Pregnant Mom Captures Baby Bump, 2 Weeks Later She's Fighting for Her Life
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A pregnant woman from Calgary, Canada, was ready to start her new life as a mom, not knowing she'd be fighting for her life just two weeks later.
Arianne Jones, 34, gave birth to a healthy baby boy on January 22. During labor, she suffered a second-degree tear on her perineum after the umbilical cord had been wrapped around her son's neck and was monitored overnight.
Her husband, 42-year-old Jeff Christie, was by her side, and the family of three were able to go home the next morning.
Arianne Jones cradling her baby bump during her maternity photoshoot.
Arianne Jones cradling her baby bump during her maternity photoshoot.
@ariannejones
"Everything was pretty normal... until it wasn't," Jones told Newsweek.
Jones, a former Olympic tobogganer, was rushed to the postpartum unit with an unexplained infection. "That's when stuff started devolving quite rapidly," Christie recalled.
After 48 hours, Jones's blood pressure was dangerously low and she was admitted to the intensive care unit where she spent the next 21 days in an induced coma and 29 days on a ventilator.
"Everyone was trying their best, but no one knew what was going on. It was the absolute worst," Christie said.
Eventually, after intense reading and researching, doctors identified the cause: a rare bacterial infection with only 50 documented cases worldwide.
They also explained that, at the time, there were only two people known to have survived the infection by removing their uteruses.
Christie told Newsweek that his wife's blood profiles were in such dire condition, the doctors weren't sure they could perform the life-saving surgeries she so desperately needed.
With their son, River, at home, the new dad told Newsweek that he became a "mass project manager" over the next few weeks. Family flew in from different states to help with childcare while Christie could be in the hospital to support his wife.
"I called my parents, and I was just like, guys, Arianne's going to the ICU. I have no idea what's going on, I need you to raise River. I need to focus on my wife," he said.
Jones had 12 surgeries in total, including the removal of her uterus and ovaries. After months of trial and error, the doctors had finally sourced control of the infection.
Jones told Newsweek that her first memory is waking up in the hospital. "I had a breathing tube in and couldn't move any muscle in my body," she said. "That was the most terrifying moment of my life."
Post-surgery, Jones had to relearn basic functions, such as breathing and swallowing.
She's had to do months of work to regain some key internal functions as well as movement in her body, but after 125 days, Jones has been discharged from the hospital.
She told Newsweek that they've been through all kinds of emotions, from feeling robbed of the magic of being new parents to anger at the situation.
"We've gone through a lot of anger, like, why us? Why me? There's no answer to that," she said. "But also, there's a lot of gratitude. I think we just have very different perspectives on life. We're not sweating the small stuff for sure."
Christie recalled a touching moment between the two of them a week after she regained her voice.
"[Arianne] said, 'I'm really sorry for this process has made you a single parent for so long.' And I looked back at her and said, 'It's the exact opposite. Because you fought so hard, you didn't make me a single parent.'"
While Jones still needs to process it all, she told Newsweek that she has a newfound sense of clarity on life.
"[Our] new mantra we've been going off is if something's not a hell yes, it's a no," she said.
Sharing awareness and factual information on her platform about the infection has also a become new purpose.
