or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Unassisted Childbirth › UC ruined by nosy neighbor *update #56, #74, #134, #160, #204, #219(long)*
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

UC ruined by nosy neighbor *update #56, #74, #134, #160, #204, #219(long)* - Page 9

post #161 of 305
Ahhh yes the oh so interesting medical records. You should see ous from our transfer with DD1 (for pain relief ONLY). Such a load of crock. NOTHING is correct in ours minus things like names.

Sorry you are having such an issue and that your birth was ruined.
post #162 of 305
Just.... WOW!

I truly hope they do not get away with this!
post #163 of 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Equuskia View Post
Please sit down to read this update.

So I get my medical records and dd's too. My ER records were very interesting. Says here that I was hydrated, pupils reactive and equal, respiration, rhythm and rate were fine, my lungs were clear, my thorax equally expanded. I had a soft depressible abdomen with positive bowel sounds. I also had full range of motion in my extremities and no gross deficit in my central nervous system. In general, I was AAOx3: awake alert and oriented to date place & person. The next morning, the progress notes say: "Patient refers to feel well, actually w poor vaginal bleeding. She is afebrile and refers only to mild back pain. She is going to be D/H [discharged home] and oriented to receive f/u [follow up] w gynecologist."
Sounds like I was fine, right?

Except no doctor ever touched me. This hospital has such amazing technology, that they can do a complete exam on you, without you even knowing! :

Or, they're completely full of sh!t and just made this up as they went along. I can't believe they just made up a physical exam!

I also checked dd's records. The only reason they had for doing antibiotics was because it was an "unsterile birth". That's it, She had absolutely nothing wrong with her. I noticed they did a drug panel on her, I guess to rule out me being a druggie.

Can't wait to see what the Procurator thinks of this.
Jeez, louise! : Can't say I'm surprised. But how could they possibly get away with all that they did because it was an unsterilized birth? More like, baby was completely healthy and happy *BEFORE* going to the hospital, where she caught infections from their not-so sterile incubators, seems to me.

I'm not an American, but for this, I am so pro-suing!!!
post #164 of 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Equuskia View Post
Please sit down to read this update.

So I get my medical records and dd's too. My ER records were very interesting. Says here that I was hydrated, pupils reactive and equal, respiration, rhythm and rate were fine, my lungs were clear, my thorax equally expanded. I had a soft depressible abdomen with positive bowel sounds. I also had full range of motion in my extremities and no gross deficit in my central nervous system. In general, I was AAOx3: awake alert and oriented to date place & person. The next morning, the progress notes say: "Patient refers to feel well, actually w poor vaginal bleeding. She is afebrile and refers only to mild back pain. She is going to be D/H [discharged home] and oriented to receive f/u [follow up] w gynecologist."
Sounds like I was fine, right?

Except no doctor ever touched me. This hospital has such amazing technology, that they can do a complete exam on you, without you even knowing! :

Or, they're completely full of sh!t and just made this up as they went along. I can't believe they just made up a physical exam!

I also checked dd's records. The only reason they had for doing antibiotics was because it was an "unsterile birth". That's it, She had absolutely nothing wrong with her. I noticed they did a drug panel on her, I guess to rule out me being a druggie.

Can't wait to see what the Procurator thinks of this.
Aside from your made up medical records (I cant say I am surprised they tried doing that), I am sickened how they gave your poor baby antibiotics for such a stupid stupid reason......unsterile birth??????? Geez, they should read the reports on the bacteria that has been found in newborn babies at so called "sterile" hospitals....And checking her for drugs to boot???? I smell lawsuit just with that issue by itself. Again, this whole thing stinks of prejudice to me.....where do they get off thinking someone choosing a UC is going to be a druggie????? You know, on the bright side of all this, you will be able to give other UC'ers advice on what and what not to do when having a UC.

By the way,whatever happened to them stating about the antibiotics being given for a staph infection??????
post #165 of 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Equuskia View Post
Please sit down to read this update.

