The Business of Being Born... are they for real?

[PeacefulChaos]

Thank you for setting me straight. I wasn't aware of that. :001_smile:

 

I think I am just so sick of the rhetoric surrounding childbirth. I had an unmedicated, non-intervention birth. It was the *worst* experience of my life. I came away from it literally traumatized. There are large portions of it that I don't even remember.

 

For my last 4 deliveries, according the the NCB people, I have done basically everything "wrong". (Elective inductions at 39 weeks, epidurals, pit...) But I did what *I* was comfortable with, instead of trying to live up to other's expectations. I weighed risks, options and made the decisions I made because they were what was best for me and my family. And I came away with amazing, wonderful birth experiences and healthy, happy babies. (I do happen to have an amazing doctor, however. ;) )

 

It seems like people (and forgive me for saying so, but IME particularly those who are into natural child birth and home birth) get so... religious about their birth choice. Like they're always proselytizing everyone around them. And honestly, it tends to make those of us who have made different choices (researched, intelligently made choices) feel like we're... less than. I don't run around shouting from the rooftops that my choice was superior to home birth. It was for *me*, but maybe it's not for *you*.

The most recent example of this was when a friend posted on FB about her upcoming induction (she was very post-dates, and was quite comfortable with her doctor inducing). She received so many "Don't let them induce you!" "Pitocin is of the devil!" "The baby will come when it's ready stop trying to rush it!" type comments I felt terrible for her.

 

I just wish women would respect each other and their individual choices more. Ya know?

 

(Thank you so much everyone for your kind words re my SIL. It was horrifying, but she's doing so great and so is the baby. She's our little miracle baby! :001_smile: We're very thankful she was where she was. )

 

I feel much the same way about parenting choices in general - we all do what works for us. How we feed our children, raise our children, etc. There was a quote back when the oh-so-wonderful (sarcasm) Time magazine came out that one of the mothers gave that said that the attachment parenting model just seemed like the natural way to do it for her.

That's how I feel about all of it. We do what works for us, we do what feels like the right thing for us. And I feel like many times, people get lost in proselytizing and telling others that x way is the ultimate way, when it isn't. There just isn't an ultimate way, kwim?

[Sara in AZ]

Thank you for setting me straight. I wasn't aware of that. :001_smile:

 

I think I am just so sick of the rhetoric surrounding childbirth. I had an unmedicated, non-intervention birth. It was the *worst* experience of my life. I came away from it literally traumatized. There are large portions of it that I don't even remember.

 

For my last 4 deliveries, according the the NCB people, I have done basically everything "wrong". (Elective inductions at 39 weeks, epidurals, pit...) But I did what *I* was comfortable with, instead of trying to live up to other's expectations. I weighed risks, options and made the decisions I made because they were what was best for me and my family. And I came away with amazing, wonderful birth experiences and healthy, happy babies. (I do happen to have an amazing doctor, however. ;) )

 

It seems like people (and forgive me for saying so, but IME particularly those who are into natural child birth and home birth) get so... religious about their birth choice. Like they're always proselytizing everyone around them. And honestly, it tends to make those of us who have made different choices (researched, intelligently made choices) feel like we're... less than. I don't run around shouting from the rooftops that my choice was superior to home birth. It was for *me*, but maybe it's not for *you*.

The most recent example of this was when a friend posted on FB about her upcoming induction (she was very post-dates, and was quite comfortable with her doctor inducing). She received so many "Don't let them induce you!" "Pitocin is of the devil!" "The baby will come when it's ready stop trying to rush it!" type comments I felt terrible for her.

 

I just wish women would respect each other and their individual choices more. Ya know?

 

(Thank you so much everyone for your kind words re my SIL. It was horrifying, but she's doing so great and so is the baby. She's our little miracle baby! :001_smile: We're very thankful she was where she was. )

 

 

 

I respect anyone's choice to do what is right for them. I am not a militant natural/home birther, but I do try to at least encourage women to do some research about one of the most important experiences of their life. I know so many women who go into pregnancy and birth blindly accepting everything their doctor tells them, and that makes me sad.

[Xuzi]

I respect anyone's choice to do what is right for them. I am not a militant natural/home birther, but I do try to at least encourage women to do some research about one of the most important experiences of their life. I know so many women who go into pregnancy and birth blindly accepting everything their doctor tells them, and that makes me sad.

 

:iagree:

 

I'm also of the opinion that *every* woman should be at least somewhat prepared to have a natural (un-medicated) birth. NOT because I think everyone SHOULD have one, but because sometimes you end up with one for reasons beyond your control. One friend of mine, who was the type of woman to sing the praises of the epidural, ended up with an unplanned un-medicated birth because the anesthesiologist was busy with other, more-critical patients, and between the time when they ordered the epidural and the time he finally got there she progressed to the pushing stage, and so they wouldn't administer it. It ended up being a pretty difficult experience for her. I've also had close friends whose epidurals failed to work, or only lessened the pain, but they still felt very uncomfortable.

 

I feel the same about c-sections and inductions, etc. Find out what is entailed in one, when you might be okay or not okay with having one, how you hope your OB will handle it, etc. so that you can be an advocate for yourself and your baby. For example, I didn't see my DD until over an hour after she was born because the OB didn't raise her above the blue curtain they had across my chest to block my view of the surgery. She was whisked from the operating room to the NICU, and all I got was a quick peak at her face as they took her out. After that experience I put "In the event of a c/s, lift the baby so I can see him/her as soon as possible after birth" on my subsequent birth plans. It wasn't something I knew I could ask for, but it would have made my emergency c/s a little less emotional if I'd known I could.

 

It's all about patient empowerment. I don't appreciate the attitudes of some Dr's in my experience who respond to requests on my part by giving me a figurative pat on the head while they go on about their plans. I think a previous poster pointed out that they are MY employee, and it is MY body, and they need to earn my trust before I allow them to be involved so intimately in its functions.

[jillian]

I respect anyone's choice to do what is right for them. I am not a militant natural/home birther, but I do try to at least encourage women to do some research about one of the most important experiences of their life. I know so many women who go into pregnancy and birth blindly accepting everything their doctor tells them, and that makes me sad.

Exactly this. I feel that way about any medical decision, vaccinations, medications, imaging procedures. Educate yourself and then make that decision you know? It doesn't matter what you decide as long as you don't say "well my doctor told me this so it must be right". Not always, there are great doctors out there and there are not such great doctors out there. It is up to you to be your own advocate.

[Momof3littles]

One thing I find fascinating is that there have been criticisms from OBs and IIRC ACOG here in the US saying you "can't apply" studies on homebirth safety from countries abroad where midwives are well-integrated into the healthcare system (including HB MWs) because that's not how our system works.

