Did you see this? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 128 Old 09-14-2011, 09:53 PM
 
coocoocachoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sosurreal09 View Post

PP your post is great, right I get that...but statistically c section rates are higher at certain times (change of shift, when it's getting late especially...OB just wants to go home already?) and certain days of the week (Friday, heck the weekend is starting perfect time to cut you open so I can go enjoy it!) .

Cite?
 

 

coocoocachoo is offline  
#62 of 128 Old 09-14-2011, 09:57 PM
 
coocoocachoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sosurreal09 View Post

PP your post is great, right I get that...but statistically c section rates are higher at certain times (change of shift, when it's getting late especially...OB just wants to go home already?) and certain days of the week (Friday, heck the weekend is starting perfect time to cut you open so I can go enjoy it!) I would not call that preventative and/or life saving...

 

 


 

Cite? (apologies in advance for doubleposting)

coocoocachoo is offline  
#63 of 128 Old 09-15-2011, 06:36 AM
 
seafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by coocoocachoo View Post


 

Cite?
 

 


yeah, I have to say, this never made sense to me - at least in the hospital I was at, the ob/gyns had 24 hour shifts. So there was no 'leaving early' or 'getting out before the weekend'. I guess a shift change happens - but does it make sense to start a c-section right before your shift changes?! I'd think if you DID want to leave at the end of your shift you wouldn't do that.

I guess other hospitals might have different ways to have ob/gyns staff L&D?

mom to z (June 2009) and m (may 2011)

seafox is offline  
#64 of 128 Old 09-15-2011, 07:16 AM
 
Imakcerka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
I think it's best to for us all to find an unbiased resource... but where? Any ideas?

I have heard the shift change, holiday, weekend jargon before and never found any reputable information pertaining to it. I've also heard of MW's sending other MW's in their place due to vacations and other life happenings that get in the way. Im going to look into this more. My mom works as an OB nurse. According to her, quite a few of the women that come in are planning home births and the OB's give them an informational packet on what they need to know. As in when they should seek outside help and proper procedures to ensure everything is clean. They don't give out instructions just advice. One of the doctors, insists that if that is their plan that they promise to come in to all their scheduled appointments so that they have a better understanding of the health of their babies and themselves. I wonder if this practice has deterred some women or helped them by giving them an idea of the state of their bodies and baby before birth. She doesn't know of any bad home births as of recent. So maybe the OB's who are willing to work with these women are actually doing a good thing?

I'm sorry, I know my body but I would have no idea if something was wrong, I'm usually in too much pain to thing of anything really.
Imakcerka is offline  
#65 of 128 Old 09-15-2011, 07:23 AM
 
sosurreal09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 3,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Well I'm not going to spend hours researching it b/c I have a 2 y/o at home with me maybe someone else has something. I have heard it often though and it was the the documentary "The business of being born". A quick google showed a lot of articles that support the whole "afraid of legal issues" argument though. Here is one I liked http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/health/24birth.html

 

 

On another note have you seen this? http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2011/09/pathetic-attention-whoring-of-homebirth.html SERIOUSLY how can you say this woman is credible in the least?


 Young born-again mama and loving wife peace.gif to DH jammin.gif and SAHP to two crazy girls dust.gifwehomebirth.jpgfly-by-nursing2.gifslinggirl.giffamilybed1.gif and believe gd.giflactivist.gif  signcirc1.gif !

sosurreal09 is offline  
#66 of 128 Old 09-15-2011, 08:01 AM
 
kathrineg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I admire the Business of Being Born for bringing up a lot of issues about the way women are treated in hospitals and shining a light on some of the stupider practices in OB. I also think it has played a part in pushing a lot of hospitals to be more natural birth friendly, which is great. The hospital where I will birth is very friendly to natural birth, avoiding separation of mom and baby, and breastfeeding. I feel lucky and grateful that I have the choice to have that kind of care AND the operating  room down the hallway and level III NICU one floor away.

 

However, there is a lot about the Business of Being Born that is frustrating to me both as a feminist and as someone who values factual information and I don't think it is great as a sole source of information about any one topic.

kathrineg is offline  
#67 of 128 Old 09-15-2011, 10:14 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sosurreal09 View PostSERIOUSLY how can you say this woman is credible in the least?

 

Again, people are getting caught on the tone of her argument rather than the content of it (her argument as expressed in the entire blog, not solely in one post). You could argue she is unnecessarily harsh, unkind, or whatnot. But I fail to see how it impeaches her credibility. The manner in which she expresses herself has nothing to do with the validity of her points--only with how likely other people are to listen.

 

Queen of Thorns likes this.
erigeron is offline  
#68 of 128 Old 09-15-2011, 11:06 AM
 
Imakcerka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Erigeron, I really think her tone is a huge problem. Would you take advice from someone who was condescending? Seriously would you? Due to our EGO's most people have a hard time doing so. Someone who really wanted to reach people wouldn't do that. Now, I certainly do not agree with how she presents her case and though I'm all for using the best source of medicine available to ensure a positive outcome, you have to realize that marketing your view (a scientific one) with a snarky tone is not the right way to go about anything.
Imakcerka is offline  
#69 of 128 Old 09-15-2011, 01:54 PM
 
sosurreal09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 3,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

She called them WHORES. Seriously birth advocates, educated, well-meaning women...One of those women is in a FB group with me and it's just mean and sad. This woman is NOT a baby killer...

 

W/e give her all the credit you want...when 1 out of 3 women are getting cut open I'd rather take my chances at home.


 Young born-again mama and loving wife peace.gif to DH jammin.gif and SAHP to two crazy girls dust.gifwehomebirth.jpgfly-by-nursing2.gifslinggirl.giffamilybed1.gif and believe gd.giflactivist.gif  signcirc1.gif !

sosurreal09 is offline  
#70 of 128 Old 09-15-2011, 04:02 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,050
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by erigeron View Post

 


I

Doctors aren't the only people who have this background. But I think it's safe to say that a lot of laypeople who say they "did research" do not have the necessary background, and thus their interpretations are suspect... which was basically the point of my post.

 

I don't think that's "safe to say" at all.  The assumption that "laypeople" lack the competence to do their own research is an unsubstantiated and dangerously patronizing generalization.  Midwives supposedly attract a highly educated clientele, women with either graduate education or at least a helluva lot of brains.  You may be surprised just how competent a lot of these women can be. 

 

But if you insist, Erigeron, that we lowly laypeople defer to physicians on these topics, I will happily do so....beginning with Drs. Marsden Wagner, Stuart Fischbein, Henry Dorn, William Sears,

Simone Buitendijk, Elizabeth Allemann..... winky.gif

 

I didn't insist on any such thing. You're putting words in my mouth.

 

My intent was not to put words in your mouth, and I apologize if that didn't come across clearly.  Respectfully, however, my point is that after weighing the evidence, as they hopefully have, different doctors come to different conclusions.  And I find the conclusions of the aforementioned individuals a lot more compelling than the creative sophistry and misogynistic drivel of who-know-who's blog.

 

I do, however, think that Dr. Amy cherry-picks her articles to some degree. I wasn't a fan of, for instance, her conclusion on EFM either. She certainly has her blind spots and I don't take her opinion, or that of any doctor, as gospel. But sometimes it's nice to read something written by somebody who actually *understands* that quoting the abstract as if it proves anything, saying "X hasn't been proven safe", calling obstetricians "surgeons", and other such behaviors that drive me batty, are Bad Science.

 

I'm glad to hear that you are level-headed enough not to take everything that one person says at face value.  This is the kind of critical thinking that got me into the out-of-hospital birthing center in the first place.  thumb.gif 

 

I agree that it is intellectually irresponsible to read an abstract, jump with glee that it confirms your bias, and then cite it as see-told-ya-so "evidence."

 

And on a final note, I'm sorry if it drives you "batty" to hear this fact, but obstetricians ARE surgical specialists as defined by the American College of Surgeons.



 

nia82 likes this.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#71 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 11:02 AM
 
starrlamia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 536
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


i dont care how many facts you present, if you are calling people names and being extremely patronizing, you dont deserve to have your arguement heard. At least not by me, I can see the same arguements with people who are actually mature enough to respect other people.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by erigeron View Post

Quote:

 

Again, people are getting caught on the tone of her argument rather than the content of it (her argument as expressed in the entire blog, not solely in one post). You could argue she is unnecessarily harsh, unkind, or whatnot. But I fail to see how it impeaches her credibility. The manner in which she expresses herself has nothing to do with the validity of her points--only with how likely other people are to listen.