So I get my medical records and dd's too. My ER records were very interesting. Says here that I was hydrated, pupils reactive and equal, respiration, rhythm and rate were fine, my lungs were clear, my thorax equally expanded. I had a soft depressible abdomen with positive bowel sounds. I also had full range of motion in my extremities and no gross deficit in my central nervous system. In general, I was AAOx3: awake alert and oriented to date place & person. The next morning, the progress notes say: "Patient refers to feel well, actually w poor vaginal bleeding. She is afebrile and refers only to mild back pain. She is going to be D/H [discharged home] and oriented to receive f/u [follow up] w gynecologist."
Sounds like I was fine, right?

Except no doctor ever touched me. This hospital has such amazing technology, that they can do a complete exam on you, without you even knowing! :

Or, they're completely full of sh!t and just made this up as they went along. I can't believe they just made up a physical exam!
: Welcome to medical farce 101, or "how to fool the patient without really trying"...It's a good thing you have the incentive and knowledge to ask for your records or you would not have known about the "exam"...I so feel for you, living there. Are all "government entities" like that?

Quote:
I also checked dd's records. The only reason they had for doing antibiotics was because it was an "unsterile birth". That's it, She had absolutely nothing wrong with her. I noticed they did a drug panel on her, I guess to rule out me being a druggie.
Given what they probably see on a daily basis, is what motivates them, i guess...but if they would trust the client's word, they might not have so many problems now, would they? Like I said earlier, if you want sterile, you did the right thing by having her at home. But it is hard to change *thier* minds, since they have been mentally conditioned to believe it, to a large extent.

Congrats on being home, and keep up the good work!
post #166 of 305
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherMother'n'Madre View Post
Ahhh yes the oh so interesting medical records. You should see ous from our transfer with DD1 (for pain relief ONLY). Such a load of crock. NOTHING is correct in ours minus things like names.

Sorry you are having such an issue and that your birth was ruined.
They didn't even get my last name right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by majazama View Post
Jeez, louise! : Can't say I'm surprised. But how could they possibly get away with all that they did because it was an unsterilized birth? More like, baby was completely healthy and happy *BEFORE* going to the hospital, where she caught infections from their not-so sterile incubators, seems to me.

I'm not an American, but for this, I am so pro-suing!!!
I think she didn't catch an infection because I brought buttloads of colostrum for her to drink. On Saturday she finished all the colostrum I had pumped, I wanted to make sure she had plenty of antibodies and to clean out her gut. Her poop was quite stinky for a few days, like sewage smelly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by veronicalynne View Post
Aside from your made up medical records (I cant say I am surprised they tried doing that), I am sickened how they gave your poor baby antibiotics for such a stupid stupid reason......unsterile birth??????? Geez, they should read the reports on the bacteria that has been found in newborn babies at so called "sterile" hospitals....And checking her for drugs to boot???? I smell lawsuit just with that issue by itself. Again, this whole thing stinks of prejudice to me.....where do they get off thinking someone choosing a UC is going to be a druggie????? You know, on the bright side of all this, you will be able to give other UC'ers advice on what and what not to do when having a UC.

By the way,whatever happened to them stating about the antibiotics being given for a staph infection??????
You mean the staph infection that never existed? I think the doc had the wrong baby, cuz mine sure never had pustules. The ER ped said it, the nurses who wiped her butt 15 times a day never saw anything, I never saw anything when I changed her diaper.
post #167 of 305
Ugh, why I am not surprised about your records? : I recently got mine from DS1's birth and was quite surprised to see the staff's "interpretation" of how things went.

Now that you have proof that there was absolutely nothing wrong with your sweet baby girl, I say sue their little butts off.
post #168 of 305
I have still been following this. And I am still sending prayers your way for your baby and your entire family. It is really insane and they do need to be sued. For more reason than money, they need as much attention to there practices brought up as possible.
what they did really is not ok. It just cant be said enough.


As for the records, WHF!!! There has to be a way for them to get in trouble for that as well. It is absolutly unreal.

NOW, my biggest problem with this the last couple days and has really been eating nat me is this Sterile birth thing that keeps coming up.