"The more that we can get the knowledge out there, then maybe we can help someone else," Christie said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
16 hours ago
- Newsweek
Cancer Rates Rising in Americans Under 50—Three Age Groups Most at Risk
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A new study from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has found that the incidence of 14 different cancer types increased among people under the age of 50. Newsweek spoke with leading oncologists about new findings published in Cancer Discovery, which revealed that between 2010 and 2019, more than two million cancer cases were diagnosed in people aged 15 to 49 in the United States. Several cancers are becoming more common in young adults, including testicular cancer, melanoma, and cervical cancer. Blood-related cancers like B-cell lymphomas and plasma cell neoplasms are also on the rise, along with rare types such as bone and joint cancers, stomach cancer and skin lymphomas. An artist's impression of a group of people of different generations and, inset, a tumor. An artist's impression of a group of people of different generations and, inset, a tumor. CIPhotos / matsu5/iStock / Getty Images Plus Dr. Steven Grossman, a clinician and researcher with expertise in gastrointestinal cancers, told Newsweek: "What is most concerning about the rise of cancers typical of older adults in younger populations is that the symptoms might be ignored until the cancer presents at a later stage, where it is more difficult to treat and cure. "This is especially worrisome for colorectal cancer and pancreatic cancer, which are particularly difficult to treat if they are discovered at a more advanced stage." Cancers Typically Linked to Older Adults The study, released on May 8, found the most significant upticks were observed in cancers such as female breast, colorectal, kidney, uterine, and pancreatic—many of which are commonly associated with older adults but are now appearing more frequently in patients in their 20s, 30s and 40s. While the overall cancer death rate in younger adults has not risen in tandem, troubling increases in colorectal and uterine cancer deaths have been reported. Some cancers like melanoma, cervical, stomach, myeloma, and bone and joint cancers showed increases only in younger populations. "We don't know yet the root cause of the increasing incidence of cancer in younger adults but science points to what we would call environmental factors," said Grossman, the executive medical director of the Hoag Family Cancer Institute in Southern California. A stock image of a female patient with headscarf listening to her doctor commenting x-ray of brain while sitting on bed next to her in hospital ward. A stock image of a female patient with headscarf listening to her doctor commenting x-ray of brain while sitting on bed next to her in hospital ward. shironosov/iStock / Getty Images Plus Gender Disparities in Early-Onset Cancers The study found that 63.4 percent of early-onset cancers occurred in women. Among women, the most common types were breast, thyroid, and melanoma, while among men, the leading early-onset cancers were colorectal, testicular, and melanoma. Pashtoon Kasi, a gastrointestinal cancer specialist, told Newsweek that medics previously believed the two major factors for cancer risk were aging and a genetic predisposition. However, they are now increasingly focused on the role of lifestyle and environmental factors. The American Cancer Society (ACS) states that around 5 to 10 percent of cancers are caused by inherited genetic mutations—not the cancer itself, but an abnormal gene passed down from a parent that increases cancer risk. This includes lifestyle factors such as a lack of exercise, obesity, alcohol use, and other elements of the diet. Grossman added: "The scientific community also generally believes that exposure to environmental carcinogens, which could include air or water pollution, likely contributes at some level to this phenomenon. That research, however, is still ongoing." Lifestyle Factors and Cancer Risk The ACS states that at least 18 percent of all cancers and around 16 percent of cancer-related deaths are linked to excess body weight, lack of physical activity, alcohol use and poor diet. Many of these cases may be preventable by following a well-balanced diet consisting of plenty of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, while limiting or eliminating red and processed meats, which are classified as carcinogens. The study found that obesity is linked to seven types of cancer that are rising among younger adults: colorectal, kidney, uterine, pancreatic, stomach (cardia), cervical cancers and myeloma (a type of blood cancer). In 2019, it was estimated that obesity contributed to as few as 5.3 percent of colorectal cancer cases and as many as 53.1 percent of uterine cancer cases. A stock image of a nutritionist measuring overweight man's waist with tape in clinic. A stock image of a nutritionist measuring overweight man's waist with tape in clinic. unomat/iStock / Getty Images Plus "The obesity piece does not explain the full story since a lot of our young onset patients are very active and healthy otherwise," said Kasi, the Medical Director of GI Medical Oncology at City of Hope Orange County. Being physically fit and getting 150–300 minutes of moderate-intensity or 75–150 minutes of vigorous-intensity activity each week may decrease the chances of cancer and other health problems, along with maintaining a healthy weight. Kasi added: "We're still learning about the impact of all these factors – genetics, environment, aging, and lifestyle. One thing that is certain is that our knowledge of cancer development is evolving in the 21st century. "Particularly, how these environmental factors and diet affect the 'microbiome' of our body and how those interplays in the development of these cancers is of interest. Expanding cancer research efforts focused on younger individuals is a critical factor." Mortality Rates and Screening Concerns Cancer death rates have not significantly increased and have generally declined. From 2010 to 2020, deaths among 15–29-year-olds fell by nearly 2 percent per year, then remained stable. Rates also dropped for 30–39 and 40–49 age groups, with declines continuing until around 2018–2022, when they leveled off. This suggests better detection and treatment are saving more lives. Dr. Amy Laughlin, a medical oncologist at the Orlando Health Cancer Institute who specializes in breast cancer and cancer genetics, explained why screening age hasn't been reduced. She said: "If a group has a small chance of cancer, then when a screening test is positive, the greatest likelihood is that it is a false positive—causing anxiety, biopsies, more tests and cost for no reason. "For example, in an older, higher-risk population you may need to do 100 breast biopsies to find one breast cancer, but in a younger, lower-risk population you may have to do 400 breast biopsies to find one cancer. Imagine the cost and anxiety we put those 399 women through." Do you have a tip on a health story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have a question about cancer? Let us know via health@ Reference Shiels, M. S., Haque, A. T., Berrington de González, A., Camargo, M. C., Clarke, M. A., Davis Lynn, B. C., Engels, E. A., Freedman, N. D., Gierach, G. L., Hofmann, J. N., Jones, R. R., Loftfield, E., Sinha, R., Morton, L. M., & Chanock, S. J. (2025). Trends in Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates in Early-Onset and Older-Onset Age Groups in the United States, 2010–2019. Cancer Discovery.
