It's time we extracted Tom and his pretty teeth from this discussion. There ARE huge dangers to the drugs that psychiatrists and our family doctors prescribe WHEN THOSE DRUGS PURPOSEFULLY ALTER MOOD! That Tom jumped on someone we all really love was a public relations goof, not a goof in his research.

If we jump into a prescription just because Tom Cruise annoyed us, and because nearly every article we saw slammed him for slamming Brooke Shields, then we are thinking very sloppily with our own health.

IF I'm hit my post-partum depression, I know I will do EVERYTHING I can to avoid those drugs. I'm watching my health, and the safety of my kids, not pleasing my girlfriends' superficial non-analysis. I'm not falling in line with what women's magazines want me to think, do, say, feel, parrot, or take with my breakfast. I'll do my own research, thank you, not get my ideas from Vanity Fair.

Does anyone know of some sites that are NOT put up by drug companies--where I might get the other side of the story. I'd like to find whatever research Tom Cruise bases his passion on.

I agree that there is a low tolerance for "inappropriate" feelings in our culture in general, especially re:motherhood. And the prescriptive solution is surely a moneymaker for many. But suggesting that mothers who choose to medicate are lemmings following womens' magazines is pretty reductive. These drugs may be mood altering (so are diet coke, yoga and candy) but they are not lobotomizing. There are some very articulate examples out there of women who took meds and did not move to Stepford. Heather Armstrong, Marrit Ingman...

I think we do need to stop seeing negative feelings as bad and dangerous, but we also need to stop accusing people who have real problems of solving them in the wrong way. It's always a good idea to do your own research and make educated choices. But in the end, people do what they need to do to get better, and isn't that the goal?