Since when has a hospital ever been considered sterile?? I am not understanding this term being used. People, including birthing women are taken into seperate operating rooms that are closed off from the rest of the hosital, scrubbing and sterile gowns, and gloves required for surgery. A c-sectioin is supposed to be the closest to a sterile birth as you can find. Done in a sterile operating room.

If normal birth was to be sterile it would also take place in such an environment. with the same measures taken as a surgical birth. They do not just do c-sections in a delivery room of a hospital. It is not sterile and I am certain if asked bluntly " are your labor and delivery rooms sterilized?" the reply would be "of course not"

sorry to ramble on, but i think that needs to be clearly brought up to whoever happends to be going over this entire situation. It saddness unbelievably.
I will never forget your story.
post #169 of 305
I am so very sorry for your traumatic experience. My heart bleeds just thinking of all this unnecessay drama around a time that should have been filled with bonding, nursing and resting when able. Take care of you and your baby. We are with you 100%
post #170 of 305
What a bizarre ordeal. I'm so sorry you had to go through that.

Your daughters are absolutely beautiful, and you picked a gorgeous name. I'm so glad your baby's home safe with you now. Congratulations on the birth of your daughter. :
post #171 of 305
i was going to read all of the posts before posting, in the event that things have turned around. i am so sorry this has happened to you and your family. things sound CRAZY in puerto rico. signing admitance give the state CUSTODY of your child while they are in the hospital. that is just BEYOND insane. i hope you guys are able to get it all worked out. i can't even imagine what you are going through. in the states you could refuse to let them in your home if you didn't call them and refuse transfer and social services would not be knocking down your door the next day that is just so sad

i did want to address this statement. this is not always true. women can be colonized with MRSA in their noses, skin and vagina. it's similar to being colonized with GBS. so, i would ask to be cultured if it does turn out to be MRSA. because 1. you'd want to get treated before too much contact with the baby and 2. if you don't have it you'd be able to show YOU didn't give it to the baby.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Serenyd View Post
Could be something she picked up the hospital .. if the cultures show it is MRSA then you know it is...
post #172 of 305
just got done reading the rest. i am so glad that she is home with you. beautiful name! beautiful children and family! congratulations. i am so sorry that things went the way they did. how sad and frustrating!!!!

i know not all hospitals are the same and it sounds like PR is a piece of work to say the very very least, but in a place that forces you to go to the hospital or calls child services in to have your baby removed sounds like a place that would make up whatever it could.

when i worked maternal child heath we had a mom that delivered in her car at the doors of the ER. she wanted to be admitted, her choice. the ONLY issue was because the baby wasn't born in the hospital the policy was that the baby had to be bathed before they were allowed to enter the nursery. again, these were the MOM'S choices. so, i gave the baby a bath and that was the end of it. the baby never went to the nursery and the mom was discharged the next morning, i worked night shift so it was in the middle of the night that the baby was born. i guess since she was so close when she delivered she wanted to get seen??? i don't know.

no antibiotics, not even really admitted as a patient. no nurse did vitals on the baby even if i recall correctly. so, of course every hospital does things differently but it sounds like PR has some serious control issues!!!!! it sounds like you give up alot of your rights there to make choices for yourself.

