ILNews

Attorney will shave head in honor of son

Jennifer Nelson
February 23, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An attorney hopes people will ask her why she's bald. She's shaving her head next month to raise money for childhood cancer research.

Briget Polichene Chamness is going to shave her brown locks in celebration of the fifth anniversary of her son, Joey, being cancer free. Joey was diagnosed with osteosarcoma, a type of bone cancer, in January 2005 when he was eight years old. He had a year of chemotherapy at Riley Children's Hospital in Indianapolis and surgery to remove the tumor in New York City.

Around that time, her husband learned of St. Baldrick's Foundation, a nonprofit that raises money for childhood cancer research by hosting worldwide head-shaving events. The foundation funds more in childhood cancer research than any other organization except the U.S. government.

Since her son got sick, Chamness said her husband and other family members have shaved their heads, some every year. Even her teenage daughter did it once. She said she's partly shaving her head out of empathy for the young girls she saw losing their hair because of chemotherapy.

"I'm trying to think of it as my gosh, here I am a 50-year-old woman who's not sick, and I'm apprehensive for losing my hair," she said. "It makes me empathetic."

Shaving her head will also open her up to questions from strangers who don't know why she's bald. She'll be wearing headscarves and knows that when people see women who have lost their hair, it's often assumed they are sick.

"St. Baldrick's recognizes that in the case of women, and they give you a big button to wear that says "Ask me why I'm bald," she said.

To raise money for the head-shaving event, Chamness sent e-mails to her college and law school classmates, friends in Indianapolis and Washington, D.C., where she worked before moving to Indiana, and professional colleagues. Chamness first worked at as chief counsel at the Indiana Department of Insurance after moving here. She later practiced at Baker & Daniels and was chief privacy officer at Conseco before joining Citigroup's government relations group, where she works as the liaison between businesses and state lobbyists.

Most people raising money for St. Baldrick's just take pledges and will shave their head no matter what, but some do say that they will only do it if they hit a certain goal. Chamness decided she'd shave her head without a specific dollar amount in mind, although she had a goal of $5,000. She's surpassed that and is up to $7,300. She's part of a team named after Joey, which has 35 people who will shave their heads. The team has raised nearly $40,000, she said.

Everyone will have their heads shaved at the same time on stage at the Northside Knights of Columbus in Indianapolis at 6:30 p.m. March 12. There will be food, beer, and a band playing as well, Chamness said.

She'd like to see more people donate to the cause because of the work St. Baldrick's does. She hopes no one has to go through what she has with her son, but because of his illness, recognizes how wonderful Riley Hospital is. Riley often receives research grants from St. Baldrick's.

"It's a great resource, and I hope that the legal community will continue to be supportive of it in various ways," she said.

Visit Chamness' team's web page, if you'd like more information about St. Baldrick's or want to donate.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT