or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Unassisted Childbirth › *Update* UCing (but DH not happy), need info on twin births and/or Polyhydranmios
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

*Update* UCing (but DH not happy), need info on twin births and/or Polyhydranmios - Page 2

post #21 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alenushka View Post

It is your choice of course, but you need to think of your husband career as well. Check your state laws as he can be held liable for providing care outside his professional scope of practice. All  it takes, is one DA who is sticker to the letter of the law to treat your DH as Paramedic and not a husband who happened to be a paramedic during a birth emergency.

Nope.  When he's not at work, he's nothing other than a bystander - he cant give drugs, nothing other than first aid/CPR... we dont have any of that stuff at home anyway.  He has to be at work, working under the Physician Advisor's License.  And, he can take family members... unlike doctors.

 

It's become pretty obvious you are not a UC supporter.  This section of the forums is for UC support.  Please take that into consideration if you should chose to post in this thread further.

 

Thanks!

post #22 of 53

I am a UC/UP supporter. That does not mean that I can't be concerned about a particular situation. Polyhydramnios substantially increases your risk of cord prolapse and malpresentation. It is also sometimes associated with congenital problems in the baby.  If you are carrying twins, you need to know if they are di/di, mo/di or mo/mo. This is extremely important. I am sure you have looked into all of this already, but I would be remiss if I didn't bring it up for anyone else who is reading this thread. Not to mention that you have been diagnosed with Pityriasis Rosea, which could present problems for your baby- hopefully not, but it is another risk factor. 

 

If you go to an OB and get an ultrasound, no one is going to force you to change your delivery plans. You can still UC if you want to. But you will be better able to manage your care if you are fully informed.  If you have signs/symptoms that fall outside of the "normal," it is wise to get them checked out. That is why we have midwives, OBs and hospitals! Being a UCer doesn't mean you eschew medical care or diagnostics when it is warranted.

post #23 of 53

I think it is a very good idea to find out what is happening in your particular situation before you decide to UC.  You are getting some very odd advice here, i see, but how can you plan adequately if you do not even know whether you are having twins, if you are what their situation may be, or if you're measuring large due to a condition like Polyhydramnios?  Could you find another midwife with whom you are happy? 

Also, i think it seems kind of shitty to force your husband to comply with your desire to UC.  you are putting lots of expectations and pressure on him, and if he does not want to be responsible for the myriad of things that could go wrong, then why do you think it is fair to insist that he does?

post #24 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by homemademomma View Post

I am a UC/UP supporter. That does not mean that I can't be concerned about a particular situation. Polyhydramnios substantially increases your risk of cord prolapse and malpresentation. It is also sometimes associated with congenital problems in the baby.  If you are carrying twins, you need to know if they are di/di, mo/di or mo/mo. This is extremely important. I am sure you have looked into all of this already, but I would be remiss if I didn't bring it up for anyone else who is reading this thread. Not to mention that you have been diagnosed with Pityriasis Rosea, which could present problems for your baby- hopefully not, but it is another risk factor. 

 

If you go to an OB and get an ultrasound, no one is going to force you to change your delivery plans. You can still UC if you want to. But you will be better able to manage your care if you are fully informed.  If you have signs/symptoms that fall outside of the "normal," it is wise to get them checked out. That is why we have midwives, OBs and hospitals! Being a UCer doesn't mean you eschew medical care or diagnostics when it is warranted.

 

I would like to point somethings out. The mono-mono di-di issue is rare. Coupled with the fact she does not know she is carrying twins the odds of this are really really small. You have to divide the risk by the chance that she's even pregnant with twins. Which is only a fraction of potential, anyway.

 

And as to the polyhydramnios... Cord prolapse is something that most often happens with artificial breaking of the waters, even without poly. Natural breaking though, can be safer. I myself had PROM with a baby who turned breech after waters broke and was early, born small (3.5 pounds). These things would have put off any doctor and many a midwife, but the reality was, he was safe. He was moving and healthy the whole way through labor and this was easy to confirm with simple observations. I let my body and intuition draw the line, not just going by the raw data. And I was suspecting twins, too. Everything panned out.

 

Now here's something that many people, even some purportedly pro UC people don't understand - intuition, prayer and sixth sense. I really don't believe this woman would even consider UC if there was something wrong and she was getting a bad vibe about the whole thing. I don't think it's anyone's place to tell her to ignore these things or distrust her intuition in favor of tiny statistics.

 

Polyhydramnios is like marginal cord insertion (the marginal cord also happened with my last baby, btw) - it really tells you next to nothing. Chances are, if there's extra water it's because it's normal for that baby or it's the one byproduct of the rash. At any rate, she's right down the street from the hospital if anything goes awry! And she will not be in the dark if prolapse happens. She can feel movement and listen just fine.

 

A lot of UC people are happy to check in to the hospital if they so much as see their shadow and I say, power to them. There is a time and a place for intervention. But I also admire the women who trust their bodies when they feel intuitively and see with personal evidence that their baby is healthy.

 

This is a risk averse society. Just look all around and you will see people trading this half percentage of risk for that quarter percentage risk all the time, as though it's a life and death decision. What's weird to me is the left brain thinking that does not allow for other data points in the equation.

post #25 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hildare View Post

I think it is a very good idea to find out what is happening in your particular situation before you decide to UC.  You are getting some very odd advice here, i see, but how can you plan adequately if you do not even know whether you are having twins, if you are what their situation may be, or if you're measuring large due to a condition like Polyhydramnios?  Could you find another midwife with whom you are happy? 

Also, i think it seems kind of shitty to force your husband to comply with your desire to UC.  you are putting lots of expectations and pressure on him, and if he does not want to be responsible for the myriad of things that could go wrong, then why do you think it is fair to insist that he does?


Shitty? He was pro UC at the start. Did you miss that? He's just getting an episode of cold feet and you want her to jump ship just for that? That's not fair to her. That's like saying she better find another lover quick if her man was getting cold feet about marriage for a few days.

 

Come on. Who's pregnant here? She is. Who could get birth raped if she goes for intervention? She could. Not him. She's obligated to protect herself and her children from such follies as premature cord clamping or needless surgical procedures and the ensuing risks of infection.

post #26 of 53

The whole thing reminds me of airport security. Everyone in the airport gets subjected to risks and privacy violations so that they can fly - a safer option to driving. Possibly hundreds have already died because they chose cars over getting groped. I'd still go by car. I chose dignity and human rights over "safety."

post #27 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by prescottchels View Post

Have you checked the birth stories on the main forum? I think there are a bunch of UC ones mixed in. There are definitely a bunch of successful UC twin births out there. I can't really offer much more support than that since I haven't been there myself....  Good luck, mama!!


What I hate is what you won't find is the unsuccessful stories because here they tend to be deleted.  Nothing like skewing the odds in favor of what you support.

 

Seriously this whole situation could be made a lot better if you just went and got an U/S to see whats going on, are you having twins, is there something wrong.

post #28 of 53

R1Jenny, your advice to get a U/S to make sure there are no problems is a reasonable post here in the Unassisted Childbirth forum. Regarding your other statement, unsuccessful stories have been deleted in the past at the request of the member who posted her story. This usually occurs not because she does not want her story to be known but because she found it being linked to and/or copied and posted about elsewhere in a very negative, attacking and accusative manner, something that would not be acceptable here at Mothering, no matter what the cause of loss. We always respect the wishes of such a member and remove her story to protect her, not to uphold a "UC at all costs" agenda. 

 

 

A reminder of our forum guidelines:

Quote:
The Unassisted Childbirth (UC) board is a forum of support, respectful requests for information and sharing of ideas and experiences. While we will not restrict discussions only to those who birth without professional attendants, we will actively discourage individuals from posting with no sincere interest in exploring UC. Proselytizing against UC will not be permitted. Controversial subjects of discussion related to UC can be found elsewhere on the internet, and we invite you to seek out other venues for that purpose.

