Wwyd? - Page 5

[Collinsky]

I'm actually a bit surprised at how few people are voting for adoption... I would think that for someone who wanted another child but perhaps had risks that that would be a more logical suggestion than simply not having more children. I didn't vote for adopting, but it would have definitely been one of my choices if this allowed me to vote for more than one option.

[channelofpeace]

Originally Posted by Sprungthe2.50

I'm sorry, but I really really really find this to be bad advice on finding an underground midwife although I agree with you entirely on finding a natural birth friendly OB and doula.

If you have a mid-wife that is willing to break the law and act covertly then how can you assume she would not be covert with you? How could you check that she was reliable? How could you find multiple mid-wives willing to do that and choose which one is the most trust worthy with a birth?

Well, you are certainly entitled to disagree with me. Perhaps you aren't aware of some of the ridiculous legal issue surrounding midwives in some states. As a PP pointed out, in some states it is illegal for midwives to attend HB at all, so they are all flying under the radar. That makes them no less competent or bad women just trying to screw birthing women over, it just means they are willing to brave the legal risks to provide care.

In states where licensure is available, some midwives choose to no be licensed, because, as I said before, there are sometimes unreasonable restrictions on how they can practice. How to check her reliability? Word of mouth and referrals are a great way. I really dislike your equating underground midwife= shady, dishonest person trying to get away with something. Seriously, there are unlicensed midwives that have attended hundreds or even thousands of births. I think that their records probably speak for themselves. As a good consumer, it is important to ask questions, but I would absolutely not dismiss an underground midwife as dangerous.

I think it might be situations with such as the OP losing her child during UC, and other mothers with complications that caused the state, rightly or wrongly to ban home-births with mid-wives.

I find it more likely that powerful lobbyists and medical associations like ACOG and the AMA are the culprit. They don't have any evidence to back up their positions, but they really don't like midwives threatening their power.

[acp]

Originally Posted by CryPixie83

There are many places where homebirth is illegal. Even places where (like in Illinois) a mother has every right to birth at home but midwifery is illegal.

Just wanted to correct this. I live in Illinois, and am planning a home birth with a certified, legal midwife. Midwifery is NOT illegal in Illinois. The only issue is that direct-entry midwives are illegal here. I wish they weren't, and have contributed to efforts to try to get a bill passed that would allow for their certification and recognition in the state. But there are many CNMs in the state. The majority, it's true, practice in hospitals (I had a GREAT CNM-attended birth in a hospital with our first child), but there are a number who do home births. And in some cases, direct-entry midwives are teaming up with CNMs to make it "legal."
Given that I do live in a state that has a distinction between licensed and unlicensed midwives, and I know of many great CPMs who are "illegal" here, I understand what the previous posters were trying to say about underground midwives not necessarily being shady or "bad."
That said, I think in this case there are very good reasons for the OP not having a home birth, and I think trying to find a midwife who would be willing to take her on would compound the risk that she'd get someone unqualified to deal with the situation, since many more responsible midwives might suggest she birth in a hospital, given her history.

[Sprungthe2.50]

Originally Posted by channelofpeace

Well, you are certainly entitled to disagree with me. Perhaps you aren't aware of some of the ridiculous legal issue surrounding midwives in some states. As a PP pointed out, in some states it is illegal for midwives to attend HB at all, so they are all flying under the radar. That makes them no less competent or bad women just trying to screw birthing women over, it just means they are willing to brave the legal risks to provide care.

In states where licensure is available, some midwives choose to no be licensed, because, as I said before, there are sometimes unreasonable restrictions on how they can practice. How to check her reliability? Word of mouth and referrals are a great way. I really dislike your equating underground midwife= shady, dishonest person trying to get away with something. Seriously, there are unlicensed midwives that have attended hundreds or even thousands of births. I think that their records probably speak for themselves. As a good consumer, it is important to ask questions, but I would absolutely not dismiss an underground midwife as dangerous.



I find it more likely that powerful lobbyists and medical associations like ACOG and the AMA or more likely the culprit. They don't have any evidence to back up their positions, but they really don't like midwives threatening their power.

I'm not saying there aren't good mid-wives that go underground because of supid restrictions, but given the fact that they are underground you can't really check or research them. And do you really want to just go ahead and trust this person not being able to really check them out?

[Synchro246]

Ack! I dunno. Any attendant skilled with SD and able to give you anti-hemorrhage meds and treat hemorrage (at least until you are you are able to transfer if need be) would be comparable to a hospital setting where they might NOT be able to handle SD so well, but probably WOULD be able to handle hemorrage better.