 

I don't know the details of the mw who didn't transfer the patient above, and I don't agree with mws practicing illegally. If you are going to risk it, you should be willing to readily transfer when push comes to shove.

 

I find it frustrating that OBs in this country really do not seem to want MWs integrated into our healthcare system. So they don't like comparisons to countries where they are well-integrated and have good outcomes for low-risk women, yet they seem to do whatever they can to make sure that doesn't happen here, particularly with FSBC or HB MWs (speaking in generalities of course, not talking about a few docs who are supportive of the role mws can play in low risk births). WHen they aren't integrated, I think the transfer issues and so forth become a bigger issue...hesitation to transfer is a dangerous thing for a mw. I am not at all justifying a mw being afraid to transfer, but I do think that's going to be the case if they are fearful of what will be said to them, etc. if the client transfers (whether they are legally or illegally practicing). That hesitation can have deadly consequences.

 

eta: my HB mw did a few years of HB midwifery, followed by several years in a large teaching hospital. She left the hospital to go into solo practice, and had good relationships with the hospital. I felt like I was in competent and respected hands. I know she would have not hesitated to transfer if she got an inkling something was headed down the wrong path, and I was okay with that.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Momof3littles

[ktgrok]

Thank you for setting me straight. I wasn't aware of that. :001_smile:

 

I think I am just so sick of the rhetoric surrounding childbirth. I had an unmedicated, non-intervention birth. It was the *worst* experience of my life. I came away from it literally traumatized. There are large portions of it that I don't even remember.

 

For my last 4 deliveries, according the the NCB people, I have done basically everything "wrong". (Elective inductions at 39 weeks, epidurals, pit...) But I did what *I* was comfortable with, instead of trying to live up to other's expectations. I weighed risks, options and made the decisions I made because they were what was best for me and my family. And I came away with amazing, wonderful birth experiences and healthy, happy babies. (I do happen to have an amazing doctor, however. ;) )

 

It seems like people (and forgive me for saying so, but IME particularly those who are into natural child birth and home birth) get so... religious about their birth choice. Like they're always proselytizing everyone around them. And honestly, it tends to make those of us who have made different choices (researched, intelligently made choices) feel like we're... less than. I don't run around shouting from the rooftops that my choice was superior to home birth. It was for *me*, but maybe it's not for *you*.

 

I think I agree here. I don't think anyone should tell a woman where or how to birth. I just think that women should be given, and deserve to be given, all the information so they can make a decision for themselves. I agree that homebirth isn't for everyone. Unmedicated isn't for everyone. However....informed consent IS for everyone. True choice, not the false perception of choice, IS for everyone.

 

As I said in a previous post I'm not pro homebirth, or pro natural birth (whatever that means anyway) or pro vaginal birth. I'm pro evidence based care and pro informed consent. THAT is the problem. Most women have ZERO knowledge about birth, or close to it, and doctors sure aren't able to impart hat information in the 5 minutes they see a woman in a typical prenatal appointment. Hell, my sister was 12 weeks pregnant with her first and didn't know what her cervix was!!!! That is a problem. She didn't know that an epidural could lower her blood pressure. She didn't know the cervidil they gave her could cause dangerously strong contractions that could hurt the baby. No one told her this stuff. So when someone says "I'm being induced", and the majority of them have no idea about the true normal length of pregnancy (41 weeks 1 day), or what a bishops score is or what the risks are, yes, people get upset. I get upset. Not because she is being induced...there are good reasons for induction. But because she isn't being given all the information before she decides. That is no better than lying, and drives me NUTS.

[dirty ethel rackham]

I think I agree here. I don't think anyone should tell a woman where or how to birth. I just think that women should be given, and deserve to be given, all the information so they can make a decision for themselves. I agree that homebirth isn't for everyone. Unmedicated isn't for everyone. However....informed consent IS for everyone. True choice, not the false perception of choice, IS for everyone.

 

As I said in a previous post I'm not pro homebirth, or pro natural birth (whatever that means anyway) or pro vaginal birth. I'm pro evidence based care and pro informed consent. THAT is the problem. Most women have ZERO knowledge about birth, or close to it, and doctors sure aren't able to impart hat information in the 5 minutes they see a woman in a typical prenatal appointment. Hell, my sister was 12 weeks pregnant with her first and didn't know what her cervix was!!!! That is a problem. She didn't know that an epidural could lower her blood pressure. She didn't know the cervidil they gave her could cause dangerously strong contractions that could hurt the baby. No one told her this stuff. So when someone says "I'm being induced", and the majority of them have no idea about the true normal length of pregnancy (41 weeks 1 day), or what a bishops score is or what the risks are, yes, people get upset. I get upset. Not because she is being induced...there are good reasons for induction. But because she isn't being given all the information before she decides. That is no better than lying, and drives me NUTS.

 

Amen! And I also say a big amen to being prepared for an unmedicated birth whether one wants one or not, simply because, even if you plan to get your "epidural in the parking lot" it may not be available to you for one reason or another or may not work as well as you hope.

[WishboneDawn]

The medical system *is* different in Canada. Malpractice is different, C-section rates are different, the way medical care is delivered is different.

 

I haven't had a baby in Canada, but I've had babies at several in the US, and my mom has been present at thousands more as an L&D nurse at several different hospital. The things people are pointing out - that doctors do lie to patients, and it's not an anomaly - are perhaps more US-centric.

 

Sorry for my late reply but yeah, I was thinking about that after my post. Healthcare in Canada is a public service while in the US it's mostly a for-profit enterprise and that could definitely lead to some big differences.

[WishboneDawn]

.

Edited July 11, 2012 by WishboneDawn

[ThreeBlessings]

I did watch the show, but it's been at least 4 years so I don't remember it well. I don't remember liking it, some parts where okay but overall I wasn't thrilled. I think it is important that people at least look at the issues surrounding being pregnant and giving birth in America. Our outcomes should be better, there really just isn't excuse for them not being better and I do believe it is because it is over done, medically.

 

I am definitely ALL about natural birth *if* 1. the mother is fully informed of options/possible outcomes in as true a way as possible given her unique circumstances and 2. it is the mother's choice and 3. barring a true medical emergency that could result in baby or mom's death.

 

My problem with choosing interventions is I don't feel most doctors present a true picture of the increased risks involved in a lot of circumstances. I just find uninformed consent wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

I have no immediate thought that this is what has happened when someone tells me their story and they didn't have a natural birth. I don't assume, but more often than not, hearing birth stories they sound so similar. Doctor pushes induction (for non-medical reasons), there is pitocin, followed by epidural for pain, complications arise (baby's heartbeat, mother not progressing, hospital's time limit reached), then c-section. Sometimes the complications don't end in c-section, but a lot of the time they do.

 

This is a very different story than someone having an induction or c-section for medical reasons. Though honestly there is one medical reason used frequently that I do question, gestational diabetes and the supposed too big baby. My reason? I've heard this story countless times and every time the baby is born under 6 lbs and has a NICU stay. I'm just not convinced this is what would have been best for baby and mom. idk?

 

And I'll just chime in and say natural births are not the norm in my area. I've been lucky that my births have been very fast and with the first two there wasn't even time to suggest interventions. I was at the hospital maybe an hour total before giving birth both times.

 

My last birth went a bit differently. My water broke first. I had two kids that needed transferred to a family member, and I had to wait for dh to get home from work so it took awhile to get to the hospital but I still wasn't contracting when I got there. I wasn't even in a room yet and the nurses where saying they would start pitocin right away. Um, no thank you. It came up again and again and again. I wasn't thrilled with the iv and monitoring, but at least I talked them into doing the monitoring intermittently so I could pace back and forth in the room. I politely declined pitocin, told them how fast my births were, let them know I felt everything was okay, I might as well of had three heads. I definitely wasn't happy they made me lie flat on my back when it came time to push, with my legs held up. stupid. But when you are at that point in labor there isn't much fight in you as you're sorta preoccupied. I really had the urge to be on my side. Also a nurse stuck her hand inside me while I was trying to push. Hurt like hell, worse pain of the whole thing. I was trying to ask her to remove herself and she wouldn't. So I just pushed like heck, and I think she did move at that point, and then baby was born. From the time I got in the bed and let them know it was time to the baby being born, less than 15 minutes. Baby was a bit bruised from my heavy pushing and quick exit, which wasn't really necessary. And another thing, the doctor who got paid for catching my baby? Came in after I got in the bed and sat at the back of the room in a chair. Yep. Told the nurses to handle it and said, "We'll just see how she can push." Anyway, after giving birth the nurses were amazed I had done it naturally. They literally told me they hadn't seen it happen. WOW. To be a pregnant woman and not even have it presented as an option to birth naturally? I just can't get with that.

[Dealea86]

One thing I find fascinating is that there have been criticisms from OBs and IIRC ACOG here in the US saying you "can't apply" studies on homebirth safety from countries abroad where midwives are well-integrated into the healthcare system (including HB MWs) because that's not how our system works.

 

I don't know the details of the mw who didn't transfer the patient above, and I don't agree with mws practicing illegally. If you are going to risk it, you should be willing to readily transfer when push comes to shove.

 

I find it frustrating that OBs in this country really do not seem to want MWs integrated into our healthcare system. So they don't like comparisons to countries where they are well-integrated and have good outcomes for low-risk women, yet they seem to do whatever they can to make sure that doesn't happen here, particularly with FSBC or HB MWs (speaking in generalities of course, not talking about a few docs who are supportive of the role mws can play in low risk births). WHen they aren't integrated, I think the transfer issues and so forth become a bigger issue...hesitation to transfer is a dangerous thing for a mw. I am not at all justifying a mw being afraid to transfer, but I do think that's going to be the case if they are fearful of what will be said to them, etc. if the client transfers (whether they are legally or illegally practicing). That hesitation can have deadly consequences.

 

eta: my HB mw did a few years of HB midwifery, followed by several years in a large teaching hospital. She left the hospital to go into solo practice, and had good relationships with the hospital. I felt like I was in competent and respected hands. I know she would have not hesitated to transfer if she got an inkling something was headed down the wrong path, and I was okay with that.

 

CPMs aren't licensed in our state, yet they still practice semi-legally (the State decided to license them and then never funded the pilot program, or something to that effect, so technically it's all still not legal). I get the impression that many of them like their under-the-radar position. Yes, the OBs are against it, but the midwives don't seem to want legitimacy, either. And ultimately it's the mothers who lose out because they don't get the safest possible midwifery care.

[WishboneDawn]

Not because she makes money off of blogging. Because she makes money off of blogging about homebirth...her entire focus is on attacking homebirth. That is what she does.

 

Well, if she believes it's unsafe, why shouldn't she focus exclusively on it? that doesn't make the information or concerns she presents inaccurate.

[Aelwydd]

 

I think I am just so sick of the rhetoric surrounding childbirth.

 

That makes two of us.

 

I had an unmedicated, non-intervention birth. It was the *worst* experience of my life. I came away from it literally traumatized. There are large portions of it that I don't even remember.

 

I'm not surprised by this. I had my one and only child without medication. I would say that even though it was a "smooth" labor, uncomplicated, fairly short (about 5 hours of really active labor), and otherwise unhindered by Birth Drama (as I call the TLC phenomena where some crisis always pops up and scary music and lighting ensue to make sure all of us are duly afraid)--it still sucked in many ways.

 

Mostly cuz of contractions and the fact another human being made my pelvis his passageway. That s**t hurts.

 

Although I'm a proponent of evidence-based midwifery care as the standard (for public health, because of lower morality and costs), I fiercely defend the right of every woman to access the kind of birth model she wants. My best friend says if she ever has a baby, she wants a planned, elective c-section. I think she should get it, and nobody better criticize her for it in my hearing.

 

I am not a NCBer who believes birth is some magical unicorn ride to self-actualization or whatever is the current mode of B.S. It's a natural event in the human life span, certainly, and like many things in nature, it's got its share of danger.

 

I hear a lot of them saying, "trust birth," but how is that really any different from "trust your doctor?" Both give over to potential forces beyond our control.

 

And anyway, in an unbalanced society as ours, where we worship technology, I don't think many of us have a lot of experience "trusting" our instincts and knowing how to interpret them.

 

What's worse, we're a society full of depleted critical thinking skills. So, you combine a female population doped up on artificial foods, medicines, environment, whatever, and then you add to that mix a distinct lack of good judgment, and really...sometimes I think no matter if you steer them towards OBs or midwives, are they really gonna make an "informed choice?"

 

Most women just watch some documentary like BOBB, or go with a sister's recommendation of an OB, or seem some pretty brochure about a hospital's L&D, and they consider themselves informed.

 

Then, they go hop on boards like this one, and have endless debates about who made the "safest" choice, or who made the most "empowering" choice. The newly pregnant eagerly click on the most pertinent links or sources shared, maybe research it for a few weeks, become experts, and make their "informed" choices. Then the cycle repeats itself.

 

I'm convinced that's why we are still having the same dumb arguments with people like Her Shrillness, Dr. Amy, whose sole purpose in life I guess, is to finish the job ACOG's forebears started in the early 1900s, and completely drive midwifery, as an industry, out of business.