 

Based on this I am removing posting privileges of the members who have posted to this thread in a manner that is not supportive or interest in exploring UC or advising zapzipzee's how to get the support she needs from her husband and that will help her have a safe UC. 

post #29 of 53

I your situation I would also want to know whether or not I'm actually carrying twins. There is no definite need for an U/S, though. A midwife (and maybe you or your husband as well) should be able to detect twins with a doppler, or even with a stethoscope. I, too, would find out what's going on, which might also help alleviate your husbands worries. And speaking of intuition and sixth sense, I think your husband deserves to have his intuitions honored as well. In the end you make the decision, but it will be a lot easier if your husband is on board.

post #30 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floretta View Post

I your situation I would also want to know whether or not I'm actually carrying twins. There is no definite need for an U/S, though. A midwife (and maybe you or your husband as well) should be able to detect twins with a doppler, or even with a stethoscope. I, too, would find out what's going on, which might also help alleviate your husbands worries. And speaking of intuition and sixth sense, I think your husband deserves to have his intuitions honored as well. In the end you make the decision, but it will be a lot easier if your husband is on board.

I actually haven't cancelled my midwife yet.  I wont until DH is once again supportive.  I do not intend to call her when I'm in labor if he remains against it... if he calls her that's his issue, and she can stay in the living room or out in her car.

 

She doesn't think there's any reason to get an ultrasound.  She says she can only "feel" one baby, but cant tell what position its in, and only found one heartbeat, but doesn't really search for a second.  I can find two, but I dont know if they're different heartbeats as we only have one fetoscope, and we cant get either with DH's stethoscope.  She says that I do have a small amount of extra fluid, but then adds that that is common in twins.  I asked when she would be concerned and when necessary to get an ultrasound.  She said if I was one of "those" people who just has to know right now, she'd send me for one, but since I dont want the doppler used, she sees no reason to not just "wait and see."  (I'm currently 26 weeks, so not like we need to know right now, something we will probably be able to know in a couple more months...)

 

DH's latest intuition is that if we UC that we "used" the midwife for her information on the rash (which, since I have so much movement, is a non-issue now).

post #31 of 53
I suppose your DH is correct you did use the midwife for her knowledge, which I am assuming you will compensate her for- it seems like a fair trade. While I will not be UC I like to view this forum because I believe it is so important for women who wish to UC to be able to. I am so inspired and feel powered by all of you and the way you trust your bodies. I want to just say OP that sometimes people feel like it is all or nothing (meaning if you UC then you don't see any practitioners and if you do it means you don't really trust yourself or the UC process.) personally I feel your judicial use of a qualified professional has shown you are open to receiving outside support when something doesn't seem right to you. Perhaps this will help DH to be on board with you.
While I really truly honor your choice to UC I wonder if there is a way to also honor your husbands gut/intuition/knowing as well as yours? My DH has been able to pick up on things I haven't been able to see in the past so when he has such a strong response I will tap into myself or the situation to see if I can source what he is picking up on. Ultimately you 2 are a team and I believe you both are coming from love to this place. I would invite you to take a breather and try the conversation in a bit when you 2 remember how much love you have for each other. Your UC will be deeply enhanced by having a partner on board who feels his intuition is being honored as well (since you may need his support during labor.)
Best of luck and please keep us posted.
post #32 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlessedJess View Post

 

I would like to point somethings out. The mono-mono di-di issue is rare. Coupled with the fact she does not know she is carrying twins the odds of this are really really small. You have to divide the risk by the chance that she's even pregnant with twins. Which is only a fraction of potential, anyway.

 

And as to the polyhydramnios... Cord prolapse is something that most often happens with artificial breaking of the waters, even without poly. Natural breaking though, can be safer. I myself had PROM with a baby who turned breech after waters broke and was early, born small (3.5 pounds). These things would have put off any doctor and many a midwife, but the reality was, he was safe. He was moving and healthy the whole way through labor and this was easy to confirm with simple observations. I let my body and intuition draw the line, not just going by the raw data. And I was suspecting twins, too. Everything panned out.

 

Now here's something that many people, even some purportedly pro UC people don't understand - intuition, prayer and sixth sense. I really don't believe this woman would even consider UC if there was something wrong and she was getting a bad vibe about the whole thing. I don't think it's anyone's place to tell her to ignore these things or distrust her intuition in favor of tiny statistics.

 

Polyhydramnios is like marginal cord insertion (the marginal cord also happened with my last baby, btw) - it really tells you next to nothing. Chances are, if there's extra water it's because it's normal for that baby or it's the one byproduct of the rash. At any rate, she's right down the street from the hospital if anything goes awry! And she will not be in the dark if prolapse happens. She can feel movement and listen just fine.

 

A lot of UC people are happy to check in to the hospital if they so much as see their shadow and I say, power to them. There is a time and a place for intervention. But I also admire the women who trust their bodies when they feel intuitively and see with personal evidence that their baby is healthy.

 

This is a risk averse society. Just look all around and you will see people trading this half percentage of risk for that quarter percentage risk all the time, as though it's a life and death decision. What's weird to me is the left brain thinking that does not allow for other data points in the equation.

 

Huh. I think you should re-read what you posted and think critically about your conclusions. You also might want to look into the actual relative risks of polyhydramnios and twin births. Again, I am pro-UC. Part of being pro-UC is being responsible for your health and your babies health- making the hard decisions like seeking medical advice when indicated.  Eschewing medical help at all costs is kind of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and IMO goes against the very nature of UC.

 

UC isn't about trusting your instincts- it's about taking responsibility for your healthcare. 

post #33 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by zapzipzee View Post

I actually haven't cancelled my midwife yet.  I wont until DH is once again supportive.  I do not intend to call her when I'm in labor if he remains against it... if he calls her that's his issue, and she can stay in the living room or out in her car.

 

She doesn't think there's any reason to get an ultrasound.  She says she can only "feel" one baby, but cant tell what position its in, and only found one heartbeat, but doesn't really search for a second.  I can find two, but I dont know if they're different heartbeats as we only have one fetoscope, and we cant get either with DH's stethoscope.  She says that I do have a small amount of extra fluid, but then adds that that is common in twins.  I asked when she would be concerned and when necessary to get an ultrasound.  She said if I was one of "those" people who just has to know right now, she'd send me for one, but since I dont want the doppler used, she sees no reason to not just "wait and see."  (I'm currently 26 weeks, so not like we need to know right now, something we will probably be able to know in a couple more months...)

 

DH's latest intuition is that if we UC that we "used" the midwife for her information on the rash (which, since I have so much movement, is a non-issue now).


I think you've been fair to the midwife, even if you went UP the rest of the way BUT I think I like your idea with the compromise you chose for him. You don't have to involve the midwife unless your husband feels he has to call her himself. I like that. Nobody can call you a hard liner to leave a coach there for your husband's peace of mind in place. And most likely this will help you avoid another transfer should anything unexpected happen.

 

I don't think it's good to have a spouse who worries to that level left without someone to call upon, even if you don't need help after all. Sometimes a spouse will chicken out and push the mom into a hospital over a small variation of normal and as frustrating as that is, it's most likely avoidable if you have an easy going midwife on hand.