 



 


Aspiring Midwife applying to University for fall 2011!
starrlamia is offline  
#72 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 11:10 AM
 
Imakcerka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
That's the exact point, there are a lot of people who otherwise might listen and possibly pick up some information that is vital. She doesn't seem to mind scaring them off.
Imakcerka is offline  
#73 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 12:18 PM
 
womenswisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: in my skin
Posts: 939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imakcerka View Post

According to her, quite a few of the women that come in are planning home births and the OB's give them an informational packet on what they need to know. As in when they should seek outside help and proper procedures to ensure everything is clean. They don't give out instructions just advice. One of the doctors, insists that if that is their plan that they promise to come in to all their scheduled appointments so that they have a better understanding of the health of their babies and themselves. I wonder if this practice has deterred some women or helped them by giving them an idea of the state of their bodies and baby before birth. She doesn't know of any bad home births as of recent. So maybe the OB's who are willing to work with these women are actually doing a good thing?

I'm sorry, I know my body but I would have no idea if something was wrong, I'm usually in too much pain to thing of anything really.

I'm confused. Are these women who are planning an unassisted birth? This packet they give out...that doesn't really make sense if the women is seeing a midwife for care. Midwives are there to help their clients determine when to seek outside help, and I'm not sure what kind of "cleaning" is necessary with a homebirth other than basic sanitation? Midwives provide routine prenatal care, so why would the mother need to double up and also see the OB for every visit? They do blood pressure, urine checks, palpation, all the same stuff (and usually far more counseling about diet, nutrition, and general health) as the OB. The reason you hire a midwife is so that she can help you determine the health of your baby and yourself. This whole thing is not making sense to me and if it's accurate, it doesn't sound like the OBs have any idea of what a midwife's qualification, training and care look like.

Fledgling midwife on hiatus, Wife to B, mama to C (c/s ribboncesarean.gif 12/04) and S hbac.gif (12/07), angel3.gif m/c (3/12) and expecting another bean 6/13 stork-suprise.gif.

womenswisdom is offline  
#74 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 01:20 PM
 
jenniferlynne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by starrlamia View Post


i dont care how many facts you present, if you are calling people names and being extremely patronizing, you dont deserve to have your arguement heard. At least not by me, I can see the same arguements with people who are actually mature enough to respect other people.
 



 


 

See, I really don't understand this attitude.  She doesn't deserve to have her argument heard?  I don't get that.  If someone is presenting FACTS, as you said, (and I'm not speaking specifically of Dr. Amy, here, but more generally; I know lots of people take issue with what she's stating.  Let's say information, maybe?) that could affect the wellbeing of me and my child, then I will listen regardless of tone. And if I have doubts about this person's credibility, then I will investigate it until I've determined whether she's worth listening to.  But to instantly dismiss her and her message because of the delivery?  I really don't understand that.  To me, it's not about whether SHE deserves to have her argument heard, but rather that my child and I DESERVE to have ALL the information necessary to make the best choice possible.  

 

Queen of Thorns likes this.
jenniferlynne is offline  
#75 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 03:43 PM
 
stellabluz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California
Posts: 357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Does this seriously happen here? My the poster or the mods? That seems really bad.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeminijad View Post

 

 

I do realize that this may get be disciplined or what have you, but open your eyes, ladies. They ain't all bad. The reason the post initially referenced is upsetting is because it is very, very true. How many completely unsuitable homebirth candidates are choosing to put their trust, and their babies' lives, into the hands of lay practitioners that have no professional accountability? How many posts start exactly like that? Sometimes, they end up with a dead baby... but that quickly gets sanitized, here at MDC. For every homebirth death that remains here, there was another removed.

 



 

stellabluz is offline  
#76 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 05:26 PM
 
sosurreal09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 3,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


I call BULL! I have definitely read stories on here from babies dying, hospital and home birth losses, THERE IS EVEN A FORUM FOR GRIEVING THE LOSS. I have even read a few about the MW or OB screwing up and legal action being taken...Some time ago they did not have that forum and people didn't really talk about it here and I'm not 100% sure if any members birth stories were deleted before.

 

There was even a thread about bad home birth experiences, not long ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stellabluz View Post

Does this seriously happen here? My the poster or the mods? That seems really bad.
 