 

 

So, my point is, don't let others make you feel like your decisions are less informed or whatever, because you did not apparently give birth in a tree house, delivered the placenta on a beach, and commune with dolphins as Nature Intended. Both sides have their loons, and both sides are indeed looking for "converts." I believe you when you say you investigated and did your homework, and I think if you hadn't pursued the choices you did in your later births, you would have had more traumatizing experiences.

 

I hate to put it in these terms, but really, for me, it came down to "Which of my options would be least damaging to me, physically, emotionally, and psychologically?"

 

I think that answer differs for each woman, depending on her personal history, her health, her available options for care, her family status, and so forth. There is no black or white, one-size-fits-all, answer to that, much to the dismay of birth fanatics (both pro-med, and pro-NCB).

[WishboneDawn]

OP, I thought the movie was too simplistic, overly sentimental, and very biased.

 

That doesn't mean it did not make valid criticisms of the American obstetrics industry. I could share a lot worse, and more ****ing, information about it than the movie did.

 

The problem is that the BOBB makes the same cardinal mistake obstetrics does--it presumes to know what is best for mom, even more so than she does herself. And in this case, it happens to be preaching the gospel of home birth, with an attending midwife.

 

Well, I can tell you that just like there are iatrogenic-happy *******s working in hospitals, there are sloppy, poorly trained, and idiotic midwives working at home. And there are groups of "natural, child birth" folks that, frankly, piss me off with their sanctimonious B.S.

 

In case it matters, I gave birth in a freestanding birth center, with a CNM and an RN attending, after laboring in the jacuzzi. I did not have have so much as an I.V. or a heplock placed. I had no pain medications administered, although the midwife did spray some lidocaine on my perineum before my son crowned. I'm sure the more hard core would not count my L&D as "natural" or "med-free" because of that.

 

I really don't care. I prefer more scientifically accurate terms like "low-intervention vaginal birth" to "natural" anyway. I have been known to tell at least one relative of mine, who was snottily talking about her natural birth to a cousin who had a c-section, that unless she gave birth in a field or a cave, with no a/c, no additives in her food or drink, no electricity, without a midwife carrying such equipment as an oxygen tank and other supplies--that, actually, her birth was quite technologically dependent.

 

Here's my final opinion: I'm sick of the paternalism of the obstetric system, and of the NCBers who claim what is "natural" and how women were designed for this or that.

 

I don't want an OB telling me I must submit to this procedure or that, because it's procedure, and I don't want a NCB advocate telling me that if I choose to have an elective section, that it's "wrong" or "unsafe" to make such a choice.

 

I believe that all women should have access to information about procedures, statistics, history, etc. of whatever model of birth they are choosing. I believe they should be free from being coerced, manipulated, or pressured because of their decision. I also believe that they have a right to seek the least traumatizing birth experience possible, without fear of judgment and statements of "Oh, the most important thing is a healthy baby," as if her bodily integrity, her pain, her emotions are on par with a brood mare's.

 

Anything less is just more patronizing of women. Put simply, the movie did not respect women, because it did not trust them to give them the full picture. Instead, it demonized the baddies (the obstetrics industry and hospitals) and it white washed home birth midwifery.

 

Oh. This is sooo what I wanted to say. :D

[ktgrok]

Well, if she believes it's unsafe, why shouldn't she focus exclusively on it? that doesn't make the information or concerns she presents inaccurate.

 

She is the blogging equivalent of tabloid media. Takes things out of context, spins them differently, and yes, presents inaccurate information. She has zero interest in presenting balanced information, because she doesn't make money that way. She wins when she stirs up controversy...the more outrageous her claims the better she does.

[Momof3littles]

CPMs aren't licensed in our state, yet they still practice semi-legally (the State decided to license them and then never funded the pilot program, or something to that effect, so technically it's all still not legal). I get the impression that many of them like their under-the-radar position. Yes, the OBs are against it, but the midwives don't seem to want legitimacy, either. And ultimately it's the mothers who lose out because they don't get the safest possible midwifery care.

I previously lived in a state like this. I am okay with that and did consider a well respected CPM. For a few reasons I ended up with a CNM, but it wasn't really her license that sealed the deal. I do think in situations like you describe, they need to be willing to readily transfer without thinking about themselves first if they go that route. That is likely more difficult to do in reality. I know that many mws would prefer the autonomy and flying under the radar thing, and I do get it to a point. I just get frustrated hearing ACOG folks saying "they aren't integrated" while doing whatever they can to keep mws from being integrated. That said, you are right, not all mws want to be integrated. It would be nice if women had the option to choose a midwife who *was* better integrated if they wanted to, you know? That is of course assuming they'd be getting evidence-based care without a lot of restrictions that are not based on evidence from OBs and hospitals. If they were integrated, somehow I think that's what they'd end up with in the current climate-a bunch of restrictions and requirements that are based on minimizing litigation, but not centered on evidence. So maybe I don't really want them integrated after all. :tongue_smilie:

[ktgrok]

For those that mention elective c-sections, I have zero issue with a woman choosing one, IF IF IF IF she knows the risks of the baby being cut (I think it is 4% currently), the risks of maternal death compared to vaginal birth (3 times higher, conservatively estimated), the risks of the baby having breathing problems, the risk of ectopic pregnancy for all future pregnancies, the risk of placental accreta in future pregnancies, etc. If she looks at all that and has reasons to think that the risks are worth it (for some women they are...including women that have had previous sexual abuse, for instance....vaginal birth can just be too traumatic for them), then fine. But if she is NOT informed of those risks, then that is wrong. Just wrong.

[Aelwydd]

For those that mention elective c-sections, I have zero issue with a woman choosing one, IF IF IF IF she knows the risks of the baby being cut (I think it is 4% currently), the risks of maternal death compared to vaginal birth (3 times higher, conservatively estimated), the risks of the baby having breathing problems, the risk of ectopic pregnancy for all future pregnancies, the risk of placental accreta in future pregnancies, etc. If she looks at all that and has reasons to think that the risks are worth it (for some women they are...including women that have had previous sexual abuse, for instance....vaginal birth can just be too traumatic for them), then fine. But if she is NOT informed of those risks, then that is wrong. Just wrong.

 

 

I disagree. It is not a moral choice. She's not sinning by having an elective c-section, no matter her level of knowledge. Is it preferable to be informed? Yes. I bet I could tell you new information about your birth choices you were not aware of (I spent several years, and got a public health degree out a serious obsession about this subject).

 

That doesn't mean any ignorance you may have had about your birth choices means they were wrong. Even if you opted for a unattended home birth, a mode of birth for which we really do not have any reliable data to measure its safety, I would say that if you made that choice thoughtfully and prepared as best you could, there is nothing wrong with it.