Miami Herald
18 hours ago
- Miami Herald
US Could Make Childbirth Free, To Tackle Falling Birth Rates
America could make childbirth free for privately-insured families, in an effort to tackle declining birth rates. The bipartisan Supporting Healthy Moms and Babies Act, which would designate maternity care as an essential health benefit under the Affordable Care Act, was introduced in the Senate in May. If passed, insurance companies would be required to cover all childbirth-related expenses, including prenatal care, ultrasounds, delivery and postpartum care, without any co-pays or deductibles. Medicaid, America's government‐funded health insurance program, already covers these costs. Democratic New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who has cosponsored the bill, told Newsweek: "Even with insurance, the costs associated with having a baby can be astronomical, and expenses are even greater for women who have health complications during pregnancy, a high-deductible insurance plan, or gaps in their coverage. By requiring insurance companies to fully cover care throughout pregnancy and a year postpartum, this bill will make childbirth more affordable for families." It comes amid growing concerns about America's population. Fertility rates are projected to average 1.6 births per woman over the next three decades, according to the Congressional Budget Office's latest forecast released this year. This number is well below the replacement level of 2.1 births per woman required to maintain a stable population without immigration. The Donald Trump administration has made this issue one of its priorities, the White House exploring giving women a "baby bonus" of $5,000, according to an April New York Times report. Many trying to tackle this global issue have called for public health policies and financial plans to help make it easier for couples to have children in society. The financial crisis and its effect on housing, inflation and pay is generally named as a major contributor to people's decisions to delay having children, to have fewer children or not to have them at all. Republican Mississippi Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, who introduced the bill along with Gillibrand, Democratic Virginia Senator Time Kaine and Republican Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, said she hopes her bill will help change this. "Bringing a child into the world is costly enough without piling on cost-share fees that saddle many mothers and families with debt. This legislation would take away some of the burden for childbearing generations," she said in May. "By relieving financial stresses associated with pregnancy and childbirth, hopefully more families will be encouraged to embrace the beautiful gift and responsibility of parenthood." Pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum care average a total of $18,865 with average out-of-pocket payments totaling $2,854, according to KFF, a nonpartisan health policy research organization, based on data from claims between 2018 and 2022. Financial concerns are repeatedly cited as a reason for not having children. Indeed, just a few days ago, the United Nations Population Fund warned of a global birth rate crisis, after finding that one in five had not had or did not expect to have the number of children they wanted. Some 39 percent said this was because of financial limitations. But Suzanne Bell, who studies fertility and related behaviors with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said that while "making childbirth cheaper or free is incredibly important," she does not think it will effect the birth rate. "The cost of raising a child, in particular the cost of child care, is very high and far outweighs the cost of childbirth," she told Newsweek. "We desperately need policies that support families with the cost of child care, especially families with low incomes." Beth Jarosz, a senior program director U.S. programs at the Population Reference Bureau, agreed that "reducing health care costs is important, but may not be enough to move the needle on births." "The cost of childbirth is just one of the many costs of having a child, and people are also reeling from the much bigger costs of child care, housing, and other necessities," she told Newsweek. Theodore D Cosco, a research fellow at the University of Oxford's Institute of Population Aging, called the bill "a step in the right direction" but said the same as Bell and Jarosz. "Parents generally aren't deciding whether to have children based on a $3,000 delivery bill, they're looking at the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent actually raising the child," he told Newsweek. But he added: "The policy certainly carries some symbolic weight, signaling bipartisan support for families and could potentially help build momentum for broader reforms, such as child care subsidies or paid parental leave." The other concern is that, while financial concerns are generally accepted as a major contributor to declining birth rates, they are not the lone cause. Bell said that even the policies she calls for "are also unlikely to increase the