 


I find it interesting that everyone is so concerned with the home birth death rate when the (99%?hospital) maternal death rate is ridiculous for this nice and developed country. We are number 41 on the ranking of countries....THAT IS BAD. http://www.seattlepi.com/national/article/U-S-ranks-41st-in-maternal-mortality-1252472.php

 


 Young born-again mama and loving wife peace.gif to DH jammin.gif and SAHP to two crazy girls dust.gifwehomebirth.jpgfly-by-nursing2.gifslinggirl.giffamilybed1.gif and believe gd.giflactivist.gif  signcirc1.gif !

sosurreal09 is offline  
#77 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 06:44 PM
 
womenswisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: in my skin
Posts: 939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Regarding the discussion about delivery dates and timing, I came across this interesting site: http://peltiertech.com/Excel/Commentary/BirthsByDayOfYear.html. It does not specifically address cesareans, but is an interesting jumping-off point when considering that inductions (which I think we can all agree are the reason for the higher weekday birth rates) are more likely to end in cesarean.

Fledgling midwife on hiatus, Wife to B, mama to C (c/s ribboncesarean.gif 12/04) and S hbac.gif (12/07), angel3.gif m/c (3/12) and expecting another bean 6/13 stork-suprise.gif.

womenswisdom is offline  
#78 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 10:44 PM
 
coocoocachoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by sosurreal09 View Post


I find it interesting that everyone is so concerned with the home birth death rate when the (99%?hospital) maternal death rate is ridiculous for this nice and developed country. We are number 41 on the ranking of countries....THAT IS BAD. http://www.seattlepi.com/national/article/U-S-ranks-41st-in-maternal-mortality-1252472.php

 

What is bad is the fact that there are a lot of factors playing into that number:  How each country records maternal deaths (did the mother die DURING childbirth or a few days after?  If she dies a week later from an infection, it may count as a maternal death here where it would be considered unrelated elsewhere).  Over what period of time have these numbers been gathered?   What the reasons for death are.  The article gives a nice summary of some reasons, it looks like the top reason is preeclampsia.  OK, so preeclampsia is serious stuff.  There are more cases of preeclampsia in the United States than there are in (it looks like the article is trying to say...) any other developed nation.     The number one risk factor for preeclampsia is also something the US is number one at:  obesity.  More obese women getting pregnant=more preeclampsia=more maternal death.  This has little to do with the hospitals, though it is frustrating that it seems like not much can be done for these women even in 2011.

 

Regarding the below post, I have seen Business of Being Born.  It's awfully melodramatic in my opinion, and tries to be taken seriously by tugging on the emotions of pregnant women.  What makes a talk show host a credible source of information?  This is what really gets me...Ricki Lake is seen as credible because she's all 'kumbaya' as she is spewing distorted truths and flat-out lies.  But Dr Amy is (ok, WAS) a medical professional, proves her points with facts and science,  but since she's a bitch she CAN'T be credible!  To touch on the part about doctors being "afraid of legal issues" argument:  Would you not be afraid of legal issues if you had the means to save a baby's life and didn't; just for the sake of giving a mother 'the birth experience she wanted? 
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by sosurreal09 View Post

Well I'm not going to spend hours researching it b/c I have a 2 y/o at home with me maybe someone else has something. I have heard it often though and it was the the documentary "The business of being born". A quick google showed a lot of articles that support the whole "afraid of legal issues" argument though. Here is one I liked http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/health/24birth.html

 

 

 

Queen of Thorns likes this.
coocoocachoo is offline  
#79 of 128 Old 09-16-2011, 10:45 PM
 
starrlamia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 536
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Because giving her my attention lends her credibility, and giving her credibility is giving all of her tirades and nonesense credibility. She brings up issues that people should be aware of, but she also presents biased facts and a degrading attitude toward people who disagree with her. I can attain the same information in other places that actually respect people and their opinions, so why would I go to her? I can make the best choice possible for me and any children I would be conceiving by researching those who actually seem to care about the whole thing rather then caring about arguing and bullying people.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jenniferlynne View Post




 

See, I really don't understand this attitude.  She doesn't deserve to have her argument heard?  I don't get that.  If someone is presenting FACTS, as you said, (and I'm not speaking specifically of Dr. Amy, here, but more generally; I know lots of people take issue with what she's stating.  Let's say information, maybe?) that could affect the wellbeing of me and my child, then I will listen regardless of tone. And if I have doubts about this person's credibility, then I will investigate it until I've determined whether she's worth listening to.  But to instantly dismiss her and her message because of the delivery?  I really don't understand that.  To me, it's not about whether SHE deserves to have her argument heard, but rather that my child and I DESERVE to have ALL the information necessary to make the best choice possible.  