 

And do not bring in "Well, the poor innocent baby is being endangered" angle either, because there are a LOT of things parents do every day that put their children in varying degrees of risk. I could argue, by the same logic, that parents who opt to drive their families to Disney World, versus flying, are selfish and wrong to do so, because flying is exponentially safer. In fact, the flying vs. driving comparison is so much more dramatic, as to render any elective c-section vs. vaginal birth comparisons virtually meaningless.

 

How about feeding kids processed foods, or conventionally grown vegetables and fruits, or giving them vaccines (or not giving them)?

 

I could sit here and give dozens and dozens of examples of situations where parents make choices everyday that pose risk to kids. And in most of these cases, the difference in risk of morbidity/mortality is much, much greater than that between different birth choices in the U.S.

 

This is why I will say again: fundamentalist attitudes are a detriment to birth choices, because it places an emotional value judgment and muddies up the discourse.

[TXBeth]

That's horrible. Ricki Lake should have talked to YOU. Jerk doctor.

 

I think in this situation I would have been thinking Jerk Husband. If my husband dared to sign consent for a procedure on me while I was insisting that I didn't want or need it (unless I was mentally ill or incoherent), he would no longer be my husband.

 

For those that mention elective c-sections, I have zero issue with a woman choosing one, IF IF IF IF she knows the risks of the baby being cut (I think it is 4% currently), the risks of maternal death compared to vaginal birth (3 times higher, conservatively estimated), the risks of the baby having breathing problems, the risk of ectopic pregnancy for all future pregnancies, the risk of placental accreta in future pregnancies, etc. If she looks at all that and has reasons to think that the risks are worth it (for some women they are...including women that have had previous sexual abuse, for instance....vaginal birth can just be too traumatic for them), then fine. But if she is NOT informed of those risks, then that is wrong. Just wrong.

 

I disagree. I think there are medical reasons for planned c-sections, and at definitely could include the potential for trauma because of previous abuse. However, no ethical doctor in his right mind would remove the appendix of a perfectly healthy woman just because "she wants it that way." So what's the difference? Insurance won't pay for an unnecessary appendectomy. They shouldn't pay for an unnecessary c-section either.

 

So my qualifier would be that if a woman knows the risks AND wants a c-section badly enough to pay for it out of pocket, then fine. But if she is not informed and/or she doesn't want to pay for it, then that is wrong.

[I.Dup.]

I am not a NCBer who believes birth is some magical unicorn ride to self-actualization or whatever is the current mode of B.S.

 

LOL! Well you said this better than I did. I feel the same about my natural births; they pretty much sucked. It was peaceful and everything, but they were about as nice and magical as getting your arm sawed off would be. :tongue_smilie:

[Slartibartfast]

Well, if she believes it's unsafe, why shouldn't she focus exclusively on it? that doesn't make the information or concerns she presents inaccurate.

 

I think picking apart birth stories, she links them or C&Ps sections, and then attacking mothers dealing with loss is pretty evil.

[funschooler5]

I think I agree here. I don't think anyone should tell a woman where or how to birth. I just think that women should be given, and deserve to be given, all the information so they can make a decision for themselves. I agree that homebirth isn't for everyone. Unmedicated isn't for everyone. However....informed consent IS for everyone. True choice, not the false perception of choice, IS for everyone.

 

As I said in a previous post I'm not pro homebirth, or pro natural birth (whatever that means anyway) or pro vaginal birth. I'm pro evidence based care and pro informed consent. THAT is the problem. Most women have ZERO knowledge about birth, or close to it, and doctors sure aren't able to impart hat information in the 5 minutes they see a woman in a typical prenatal appointment. Hell, my sister was 12 weeks pregnant with her first and didn't know what her cervix was!!!! That is a problem. She didn't know that an epidural could lower her blood pressure. She didn't know the cervidil they gave her could cause dangerously strong contractions that could hurt the baby. No one told her this stuff. So when someone says "I'm being induced", and the majority of them have no idea about the true normal length of pregnancy (41 weeks 1 day), or what a bishops score is or what the risks are, yes, people get upset. I get upset. Not because she is being induced...there are good reasons for induction. But because she isn't being given all the information before she decides. That is no better than lying, and drives me NUTS.

 

Amen! And I also say a big amen to being prepared for an unmedicated birth whether one wants one or not, simply because, even if you plan to get your "epidural in the parking lot" it may not be available to you for one reason or another or may not work as well as you hope.

 

:iagree::iagree:

 

I've had two "natural" hospital births and two homebirths. I did extensive reading up on all of my options before baby #1, and even going in knowing I wanted a drug-free birth, I still had to fight against all of the interventions they were pushing on me for the births of my first two children. I prefer homebirth because the hospital (in my area) just cannot go against procedure even for moms with low-risk pregnancies (like me).

 

I can't remember everything about the movie, but I thought that they portrayed the homebirths realistically. It wasn't all soft music and calm mothers...I especially lliked that they showed that midwife in labor. :001_smile: Everybody's labors are different. Heck, I thought my last labor would be my easiest and fastest. Nope, it was my longest and most painful. I would still rather go through that at home, where I can move around the way I want and be comfortable.

 

I am not against hospital birth at all, and I would definitely go there if there was an emergency. I've just seen too many unnecessary interventions at my local hospital (early inductions, high c-cection rate, etc).

[MinivanMom]

I think picking apart birth stories, she links them or C&Ps sections, and then attacking mothers dealing with loss is pretty evil.

 

:iagree:

 

A friend of a friend lost a baby recently. It was posted on the site with an attack so ugly I cried when I read it.

 

She doesn't limit herself to homebirths either. She will post stories of people who lost babies in the hospital and attack them for not having elective inductions or c-sections before the due date. It is ugly, ugly stuff.

[ktgrok]

I disagree. It is not a moral choice. She's not sinning by having an elective c-section, no matter her level of knowledge. Is it preferable to be informed? Yes. I bet I could tell you new information about your birth choices you were not aware of (I spent several years, and got a public health degree out a serious obsession about this subject).

 

That doesn't mean any ignorance you may have had about your birth choices means they were wrong. Even if you opted for a unattended home birth, a mode of birth for which we really do not have any reliable data to measure its safety, I would say that if you made that choice thoughtfully and prepared as best you could, there is nothing wrong with it.

 

 

 

Maybe you misunderstood me? I'm not saying SHE is doing something wrong if she makes her decision without all the relevant information. I'm saying her DOCTOR is doing something wrong if he doesn't present the risks, as well as the benefits. I think that is true, and commonly accepted, for ALL medical procedures. I'd be pretty darned peeved if I went in for a bladder surgery or something and wasn't given all my options and the risks of each.