birth rate, as evidence from other countries with much more supportive policies suggest." Norway is considered a global leader in parental leave and child care policies, and the United Nations International Children's Fund (UNICEF) ranks it among the top countries for family-friendly policies. But it too is facing a birth rate crisis. Norway offers parents 12 months of shared paid leave for birth and an additional year each afterward. It also made kindergarten (similar to a U.S. day care) a statutory right for all children aged one or older in 2008. The government subsidizes the policy to make it possible for "women and men to combine work and family life," as Norway's former Minister of Children, Equality, and Social Inclusion Solveig Horne said at a parental leave event in 2016. And yet, Norway's fertility rate has dropped dramatically from 1.98 children per woman in 2009 to 1.44 children per woman in 2024, according to official figures. The rate for 2023 (1.40) was the lowest ever recorded fertility rate in the country. Financial barriers "are only part of the picture," Cosco said, "psychological, cultural, and structural factors matter too." Newsweek spoke to several experts about Norway specifically, who all cited recent culture changes. For example, "young adults are more likely to live alone" and "young couples split up more frequently than before," Rannveig Kaldager Hart, a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's Centre for Fertility and Health said. He went on to speak about "intensive parenting," which refers to the modern parenting style in which parents invest time, money and energy into creating successful adults. The expectations of this parenting style "may cause some to postpone or have fewer children than they otherwise would," Hart said. Nevertheless, backers of the American bill seem to believe that it may be part of the solution. "Being pro-family means fostering an economy that makes it feasible to raise a child. But too often, parents find themselves dealing with sky-high medical bills following the birth of a child. This legislation would eliminate out-of-pocket maternity costs for families with private health insurance and prohibit private carriers from imposing cost-sharing on beneficiaries, empowering parents to focus on what matters most," said Hawley. Related Articles Warning Of Global Birth Rate 'Crisis' After Study Of 14 CountriesChina Makes Childbirth Change Amid Falling Birth RateTrump Administration To Give $1,000 Boost to All Newborn BabiesMore Gen Z Delay Having Kids Than Millennials Amid Birth Rate Decline Fears 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Newsweek
a day ago
- Newsweek
US Could Make Childbirth Free, To Tackle Falling Birth Rates
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. America could make childbirth free for privately-insured families, in an effort to tackle declining birth rates. The bipartisan Supporting Healthy Moms and Babies Act, which would designate maternity care as an essential health benefit under the Affordable Care Act, was introduced in the Senate in May. If passed, insurance companies would be required to cover all childbirth-related expenses, including prenatal care, ultrasounds, delivery and postpartum care, without any co-pays or deductibles. Medicaid, America's government‐funded health insurance program, already covers these costs. Democratic New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who has cosponsored the bill, told Newsweek: "Even with insurance, the costs associated with having a baby can be astronomical, and expenses are even greater for women who have health complications during pregnancy, a high-deductible insurance plan, or gaps in their coverage. By requiring insurance companies to fully cover care throughout pregnancy and a year postpartum, this bill will make childbirth more affordable for families." It comes amid growing concerns about America's population. Fertility rates are projected to average 1.6 births per woman over the next three decades, according to the Congressional Budget Office's latest forecast released this year. This number is well below the replacement level of 2.1 births per woman required to maintain a stable population without immigration. The Donald Trump administration has made this issue one of its priorities, the White House exploring giving women a "baby bonus" of $5,000, according to an April New York Times report. Many trying to tackle this global issue have called for public health policies and financial plans to help make it easier for couples to have children in society. The financial crisis and its effect on housing, inflation and pay is generally named as a major contributor to people's decisions to delay having children, to have fewer children or not to have them at all. Republican Mississippi Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, who introduced the bill along with Gillibrand, Democratic Virginia Senator Time Kaine and Republican Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, said she hopes her bill will help change this. "Bringing a child into the world is costly enough without piling on cost-share