 

I like the way this one sounds. She's not coming across the way you describe her as high strung and focused on intervention. My midwife attended the first two births, letting my husband catch and then on the third one, she was there for the pregnancy and there for my husband to call. He did call and she set both of us more at ease so we could finish the UC ourselves. I was wanting him to try pushing the cervical lip away wanting to be done but he couldn't on his own and the midwife assured him he could just wait it out and I'd complete on my own, which went exactly as she predicted. So she could just go back to sleep. Good deal for her, we paid the entire amount but she didn't lose any sleep on us.

post #34 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by homemademomma View Post

 

Huh. I think you should re-read what you posted and think critically about your conclusions. You also might want to look into the actual relative risks of polyhydramnios and twin births. Again, I am pro-UC. Part of being pro-UC is being responsible for your health and your babies health- making the hard decisions like seeking medical advice when indicated.  Eschewing medical help at all costs is kind of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and IMO goes against the very nature of UC.

 

UC isn't about trusting your instincts- it's about taking responsibility for your healthcare. 

 

Speaking of critical thinking, we don't want to be penny wise and pound foolish when weighing risks.

 

Let me ask you something, would you fly if there was a 10% risk that airport security was going to touch your vagina with a dirty glove or force you to be fired with radiation 3 times for their amusement? Or both, as some have experienced? Even though you might increase your family's entire short term risk of death during the long road trip by avoiding air travel?

 

I personally think too much is made of some risks, considering that people are trying to trade short term risks for long term risks (or the other way around or one kind of risk for another) all the time. Long term risks seem to be nearly forgotten. Like the Japanese politicians who are so eager to say there are "no short term risks" to radiation exposure from a meltdown. Great. Because that's all we are interested in. (we all know evacuation can pose short term risks for many people, especially politicians - naturally the politicians are more interested in that.)

 

I'm not saying there is never a time for intervention but responsibility must be weighed considering health between BOTH short term and long term risks when you are talking about using diagnostic equipment that could lead to excessive intervention.

 

I would need more information to seek intervention than a slightly bigger belly and more water than usual.

 

I haven't even mentioned any long term risks or short term traumas as a result of intervention in this post. But could you think of a few? I can think of so many it discourages me from posting a list.


Edited by BlessedJess - 2/2/13 at 2:10pm
post #35 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlessedJess View Post

 

Speaking of critical thinking, we don't want to be penny wise and pound foolish when weighing risks.

 

Let me ask you something, would you fly if there was a 10% risk that airport security was going to touch your vagina with a dirty glove or force you to be fired with radiation 3 times for their amusement? Or both, as some have experienced? Even though you might increase your family's entire short term risk of death during the long road trip by avoiding air travel?

 

I personally think too much is made of some risks, considering that people are trying to trade short term risks for long term risks (or the other way around or one kind of risk for another) all the time. Long term risks seem to be nearly forgotten. Like the Japanese politicians who are so eager to say there are "no short term risks" to radiation exposure from a meltdown. Great. Because that's all we are interested in. (we all know evacuation can pose short term risks for many people, especially politicians - naturally the politicians are more interested in that.)

 

I'm not saying there is never a time for intervention but responsibility must be weighed considering health between BOTH short term and long term risks when you are talking about using diagnostic equipment that could lead to excessive intervention.

 

I would need more information to seek intervention than a slightly bigger belly and more water than usual.

 

I haven't even mentioned any long term risks or short term traumas as a result of intervention in this post. But could you think of a few? I can think of so many it discourages me from posting a list.

I think ultrasounds are WAY overused. We should save them for when variations from normal behoove us to seek more information, so we can make an informed choice about our care.  

 

Yes, obviously the chances are in the OP's favor that there is nothing out of the ordinary, and the birth will go fine. However- she has signs that indicate there might be a complication or variation!  The risk of a single ultrasound is negligible. That's a fact. MUCH MUCH MUCH less than the risk associated with a surprise twin birth or polyhydramnios. Let's be real, here. 

 

INFORMED decisions cannot be made without information. 

post #36 of 53
You know what OP, the Cochrane Review in 2009 stated that they thought ultrasound was safe but that they weren't sure and new machines hadn't been tested. A good ear for babies should be able to hear two. Don't let opinionated people get you down. It's really important to see things from your husbands point of view in case your own vision is missing something. Otherwise rock on with your bad self.
post #37 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by homemademomma View Post

I think ultrasounds are WAY overused. We should save them for when variations from normal behoove us to seek more information, so we can make an informed choice about our care.  