 

That said, how do you make a choice thoughtfully without having all the info to think about? How can someone choose what is best for them if they don't KNOW what the things they are choosing really entail? But regardless, my statement that it was wrong was in regards to the medical establishment hiding information, not about the woman herself. We SHOULD be able to trust our doctors to give us all the information we need to make an informed decision. Informed consent is a right in this country.

[funschooler5]

At the hospital where I had my first, I said I didn't want to lie on my back to push, and the OB (NOT the one I had hired - my baby came early and she was out of town) said, snarkily, "Oh, do you know a different way to push?" I didn't feel like arguing at that point, and just gave in.

 

The hospital where I had my second was a very different environment, encouraged free movement, and were supportive of birthing in whatever position the mother wanted (though my birth, on the toilet, was not anyone's ideal, including my own :lol:). However, I have noticed that, in absence of clear preference on the part of the mother, they tend to maneuver people into the lying down with legs held position.

 

This is what happened to me with baby#2...I was laboring on my hands and knees in the bed, and I felt the urge to push so I asked if I could push like that, and the on-call OB was very snide and made me get on my back. At that point, you just don't feel in the mood to argue.:glare:

 

BUT when this same OB tried to talk me into an episiotomy I got very vocal and told him no way. He said, "Fine, you can just tear then." I pushed out my 9lb 1oz baby with a tiny tear. I still don't understand why he felt I needed one...my labor was only 3 hrs long, with only 10 minutes of pushing. :confused: He must have had somewhere to be.

[WishboneDawn]

:iagree:

 

A friend of a friend lost a baby recently. It was posted on the site with an attack so ugly I cried when I read it.

 

She doesn't limit herself to homebirths either. She will post stories of people who lost babies in the hospital and attack them for not having elective inductions or c-sections before the due date. It is ugly, ugly stuff.

 

Yikes.

[stripe]

That said, how do you make a choice thoughtfully without having all the info to think about? How can someone choose what is best for them if they don't KNOW what the things they are choosing really entail? But regardless, my statement that it was wrong was in regards to the medical establishment hiding information, not about the woman herself. We SHOULD be able to trust our doctors to give us all the information we need to make an informed decision. Informed consent is a right in this country.

 

And I don't understand why so many women make it a competition. I have had several women who want to tell me why my births were "easier" than theirs, totally out of nowhere. Does one really prove her womanliness by being the loudest, the quietest, having the worst tear, having the worst bleeding, having a bloodless birth, having no tear, having twilight sleep/morphine/epidural/no painkillers, having the longest labor, whatever, I don't understand it. I generally give no details to anyone for this reason.

[BinahYeteirah]

I usually don't discuss it, either, but I think it is one of those "darned if you do, darned if you don't" kind of things. Birth is a very powerful event in a woman's life. Why wouldn't a woman want to talk about it with other women?

[stripe]

I usually don't discuss it, either, but I think it is one of those "darned if you do, darned if you don't" kind of things. Birth is a very powerful event in a woman's life. Why wouldn't a woman want to talk about it with other women?

 

Oh, I have no problem having a serious conversation. But I have had conversations that are not even masked as games of one upmanship. People asking how long I was in labor, then saying, "Oh, well, that was easy,because I was in labor for 36 hours," or whatever, or actually insisting that (without my having said anything!) that her contractions were stronger than mine, and so forth. Some of these women clearly are coming at it from the angle that they need to justify their use of (say) pain medicine. I don't know why I even should have an opinion about someone else's pain medicine. I really don't. So I tend to clam up when I see that conversation coming.

[ktgrok]

Oh, I have no problem having a serious conversation. But I have had conversations that are not even masked as games of one upmanship. People asking how long I was in labor, then saying, "Oh, well, that was easy,because I was in labor for 36 hours," or whatever, or actually insisting that (without my having said anything!) that her contractions were stronger than mine, and so forth. Some of these women clearly are coming at it from the angle that they need to justify their use of (say) pain medicine. I don't know why I even should have an opinion about someone else's pain medicine. I really don't. So I tend to clam up when I see that conversation coming.

 

I have seen this...and the "who can tell the most horrifying birth story" competition, but only rarely. The women I hang out with are not like that, and show compassion and support no matter what.

[TranquilMind]

dansamy: I agree that it's a huge problem. I regularly work post-partum, where I care for mothers who had a "primary c/s for failure to progress @ 1745". Translation: Doc has plans and he's not coming back to the hospital to deliver this baby.

 

That just pisses me off.

 

While I don't have direct experience with hospital birth, because I avoided it, I DO have experience with a chronically ill family member who spent years in and out of the hospital before she died in her early 20's. They were horrible to her, on the whole, though there were exceptions. The final bill was cleared and they did not pester my Mom for the million owed because of all their mistakes, once an attorney got involved.

 

So yeah...a bit biased here for taking control of your own medical care.

 

 

Virtually none of these women actually need a c/s. They need to stop trying to induce a baby that's too early or a cervix that's too high/thick/closed. They need to labor and let their bodies take the time they need to actually do the work. It's work I wish I'd had an opportunity to do, but that wasn't the fate that I received.

Yes, this is so true, from all I read and hear.

 

My fate was to be in the 10% of truly, absolutely life-saving for mother and baby c/s. I have no guilt about needing emergency life-saving surgery.

 

 

Well, of course you shouldn't have guilt about emergency, life-saving surgery! Glad you made it

 

I have a ton of mom guilt for not being well enough to carry to term

 

 

Awww... You did the best you could!

[BinahYeteirah]

Oh, I have no problem having a serious conversation. But I have had conversations that are not even masked as games of one upmanship. People asking how long I was in labor, then saying, "Oh, well, that was easy,because I was in labor for 36 hours," or whatever, or actually insisting that (without my having said anything!) that her contractions were stronger than mine, and so forth. Some of these women clearly are coming at it from the angle that they need to justify their use of (say) pain medicine. I don't know why I even should have an opinion about someone else's pain medicine. I really don't. So I tend to clam up when I see that conversation coming.

 

Yes, I generally don't talk about for this reason. I just think it's sad that my experience has been that I simply cannot talk about it. I don't think I've ever had a serious conversation about birth in real life. If I mention that I have home births, often the first comment that comes out of a woman's mouth is something along the lines that she could never do that. Often it seems that the woman feels the need to justify her birth choices, so she hurries to point out why she is too high risk or how x happened during one of her previous births so she could never consider home birth. Like you, I can't imagine why I'd care where any given women gives birth, so long as she is happy with her choices. I guess we basically agree, again, I just think it's sad that I can't say a word without it being interpreted as some kind of statement of superiority or challenge, even when I haven't the slightest intentions in that direction.