 



 


Aspiring Midwife applying to University for fall 2011!
starrlamia is offline  
#80 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 12:45 AM
 
jenniferlynne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by starrlamia View Post

Because giving her my attention lends her credibility, and giving her credibility is giving all of her tirades and nonesense credibility. She brings up issues that people should be aware of, but she also presents biased facts and a degrading attitude toward people who disagree with her. I can attain the same information in other places that actually respect people and their opinions, so why would I go to her? I can make the best choice possible for me and any children I would be conceiving by researching those who actually seem to care about the whole thing rather then caring about arguing and bullying people.

 



 


Nope, I still don't get it.  How does reading her site with a critical eye lend her credibility?  That makes no sense to me at all.  Believe me, I don't care in the least if you read her site or not, and I understand taking offense at her tone, I just don't understand the instant dismissal of what she says as "nonsense" because you don't like the way she says it.  Whatever, we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

jenniferlynne is offline  
#81 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 09:43 AM
 
seafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jenniferlynne View Post




Nope, I still don't get it.  How does reading her site with a critical eye lend her credibility?  That makes no sense to me at all.  Believe me, I don't care in the least if you read her site or not, and I understand taking offense at her tone, I just don't understand the instant dismissal of what she says as "nonsense" because you don't like the way she says it.  Whatever, we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 


well, it would be one thing if she was posting results of her own research. Its not like you can't get the data somewhere else, no? so getting it from someone who presents it without their personal opinion and without inflammatory language might be more pleasant, and easier to actually see what is data compared to opinion.

ETA: Its also difficult to communicate in a comment area on a blog rather than a forum, at least for me. Its super slow, comments kept showing up out of order, no quoting possible, and the box to write in is only a few lines, so editing isn't easy unless its super short.

mom to z (June 2009) and m (may 2011)

seafox is offline  
#82 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 10:36 AM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,050
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by SympatheticDad View Post


And this is where we can see the fundamental misunderstanding in action.

 

Mothers do not need intervention ... except when they do.


Babies can be born without problems ... except when they can't.

 

An OB's primary job is not to respond to emergencies, although they do that too.  An OB's primary job is to prevent the emergency from developing in the first place.  That's worth saying again:  Obstrectic medicine is primarily preventive in nature.  The reason OB's engage in so many (so-called) "unnecessary" interventions is because, ideally, they're intervening before an emergency develops.  So instead of waiting until your baby has been suffocating for an extended period of time, they respond to changes in fetal monitoring that indicate that a problem may be developing.  After the fact, it's easy to look back and say "Well, that was unnecessary, because nothing bad happened," but that's not how one properly uses statistical analysis.  You don't claim that wearing your seat belt was unnecessary just because on a given car trip you didn't crash.

 

I find this line of reasoning preposterous at best and dangerous at worst.

 

As a parent, my primary job is to keep my children out of harm’s way.  Parenting is primarily preventive in nature, so I’ll go ahead and make my children wear helmets at all times (you never know when a head injury could occur), eat only at home (you never know when a disgruntled employee could spit in their food and spread an infectious disease), lock them inside (to shield them from such outdoor dangers as pedophiles and West Nile virus), lock them outside (less chance of dying from household fire or suffering from indoor contaminants), and above all, avoid letting them ride in the car, which poses a 1 in 6500 chance of certain death.

 

To use a more fitting analogy, I could take the preventive approach of surgically removing both of my breasts and uterus.  Such interventions, after all, literally cut out the risk of cancers targeting those areas. 

 

There’s prevention, and then there’s overkill.  And even the world's most well-reputed, independent researchers know what constitutes overkill.

 

As to your fetal monitoring example, ideally doctors and hospitals would ditch the anti-evidence EFM for low-risk women and employ intermittent auscultation.  But AT LEAST they could respond to that eyebrow-raising reading with back-up confirmation by auscultation before wheeling a woman in to get her belly sliced open.  (Struck through until I can find the source). 

