Sarah Palin was very likely already pregnant with Track when her and Todd eloped in 1988. However, one would hope that Palin and her husband got married because of love, rather than political pressure.
But do these matters really apply to the McCain/Palin campaign? While she may not believe that her family life should have any bearing on the campaign, her family-oriented policies most certainly do. When examining where she stands on various family and reproductive issues such as sexual education, family planning, abortion, special needs children and fetal rights, then it's not inappropriate to see how these subjects have affected Palin's own life. Included in those effects are the decisions of her children as opposed to Palin's own beliefs. Palin herself has said that children do not have to agree with their parents. This is especially highlighted when comparing Palin's views on global warming and creationism with her father's as a school science teacher. So why is the campaign trying so hard to fit Palin's family into some sort of mold? What is it that they are afraid of? If Palin's family is truly separate from the campaign, and thus outside the scope of questioning, then they should not be given such a public place in it.
While it may be a long time (or never) before we know about Track's supposed criminal past or if Bristol and Levi's engagement is more than just a play put on for the constituents, these raise valid questions for the McCain/Palin campaign:
-
(A) if your family is so off-limits, then why do you parade certain aspects of it around like show ponies?
(B) how can you be so certain that the choices you make for your family will work for every family?
It is intensely hypocritical to say that one child's decisions cannot even be discussed by the media while the other one's decisions should be celebrated by that same media. Either your family is fair game, or it isn't. You don't get to pick and choose which parts of your life and your family are examined, scrutinized, and criticized.
I hate to be the first to tell you, but you're not in Wasilla anymore.
© Devon Adams 2008. No part of this article may be reproduced or otherwise used without the express, written consent of the author.