fees that saddle many mothers and families with debt. This legislation would take away some of the burden for childbearing generations," she said in May. "By relieving financial stresses associated with pregnancy and childbirth, hopefully more families will be encouraged to embrace the beautiful gift and responsibility of parenthood." Would Making Childbirth Free Help Birth Rates in America? Pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum care average a total of $18,865 with average out-of-pocket payments totaling $2,854, according to KFF, a nonpartisan health policy research organization, based on data from claims between 2018 and 2022. Financial concerns are repeatedly cited as a reason for not having children. Indeed, just a few days ago, the United Nations Population Fund warned of a global birth rate crisis, after finding that one in five had not had or did not expect to have the number of children they wanted. Some 39 percent said this was because of financial limitations. But Suzanne Bell, who studies fertility and related behaviors with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said that while "making childbirth cheaper or free is incredibly important," she does not think it will effect the birth rate. "The cost of raising a child, in particular the cost of child care, is very high and far outweighs the cost of childbirth," she told Newsweek. "We desperately need policies that support families with the cost of child care, especially families with low incomes." Beth Jarosz, a senior program director U.S. programs at the Population Reference Bureau, agreed that "reducing health care costs is important, but may not be enough to move the needle on births." "The cost of childbirth is just one of the many costs of having a child, and people are also reeling from the much bigger costs of child care, housing, and other necessities," she told Newsweek. Theodore D Cosco, a research fellow at the University of Oxford's Institute of Population Aging, called the bill "a step in the right direction" but said the same as Bell and Jarosz. "Parents generally aren't deciding whether to have children based on a $3,000 delivery bill, they're looking at the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent actually raising the child," he told Newsweek. But he added: "The policy certainly carries some symbolic weight, signaling bipartisan support for families and could potentially help build momentum for broader reforms, such as child care subsidies or paid parental leave." Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/Canva Is It Just About Money? The other concern is that, while financial concerns are generally accepted as a major contributor to declining birth rates, they are not the lone cause. Bell said that even the policies she calls for "are also unlikely to increase the birth rate, as evidence from other countries with much more supportive policies suggest." Norway is considered a global leader in parental leave and child care policies, and the United Nations International Children's Fund (UNICEF) ranks it among the top countries for family-friendly policies. But it too is facing a birth rate crisis. Norway offers parents 12 months of shared paid leave for birth and an additional year each afterward. It also made kindergarten (similar to a U.S. day care) a statutory right for all children aged one or older in 2008. The government subsidizes the policy to make it possible for "women and men to combine work and family life," as Norway's former Minister of Children, Equality, and Social Inclusion Solveig Horne said at a parental leave event in 2016. And yet, Norway's fertility rate has dropped dramatically from 1.98 children per woman in 2009 to 1.44 children per woman in 2024, according to official figures. The rate for 2023 (1.40) was the lowest ever recorded fertility rate in the country. Financial barriers "are only part of the picture," Cosco said, "psychological, cultural, and structural factors matter too." Newsweek spoke to several experts about Norway specifically, who all cited recent culture changes. For example, "young adults are more likely to live alone" and "young couples split up more frequently than before," Rannveig Kaldager Hart, a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's Centre for Fertility and Health said. He went on to speak about "intensive parenting," which refers to the modern parenting style in which parents invest time, money and energy into creating successful adults. The expectations of this parenting style "may cause some to postpone or have fewer children than they otherwise would," Hart said. Nevertheless, backers of the American bill seem to believe that it may be part of the solution. "Being pro-family means fostering an economy that makes it feasible to raise a child. But too often, parents find themselves dealing with sky-high medical bills following the birth of a child. This legislation would eliminate out-of-pocket maternity costs for families with private health insurance and prohibit private carriers from imposing cost-sharing on beneficiaries, empowering parents to focus on what matters most," said Hawley.