i hope things are great from here on out! i have never been involved with social services, but i think i'd be as proactive as i possibly could. don't give the control freaks anymore reason to display their need to control. yuck!
post #173 of 305
Apparently, down here in PR, women who are druggies (and there are a LOT of them) have home births to avoid all the mess they'd get into if they went to the hospital to have their baby. So my thinking is that they simply assumed that my wife was a coked-out drug-slut. That assumption is going to cost them their ass.
post #174 of 305
My friend got MRSA from a c-section just a few months ago. Doesn't seem all that sterile to me.
post #175 of 305
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by majazama View Post
My friend got MRSA from a c-section just a few months ago. Doesn't seem all that sterile to me.
I remember cringing when my ob would walk into the office from the hospital wearing the scrubs he used there, complete with head cover and shoe covers. You know, the same scrubs that have been in contact with who knows what, and he walks into an office full of pregnant women. Yeah, real safe. Ick.
post #176 of 305
I am so sorry you are having to deal with this. reading this just makes me hot. I just went thru this three months ago with the birth of my daughter. she was supposed to be born at home, but we had to transfer. the ped. was the problem at this one too. wanted to throw cps and everyone else into the pic as well. almost the same identical situation! gosh Im sorry. it sux bad. But as soon as I stood my ground, I told them I was leaving AMA and taking baby AMA as well. they said I could not have my baby either. I told them I was going to have my lawyer call. they released me just hours later, with baby in tow. because they could not prove anything was wrong with either of us. we also got bs for not giving any of the typical newborn tests/vax. I hope you get your baby back in your home where you all belong asap. my heart goes out to you and your family. (I had a 2.5yo too.)
post #177 of 305
Quote:
I got the whole line about how this was a "nonsterile" birth and how they would have to check the baby to make sure she was ok.


What happened to you is wrong. This kind of thing is too common. Women should be allowed to give birth in their own home. Studies show that homebirth is just as safe as birth in a hospital. I toured a local hospital in my ninth month (mw required a back-up hospital) and what I saw was abhorrent. This particular hospital tends to be populated with mostly Mexican immigrant patients. The delivery table was a metal cot about 5 feet up in the air, complete with stirrups. It was seriously horrible.
post #178 of 305
Wow, I couldn't read this whole thing and not post . . . my heart goes out to you and your family. I'm so relieved your beautiful little one is home with you! I'm not familiar with how things are done in PR, but it sounds like they were trying to make an example out of you. I'm praying that CPS doesn't give you any more trouble, and that you can all finally relax and bond. I'm so, so sorry you had to deal with this. Do whatever you can to have some kind of justice brought to the situation!
post #179 of 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodtveidt View Post
Apparently, down here in PR, women who are druggies (and there are a LOT of them) have home births to avoid all the mess they'd get into if they went to the hospital to have their baby. So my thinking is that they simply assumed that my wife was a coked-out drug-slut. That assumption is going to cost them their ass.
i live in MN and they do a drug panel on most babies born in certain hospitals without neccessarily telling the parents. its actually pretty standard in a hospital setting regardless of where in the country you are.
post #180 of 305
i don't know about insurance where you are, but dealing with your insurance company is another angle in this.

when i went for a physical in january, they billed my insurance for over $250 worth of care for a physical. according to my insurnace, a physical is 100% covered without copay. when i got a bill saying that insurance hadn't released the funds (i had to fill out some paperwork asserting that i didn't have insurance through another source), i was surprized to be billed $99 for "nursing care facilities" as well as "medical examination."

the insurance company informed me that these were not the correct codes for a physical--which is all that i had--and that they wouldn't pay (i would have to pay the bill and then bill them myself, and they'd return 70% of what they cover to me) i asked what these terms meant, and "nursing care facilities" includes midwifery care, which they wouldn't cover at all under my insurance.

i called the doctors office and then asked them what gives. they then say that my medical examination and nursing care facilities was under thei rmidwifery care, even though i'd specifically gone there for a physical in the medical practice only. i told them that i wouldn't pay the bill and would be calling the fraud office of my insurance company.

immediately, my insurance company is 'rebilled.' they retracted the 'errant bill' and changed my medical records to reflect that i had a physical.

i never saw the midwife in their practice, nor did i have any intention of doing so. i just wanted a physical.

the insurance company paid for it, but i did tell them about my struggle with the office. they flagged the office to comb over the bills with their clients. turns out, they'd been wrongfully billing insurance for a long while.

so, if your insurance company gets billed fo things that they didn't do for you, then submit a fraudulent claim against them. it's just more paperwork, but insurance companies are vigilant about not paying for whatever they don't have to!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Unassisted Childbirth
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Unassisted Childbirth › UC ruined by nosy neighbor *update #56, #74, #134, #160, #204, #219(long)*