[Soror]

Oh, I have no problem having a serious conversation. But I have had conversations that are not even masked as games of one upmanship. People asking how long I was in labor, then saying, "Oh, well, that was easy,because I was in labor for 36 hours," or whatever, or actually insisting that (without my having said anything!) that her contractions were stronger than mine, and so forth. Some of these women clearly are coming at it from the angle that they need to justify their use of (say) pain medicine. I don't know why I even should have an opinion about someone else's pain medicine. I really don't. So I tend to clam up when I see that conversation coming.

 

Yep, I get that too, rather randomly. People ask about my births or somehow know from someone else then tell me all about their medicalized births and how it is good they were at the hospital etc. I don't ever solicit this, I rarely comment beyond a hmm, or that sounds bad etc. I don't talk about my birth either unless someone asks and then I give only as much details as asked for and then I try to evade. It is evidently bothersome to others to even hear about it my experience so I just keep it to myself as I prefer not to be attacked for my choices either. I had a women tell me one time about how "I'm not cool" or such for having a hb." I didn't even know how to respond, yet again in this situation I was asked about hb and I didn't even remotely bring up the subject and only answered as briefly as I could without being rude, but it is a curiosity here because it is so rare.

[TranquilMind]

Breastfeeding immediately after the birth also speeds up delivery of the placenta.

 

Well, yeah! I guess that is why I didn't understand any need for pitocin after delivery.

 

Let me guess...they discourage or prohibit nursing right after birth in the hospital? On TV, they seem to whisk the baby away and do stuff right away.

 

At home, the midwife just plops the baby on your chest and tells you to start nursing immediately.

[TranquilMind]

I have seen this...and the "who can tell the most horrifying birth story" competition, but only rarely. The women I hang out with are not like that, and show compassion and support no matter what.

 

I just love it when these women who love to tell horrifying stories tell them to women who are pregnant for the first time! So nice.

 

I had a few come at me at a shower with this tactic. I was annoyed so I told them I was having a baby at home with no pain (Hey, I can hope and pray!). They laughed out loud right in my face.

 

I had that baby at home with no pain. :tongue_smilie:

Though it was a long labor (38 hours).

[LMD]

I think I agree here. I don't think anyone should tell a woman where or how to birth. I just think that women should be given, and deserve to be given, all the information so they can make a decision for themselves. I agree that homebirth isn't for everyone. Unmedicated isn't for everyone. However....informed consent IS for everyone. True choice, not the false perception of choice, IS for everyone.

 

As I said in a previous post I'm not pro homebirth, or pro natural birth (whatever that means anyway) or pro vaginal birth. I'm pro evidence based care and pro informed consent. THAT is the problem. Most women have ZERO knowledge about birth, or close to it, and doctors sure aren't able to impart hat information in the 5 minutes they see a woman in a typical prenatal appointment. Hell, my sister was 12 weeks pregnant with her first and didn't know what her cervix was!!!! That is a problem. She didn't know that an epidural could lower her blood pressure. She didn't know the cervidil they gave her could cause dangerously strong contractions that could hurt the baby. No one told her this stuff. So when someone says "I'm being induced", and the majority of them have no idea about the true normal length of pregnancy (41 weeks 1 day), or what a bishops score is or what the risks are, yes, people get upset. I get upset. Not because she is being induced...there are good reasons for induction. But because she isn't being given all the information before she decides. That is no better than lying, and drives me NUTS.

 

Yep - well said. Throw in a little emotional manipulation and scare tactics too. I know there are fantastic obs out there, but I've heard too many horror stories about obs spinning B.S. (that wasn't recognised as B.S.)and the women still come along afterwards saying 'they saved my/my baby's life' - yes, after all that unneccessary intervention you'd hope so :glare:

[Coffeetime]

Well, yeah! I guess that is why I didn't understand any need for pitocin after delivery.

 

Let me guess...they discourage or prohibit nursing right after birth in the hospital? On TV, they seem to whisk the baby away and do stuff right away.

 

At home, the midwife just plops the baby on your chest and tells you to start nursing immediately.

 

Not even close, actually. My hospital has a 1 hour minimum "skin to skin" time policy immediately after birth. They don't take the baby to even bathe or weight them during this time and they encourage breastfeeding right away.

[ktgrok]

Not even close, actually. My hospital has a 1 hour minimum "skin to skin" time policy immediately after birth. They don't take the baby to even bathe or weight them during this time and they encourage breastfeeding right away.

 

wow, in our hospitals you have to push to GET your baby back in an hour.

[TranquilMind]

Not even close, actually. My hospital has a 1 hour minimum "skin to skin" time policy immediately after birth. They don't take the baby to even bathe or weight them during this time and they encourage breastfeeding right away.

 

Well, that's good.

 

Does not sound like it is standard operating procedure, though.

[StaceyinLA]

Not even close, actually. My hospital has a 1 hour minimum "skin to skin" time policy immediately after birth. They don't take the baby to even bathe or weight them during this time and they encourage breastfeeding right away.

 

You see the baby for a brief moment then to the nursery it goes. If you're lucky you'll have it back within a couple of hours, but usually not before it has been given a bottle of sugar water and a pacifier. Our breastfeeding support is as bad or worse than our 40% c-section rates. It's quite pathetic.

[InterestingCase]

I posted a few pages back. When I had my son in 1990, they did take the baby out of the room for a bath, but his father went along. The first thing the doctor did was place the baby on my chest, but I was young and felt too awkward to nurse. The hospital and docs would have been fine with it. With babies 2 and 3, I breastfed immediately and the baby was bathed in the room, so that was a nice change.

 

In 1990, there was a nursery (did not like this at all), but with my last two, only babies in distress went to the nursery. My last two babies were with me in the room at all times.

 

Oregon's C-section rate is just above 30% (last I checked).

 

I find it so surprising and sad that women are still forced to deal with outdated practices.

 

As a funny aside, in certain circles in Oregon, women feel the need to explain if they choose to give birth in the hospital. Homebirth is considered very "cool" by many of the women I know.

[NASDAQ]

Everyone I know was given the baby immediately after birth, unless there was a problem CVS. Nursing after birth is standard. Even c-section babies go right back to mom.

[NASDAQ]

Not to start more controversy, but can you link me to what happened here? IN the states this isn't a case that I've heard of. Obviously babies do die sometimes, I'd be interested in seeing what happened (if only to know what the hell not to do myself). the court case you linked doesn't seem to discuss the circumstances. (and yes, I'm very very glad that midwives where I am are trained and licensed, and, as importantly, have a good collaborative arrangement with the hospitals for transfer purposed. Just this week two women in my mom's group transferred for c-sections actually...one for non reassuring heart tones and one because she was dilating and waters were bulging but there was no head coming down..midwife was worried about possible cord prolapse if the waters broke....sure enough upon surgery they found that the cord was presenting ahead of the baby).