Personally, I'd go with either an underground midwife I trust who meets the qualifications above OR a planned cesarean. If the doc had SD skills and I felt good with shim I'd go vaginal, if the doc seemed scared of SD. . .well I'd try for another doc, but I'd consider cesarean. If it's really my last baby I'd be less worried about the planned cesarean than if if I were planning another. But this is ME, not you. I'd rather have a well contoled cesarean than a zavenelli or spaztic SD management any day.

Are women who are at risk for PPH at risk for extra bleeding with a cesarean section?

[1littlebit]

Originally Posted by channelofpeace

I find it more likely that powerful lobbyists and medical associations like ACOG and the AMA or more likely the culprit. They don't have any evidence to back up their positions, but they really don't like midwives threatening their power.

this exactly.

[channelofpeace]

Originally Posted by Sprungthe2.50

I'm not saying there aren't good mid-wives that go underground because of supid restrictions, but given the fact that they are underground you can't really check or research them. And do you really want to just go ahead and trust this person not being able to really check them out?

Even most underground midwives have statistics and have had clients that are willing to tell about their experiences with them (good or bad). You might have to do a little more digging than in a situation where they are licensed, but it doesn't mean the information isn't there.

[mommato5]

Honestly??? I would go ahead and do a hospital birth. No way in the world would I trust someone who is not a CNM. I know the pain of loss. The ONLY thing that really matters is a living breathing child at the end. If the birth sucked, you can look at your baby and see all the reasons why you went through what you did. If you lose your child, what is there to look back on?? Thank goodness I had this birth, although I have nothing now?? It's not worth it. God forbid I have to ever have a c-section. I will because the outcome will be a living breathing child, which is something an untrained, unlicensed, uneducated, unregulated midwife cannot promise.

You know, word of mouth doesn't really help anyone when it comes to midwives. Of course, if you know someone who has had awesome homebirths you are going to want her midwife right?? What if that midwife chooses to not share her crappy history with you??? What if you become the one finding out the hard way just what kind of midwife you are dealing with??? Mine was so experienced, had no deaths except for one stillbirth, had one premature delivery, had so many years experience, had delivered over two thousand babies. Yeah, thats ALL she chose to tell me. Now, my daughter is yet another death under her belt that I didn't learn about until it was too late.

[barefootpoetry]

Originally Posted by mommato5

God forbid I have to ever have a c-section. I will because the outcome will be a living breathing child, which is something an untrained, unlicensed, uneducated, unregulated midwife cannot promise. .

A C-section doesn't promise that either. And I'm kind of insulted that you think all midwives who arent CNMs are uneducated and untrained.

You know, word of mouth doesn't really help anyone when it comes to midwives. Of course, if you know someone who has had awesome homebirths you are going to want her midwife right?? What if that midwife chooses to not share her crappy history with you??? What if you become the one finding out the hard way just what kind of midwife you are dealing with??? Mine was so experienced, had no deaths except for one stillbirth, had one premature delivery, had so many years experience, had delivered over two thousand babies. Yeah, thats ALL she chose to tell me. Now, my daughter is yet another death under her belt that I didn't learn about until it was too late.

Getting a midwife because a friend of yours used her and had a good birth is not very good consumer research if you ask me. Of course the midwife is only going to tell you the good parts of her job history. You have to go to her clients to ask them what really happened. That's why employers call your former workplaces and ask them about you, because no applicant is going to put all the not-so-positive things they did on their application. I am speaking hypothetically, of course, and not directly about you, mommato5.

Research, ask questions, LOTS of questions, to LOTS of people. I would trust an unlicensed midwife with decades of happy clients over a CNM with lots of unhappy clients. But that's just me and it really has nothign to do with the OP's quandary, so I guess I should hush up before I get any more OT.

[Mama_Leah]

Honest opinion, if it were me I would schedule a c-section. Or, if my finances allowed I would adopt.

[Synchro246]

Originally Posted by mommato5

God forbid I have to ever have a c-section. I will because the outcome will be a living breathing child, which is something an untrained, unlicensed, uneducated, unregulated midwife cannot promise.

Nobody can promise that.

[famousmockngbrd]

It's my understanding that homebirth itself is legal everywhere, but in some states it's illegal to practice midwifery. I didn't think the birthing woman could get in trouble, just the midwife. Someone please correct me if I am wrong about this.

[famousmockngbrd]

Originally Posted by mommato5

...the outcome will be a living breathing child, which is something an untrained, unlicensed, uneducated, unregulated midwife cannot promise.

I agree that an untrained and uneducated midife would probably not be a good one. Of course, like a PP said, nobody can make any promises about the outcome of a birth.

Originally Posted by mommato5

Now, my daughter is yet another death under her belt that I didn't learn about until it was too late.

I'm sorry your daughter died. You too, frontierpsyche. My heart goes out to any mama who has lost a child.