 

Yes, obviously the chances are in the OP's favor that there is nothing out of the ordinary, and the birth will go fine. However- she has signs that indicate there might be a complication or variation!  The risk of a single ultrasound is negligible. That's a fact. MUCH MUCH MUCH less than the risk associated with a surprise twin birth or polyhydramnios. Let's be real, here. 

 

INFORMED decisions cannot be made without information. 


I think you are thinking only of the risks set up by the U/S waves. I was thinking in more broad terms like misdiagnoses or raised alarms that then require further tests and traumatizing worries over nothing. That concerns me even more.

 

For myself, last time U/S would have opened up a can of worms I didn't need. For one thing, he was very unusually small. His placenta was well below the tenth percentile range. So was he. He was born at 36 weeks weighing only 3.5 pounds. Coupled with the marginal cord insertion, (I also believe they would have measured lower than usual fluid levels) and perhaps a misdiagnosed worry thrown in for good measure I would have been subjected to the kinds of stresses that no pregnancy needs if you want a good outcome. Research shows that maternal stress in late pregnancy is linked to worse outcomes. Meanwhile, he's going to be triple his birth weight next week and he's only just turned 3 months old. He's healthy and has never seen the inside of a hospital or had supplemental feeds to boost weight gain.

post #38 of 53

"There was even this one I could give a link to, where a mom has a vaginal twin birth at a hospital and ends up with galloping gangrene. Not an infection you will ever see at a home birth. At least, there isn't a case of it in the news or birth statistics yet."

Not true. There was at least one home birth that resulted in a massive, systemic infection that left the woman a quadruple amputee. 
http://www.12newsnow.com/story/18373018/mother-of-t

post #39 of 53

http://www.homebirth.net.au/2008/06/homebirth-vs-hospital-statistics-to-die.html

 

If you find it interesting, here's the place that really helped me see how much better off many infants are at home. I guess it really depends on the home environment, microbe-wise, but it's hard for me to argue with the idea that a hospital, which sees thousands of people in a short amount of time (more or less depending on the size of the hospital) could ever compare in disease exposure to a home. And both mother and child are vulnerable to infection so the safest place is not where there are outbreaks or persistent infections the mother has never before encountered.

post #40 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlessedJess View Post


I think you are thinking only of the risks set up by the U/S waves. I was thinking in more broad terms like misdiagnoses or raised alarms that then require further tests and traumatizing worries over nothing. That concerns me even more.

 

For myself, last time U/S would have opened up a can of worms I didn't need. For one thing, he was very unusually small. His placenta was well below the tenth percentile range. So was he. He was born at 36 weeks weighing only 3.5 pounds. Coupled with the marginal cord insertion, (I also believe they would have measured lower than usual fluid levels) and perhaps a misdiagnosed worry thrown in for good measure I would have been subjected to the kinds of stresses that no pregnancy needs if you want a good outcome. Research shows that maternal stress in late pregnancy is linked to worse outcomes. Meanwhile, he's going to be triple his birth weight next week and he's only just turned 3 months old. He's healthy and has never seen the inside of a hospital or had supplemental feeds to boost weight gain.

Wow, that must have been a huge surprise since you were sure there were twins and suspected triplets.

 

 

Its amazing that he's never had to go to the hospital. Most moms of babies in the three pound range arent so lucky. Usually babies that small and early have temperature problems, feeding issues, and jaundice- at the minimum.  I sat skin to skin with my 3 lb 15 ozer for hours in my 90 degree house and couldnt get her temp above 96 and had to take her to the nicu to join her sister, who was there for fluid in her lungs.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Unassisted Childbirth
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Unassisted Childbirth › *Update* UCing (but DH not happy), need info on twin births and/or Polyhydranmios