 

Search canlii.org for "Gloria Lemay." You'll get a bunch of her reported cases, including several of her duking it out with the College of Midwives.

 

Here is the BCSC case for R. v. Sullivan:

http://canlii.ca/en/bc/bcsc/doc/1986/1986canlii1188/1986canlii1188.html

 

Here is the BCCA case: http://canlii.ca/en/bc/bcca/doc/1988/1988canlii3156/1988canlii3156.html

 

Canlii of course is only certain _reported_ decisions and the reporting from the eighties and early nineties is not as comprehensive. So this isn't necessarily the sum total of her legal troubles, and they may refer to decisions that you can't access through Canlii.

[scrappyhappymama]

Full disclosure: I haven't read the thread yet and I just had a homebirth of my fifth baby a month ago. So you know where I'm coming from. ;)

 

My questions, just from reading the initial post are, is your position on this matter consistent? In other words when you say

 

I am one of those people who think home births are risky.

 

Do you also acknowledge that hospital births are risky? That women and babies die every day from procedures and practices that are only done in hospitals or from infections caught in the hospital?

 

When you say:

 

I'm glad that we have the freedoms to have our babies the way we want, so long as it isn't endangering them (like the lady, totally unrelated to this movie or this concept, who wanted SO BADLY not to have a c-section that her baby died. She should be charged with murder, IMO.

 

So, if a woman who chooses to have a medically unnecessary repeat c-section and her baby dies from the procedure or as a result of the procedure, would you advocate that she be charged with murder as well? I would certainly hope not!

 

I know you describe your pregnancies as picture perfect, but just from your description of your first pregnancy, I can find many ways in which it was managed medically and according to hospital policies and not in your or your baby's best interest. For one, there is no possible way that sitting around at the hospital the first day, not contracting and not progressing was helping you out. There are many ways a midwife could have helped you to help your labor progress and not stall out the way it did. Normally, I would not criticize another woman's labor experience or perspective, but honestly I think your own viewpoint is so skewed by your experience that you cannot even see how your were a victim of the very same system the movie depicts.

 

I'll be reading the rest of this thread while nursing during the night tonight, so I'm sure I'll be back to edit this thread or add more later. :D

[ocelotmom]

This is what happened to me with baby#2...I was laboring on my hands and knees in the bed, and I felt the urge to push so I asked if I could push like that, and the on-call OB was very snide and made me get on my back. At that point, you just don't feel in the mood to argue.:glare:

 

BUT when this same OB tried to talk me into an episiotomy I got very vocal and told him no way. He said, "Fine, you can just tear then." I pushed out my 9lb 1oz baby with a tiny tear. I still don't understand why he felt I needed one...my labor was only 3 hrs long, with only 10 minutes of pushing. :confused: He must have had somewhere to be.

 

Mine did the episiotomy. When I said I didn't want one (early in labor - this was my OB's backup who I first met at the hospital), she said she wouldn't unless I was tearing towards the urethra. Well, guess what she said happened :glare:.

 

(And I found out later that urethral tears are generally not a big deal, anyways)

 

Second birth - tiny 1st degree tear at the same spot. Third birth - no tear.

[ktgrok]

Everyone I know was given the baby immediately after birth, unless there was a problem CVS. Nursing after birth is standard. Even c-section babies go right back to mom.

 

Wow...the most popular hospital here used to have a MANDATORY 2-4 hour separation after c-section...the required all c-section babies to stay in the "transitional" nursery.

 

Now they don't have that as an official policy, but mom isnt' given the baby until she is out of recovery AND they have a nursery worker available to move the baby...still is often hours.

[NASDAQ]

Also, I'm not sure that Lemay was practicing illegally at the time of the original death. Midwifery licensing changed a great deal in response to that series of cases, and she practiced illegally subsequent to those changes. The BC College of Midwives then sought an injunction specifically enjoining Lemay from calling herself a midwife and/or behaving as a midwife, and she violated that in addition to the general rule.

 

What she did that she was in trouble for was not to practice illegally. It was to fall so ridiculously far short of the standards of a reasonable health care provider that her negligence caused the death of the baby.

 

In addition, the baby was successfully delivered by the EMT. It was not a case of difficulty in effecting the home-to-hospital transfer.

 

http://canlii.ca/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2002/2002bcsc6/2002bcsc6.html

 

[2] Ms. Lemay was one of a number of midwives practising in British Columbia when the B.C. government in 1995 took steps to regulate the practice of midwifery within what is now the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 50 ("the Act"). The government, pursuant to ss. 12(1) and 15(2)(f) of the Act, passed B.C. Regulation 103/95 O.C. 269/95 ("the Regulation") designating midwifery as a health profession, creating the College as the regulatory and licensing body for midwives and determining reserved acts which may only be performed by registrants of the College. The College began operations in 1998 and only College registrants may call themselves midwives.

 

[3] Some previously unlicensed midwives joined the College after its creation, however Ms. Lemay did not apply for registration and her activities attracted the College's attention which in 1999 obtained an interim and later a permanent injunction order restraining Ms. Lemay from using the term midwife and practising acts reserved for midwives.

[NASDAQ]

Wow...the most popular hospital here used to have a MANDATORY 2-4 hour separation after c-section...the required all c-section babies to stay in the "transitional" nursery.

 

Now they don't have that as an official policy, but mom isnt' given the baby until she is out of recovery AND they have a nursery worker available to move the baby...still is often hours.

 

Our hospital doesn't actually have a nursery for normal babies. There's the NICU and there's a nursery in the ward for women who are detoxing from drugs.

 

When my brother was born in 1985, my mother says my father held the baby for awhile because she was very groggy. She had also had general anesthesia.

[Forget-Me-Not]

Well, yeah! I guess that is why I didn't understand any need for pitocin after delivery.

 

Let me guess...they discourage or prohibit nursing right after birth in the hospital? On TV, they seem to whisk the baby away and do stuff right away.

 

At home, the midwife just plops the baby on your chest and tells you to start nursing immediately.

 

Actually at my med-free hospital birth, the nurses gave me a good chance to get my daughter nursing. But I was bleeding heavily and she wouldn't latch (the beginning of a month-long campaign to get that kid nursing--ironically, my baby born by emergency c-sec under general was my best breastfeeder! :lol:). So I did get an IM shot of pitocin. I remember it stung like crazy.

[ktgrok]

Our hospital doesn't actually have a nursery for normal babies. There's the NICU and there's a nursery in the ward for women who are detoxing from drugs.

 

When my brother was born in 1985, my mother says my father held the baby for awhile because she was very groggy. She had also had general anesthesia.

 

that's how it was here 13 years ago, when I had my son. Changes have happened, and not for the better.