[1littlebit]

CNMs arent always great. i had one. she told me 2 weeks before my due date that i ha to have a c section because ds was to big. she said it was to risky b/c he might get stuck and have brain damage or die. he was 8lbs 14 oz ... thats small for my family.

Ina May Gaskin isnt a CNM.. people trust her

[barefootpoetry]

Originally Posted by 1littlebit

CNMs arent always great.

Ditto that. my CNM sent me to be sectioned because my pelvis was "misshapen". I didn't even find out my baby was posterior until I got my surgical records, that's probably why he couldn't get out. She also told me I couldn't birth a baby bigger than 6 lbs. My next baby was 8 lbs. 4 oz.

A degree on the wall does not a good practitioner make.

[groovynaturemama]

oh mama. i'm so sorry for the loss of your baby girl.

i voted for showing up at the hospital. i don't know the exact amount of your blood loss or the degree of dystocias you had, but based on the info in your post, i voted that way, and am giving my opinion. i feel like active management of your placenta would be necessary, and given that legally you are not permitted to have a homebirth, the hospital is the place where you can be sure to get the post partum care you needed without facing legality isues for yourself or a potential underground midwife. as far as the dystocia is concerned, a dr. should be able to manage one, and if they cannot turn the baby, i assume they have the option of c/s. i wouldn't just outright opt for a c/s beforehand, though if it were me. i am thinking of this from a very logistical standpoint, even though i know there is a huge emotional component to being able to birth in the way you so choose; after all this (your history and ability to have the birth you want) may mean the difference b/w having another child or not. i cannot accurately know what emotions you're feeling; all i can do is imagine. i don't even want to guess what you're feeling, all i can say is it must be a lot.

i would have a check of my pelvis done to see if there is an anotomical reason for dystocia occuring. i would ask the dr. at the hospital how he/she handles dystocias, and at what point do they consider a c/s necessary. i would ask what their protocol for pph is, and would they consider active management of the placenta (ie- giving an injection of pitocin immediately after the delivery of the placenta, before too much blood is lost) given your history, and what exactly they consider to be active management.

[*Erin*]

with your history, i would have another child, and i would have a c/s-i would wait until i was in natural labor to have it done.
eta
im so sorry for you for the loss of your first baby. i wish you well whatever you decide. hugs, mama.

[caedmyn]

Originally Posted by barefootpoetry

Well, I'm not an expert, but my midwife advised me to keep my diet low in fats and sugars and high in veggies so I wouldn't grow a "fluffy" baby (her words). I have a narrow pelvis, otherwise it wouldn't be an issue. I guess that's a diet every pregnant woman should follow,though, regardless of what size they want their baby to be. And FTR it didn't really work...I had an 8 lb. 4 oz. baby with massive shoulders and rolls galore. Not really "fluffy" but just about as big as my pelvis can fit, I bet.

I don't think this is much like deliberately trying to grow a small baby, though. I wouldn't advise that.

What I suggested isn't any different than what your midwife (and other midwives as well) recommended, I just happen to recommend a different way to approach it. Perhaps it would have been better received if I'd worded it as "not go out of your way to grow a big baby" or something like that.

And I don't know if there's any research out there on truly low carb diets in pregnancy. The only mentions I've seen of low carb diets in pregnancy aren't really low carb, they're just low in sugar and simple carbs, and whole grains & fruit and many veggies still have tons of carbs. There's quite a lot of evidence that carbs (simple or not) cause people to gain weight, so it seems at least feasible to me that carbs could cause some babies to gain extra weight in utero as well.

[chi_mama]

Go process this and work through the feelings and I think the answers will be much much clearer

I agree with avivaelona
I voted other, and by other I mean relax, enjoy your baby and put this on the back burner.
I don't mean to overstate but you have experienced so much to finally have this LO. I spent a lot of time processing my birth experience after my son, I think all mamas do. I would assume that most women with multiple births reflect/compare upon all of their experiences pp. That being said, you have time (maybe even years) before concieving is even an option to you. By then there may be other options available in your area.. you may live elsewhere.
but most importantly, as stated previosly, give yourself some time. when ds was 2.5 months I was just getting the hang of showering daily
I apoligize if I have minimized your concerns in anyway.

[Jane]

I voted "other". I would probably plan to have a vaginal birth with active management of third stage (ie, give oxytocin after the birth of the baby). This can be done in a baby friendly way, with the pit given a minute or so after the birth, and you can wait for the cord to stop pulsing before cutting.
I would also have an IV in place, or a saline lock, before the birth. I would want my provider to have several medications available, including pitocin, cytotec, methergine, hemabate, and/or herbs.

This could happen in a birth center, a hospital, or at home.

I would also probably set a date to worry about it later. Like, say, I would get an IUD at 6 weeks post partum, and promise myself that I wouldn't worry about it, or make plans until I had the IUD out.