Two weeks after my third son's birth, I'm ready to start building my case against my OB (as in my personal eternal grudge against him, not a legal case). It's a long story and there are many details I could include, but what I am curious about right now is this (to answer will require familiarity with the test):
Is a score of 6 out of 8, with the missing element being the breathing movements, a remotely justifiable cause for immediate induction? After the initial 6 score, which I'm not sure even counts because he didn't spend the full 30 minutes on it, I was on the monitor for like 2 hours at the hospital and the strip was perfect the entire time. (Which would give me an 8 out of 10 on the original 10-point BPP that includes an NST.) The BPP ultrasound was repeated that afternoon and although the tech saw a little bit if breathing movement, it was not the full 20 seconds required to give those 2 points. To be fair, she had me drink cold water and then juice and get up and walk around to try to get him to wake up, but he was in a resting phase at the time, or so I now believe.
So my doctor flipped out, played the dead baby card, and less than 24 hours later baby was born after a pitocin induction. (I was 38w3d at the time of the BPP and was 2-3cm).
Please don't ask why I was having BPPs to begin with, it was not a good reason and that was part of my many mistakes in this whole mess. And please don't ask why I went along with it and didn't just leave, I already hate myself enough for being so spineless.
I just want to know whether my doctor had a leg to stand on medically in being so cautious or whether, as I suspect, this was much ado about nothing and other practitioners would have just repeated the test in a day or two. Baby's apgars were 9 and 9, fwiw. He handled the induction beautifully and breastfeeding is going very well thank god. I'm incredibly pissed about how it all went down, though, as everything I've looked at online says that an 8/10 score is considered normal and that only at a 6 out of 10 would you consider intervention. Is that info outdated or incorrect? I think the induction was not just a very conservative call but wholly unnecessary and I believe there are other reasons the doctor was fishing for a reason to induce (all the classics, perhaps minus wanting to make a golf game).
Can anyone help me out?