 

Sympathic dad, perhaps you would be *more* sympathetic if you would consider the plight of women forced to lie down to give birth (when other positions may help turn a baby, speed labor, or at very least feel more comfortable),  forced to have painful labor augmenting drugs for no medical reason other than “failure to progress,” forced to fast or eat the almighty ice chips when they actually need caloric intake to what could be their most athletic endeavor.  You say that you can refuse an intervention.  It's not that simple.  Unaware of their legal and fundamental rights, most women sign hospital consent forms, while in the throes of labor, that give hospital staff carte blanche to intervene whenever and however they wish.  And as a guy, you're never going to know what it's like to be in transition.  It's a whole new world in which you can barely utter the one-syllable, four-letter words that are on your mind....let alone argue with a doctor about a pending intervention.   

 

Finally, your argument begs the question; it rests on the underlying assumption that OB's always know what they're doing.  That would be nice.  If only it were true. 

 

 


In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#83 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 11:29 AM
 
kathrineg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

 

 

Quote:

As to your fetal monitoring example, ideally doctors and hospitals would ditch the anti-evidence EFM for low-risk women and employ intermittent auscultation.  But AT LEAST they could respond to that eyebrow-raising reading with back-up confirmation by auscultation before wheeling a woman in to get her belly sliced open. 

 

I don't want to argue about individual interventions, but EFM tells you the heart rate of the baby, and how it responds to contractions.

 

I don't see what information would be added by listening to the heart rate of the baby with a different instrument. At that point you already know what the heart rate is, not just in that moment, but over a long period of time.

 

 

kathrineg is offline  
#84 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 11:39 AM
 
IwannaBanRN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Belgrade, MT
Posts: 2,354
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by kathrineg View Post

 

 

 

I don't want to argue about individual interventions, but EFM tells you the heart rate of the baby, and how it responds to contractions.

 

I don't see what information would be added by listening to the heart rate of the baby with a different instrument. At that point you already know what the heart rate is, not just in that moment, but over a long period of time.

 

 


EFM, in most cases also restricts mom to bed, on her back, which makes labor even more painful and more likely to get an epidural when she didn't want one in the first place. In low risk women that are not being induced, there is no need for the monitors. A fetal doppler or fetoscope is much more appropriate for mother's NATURAL pain management.
 

 

sosurreal09 likes this.
IwannaBanRN is offline  
#85 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 12:02 PM
 
sosurreal09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 3,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


For the record I did say in my first post 'Can you blame them?" (the OB's about the legal issues)

 

The reality is that we have too much intervention in this country. 1 out of 3 women do not need c-sections. That is major surgery that very much increases risks and death. I can't imagine anyone who really understands c-sections as being major surgery saying it does not increase maternal death risks. A lot of women/babies in the US die after they get home from the hospital, are they recorded and counted in this? IDK I didn't do the research.

 

Dr. Amy writes a lot of BS articles that just make fun of home birthers and birth advocates. She certainly doesn't use any science in that...

Quote:
Originally Posted by coocoocachoo View Post



What is bad is the fact that there are a lot of factors playing into that number:  How each country records maternal deaths (did the mother die DURING childbirth or a few days after?  If she dies a week later from an infection, it may count as a maternal death here where it would be considered unrelated elsewhere).  Over what period of time have these numbers been gathered?   What the reasons for death are.  The article gives a nice summary of some reasons, it looks like the top reason is preeclampsia.  OK, so preeclampsia is serious stuff.  There are more cases of preeclampsia in the United States than there are in (it looks like the article is trying to say...) any other developed nation.     The number one risk factor for preeclampsia is also something the US is number one at:  obesity.  More obese women getting pregnant=more preeclampsia=more maternal death.  This has little to do with the hospitals, though it is frustrating that it seems like not much can be done for these women even in 2011.

 

Regarding the below post, I have seen Business of Being Born.  It's awfully melodramatic in my opinion, and tries to be taken seriously by tugging on the emotions of pregnant women.  What makes a talk show host a credible source of information?  This is what really gets me...Ricki Lake is seen as credible because she's all 'kumbaya' as she is spewing distorted truths and flat-out lies.  But Dr Amy is (ok, WAS) a medical professional, proves her points with facts and science,  but since she's a bitch she CAN'T be credible!  To touch on the part about doctors being "afraid of legal issues" argument:  Would you not be afraid of legal issues if you had the means to save a baby's life and didn't; just for the sake of giving a mother 'the birth experience she wanted? 
 

Quote:



 

IwannaBanRN likes this.

 Young born-again mama and loving wife peace.gif to DH jammin.gif and SAHP to two crazy girls dust.gifwehomebirth.jpgfly-by-nursing2.gifslinggirl.giffamilybed1.gif and believe gd.giflactivist.gif  signcirc1.gif !

sosurreal09 is offline  
#86 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 12:05 PM
 
kathrineg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Again, I don't want to argue for or against continuous EFM (especially because I don't support continuous EFM nor do my OB or the hospital where I will be giving birth).

 

My point is that ascultation is not more accurate than EFM--it's essentially the same thing (measuring the baby's heart rate) with a different tool. You would get the exact same information, the baby's heart rate. 

 

If you physically held the heart rate monitor on the mother's stomach it would be exactly like using a doppler, except that instead of just listening, you'd  also have a computer helping you calculate the heart rate at any given moment and recording that heart rate.

 

If you didn't trust the computer to do the calculations, you could listen to the heart rate with the fetal monitor in the same way you would use a doppler--when I've been hooked up to it I ask them to leave the sound on and I listen to his heartbeat the entire time. 

 

ETA: Just to be clear--I'm talking about the idea that doctors should use a doppler or stethoscope to "confirm" the readings of an EFM before a c-section.

kathrineg is offline  
#87 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 01:05 PM
 
stellabluz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California
Posts: 357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jenniferlynne View Post




Nope, I still don't get it.  How does reading her site with a critical eye lend her credibility?  That makes no sense to me at all.  Believe me, I don't care in the least if you read her site or not, and I understand taking offense at her tone, I just don't understand the instant dismissal of what she says as "nonsense" because you don't like the way she says it.  Whatever, we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

I think it kinda comes down to the fact that it is not how she is saying it or who she is, but the truth that the issues she is making a mockery of are serious and real and they are real from a home birth perspective and from a hospital one. She, or you or I or a credible/non credible MW could have written a very similar, mainstream fill in the blanks about an ob/hospital pregnancy and birth experience with just as sad and true outcomes. All this goes both ways. And the fringe folk are always gonna get poked and made fun of by those type of personalities that are flooding our media and power-places. And when people really take a critical eye to the statistics and facts made up LARGELY by our hospital/ob/birth perspective, one can clearly see where danger/damage/abuse and trauma start from. The bully-ing and mocking of us on the mdc by this woman is just another way to push apart the relationship and connection between people. Furthering the goal and need for co-commitment to OVERALL better safety and healthier outcomes for women and babies in this country by birth "professionals".
 

 

stellabluz is offline  
#88 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 01:10 PM
 
coocoocachoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Cite?  Any evidence I have seen that points to c-sections increasing death rates haven't been very credible.  Correlation is not causation.  Why are you so passionate about something that you won't even bother doing any further research on? Where are all these women dying at home after c-sections? It makes no sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sosurreal09 View Post


For the record I did say in my first post 'Can you blame them?" (the OB's about the legal issues)

 

The reality is that we have too much intervention in this country. 1 out of 3 women do not need c-sections. That is major surgery that very much increases risks and death.

 



 

coocoocachoo is offline  
#89 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 01:17 PM
 
starrlamia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 536
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


gives her page views, more page views= people thinking she deserves it, etc. We may have to agree to disagree on this one :P


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jenniferlynne View Post




Nope, I still don't get it.  How does reading her site with a critical eye lend her credibility?  That makes no sense to me at all.  Believe me, I don't care in the least if you read her site or not, and I understand taking offense at her tone, I just don't understand the instant dismissal of what she says as "nonsense" because you don't like the way she says it.  Whatever, we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 



 


Aspiring Midwife applying to University for fall 2011!
starrlamia is offline  
#90 of 128 Old 09-17-2011, 01:58 PM
 
Imakcerka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
I think we should just stop arguing this. We all should be fine with Amy's critical eye. She has every right to take our beliefs and stomp all over them. Hey it gets her page views. We can all agree quite a few people will not learn from her type of "teaching". So... she's obviously not trying to actually reach anyone who may have a differing view. However if her intent is to actually reach anyone other than other snarky women who just love to bash others and may need a place to fit... then she's failing.

meh... I'm done caring about her lets start a new thread that highlights the good and bad of home births and hospital births. Without AMY.
Imakcerka is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off