The Skeptical OB - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 05:27 AM
 
BroodyWoodsgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by nikkijames View Post

But honestly, your posts come across anti-homebirth. Not everyone would choose homebirth in every circumstance. Personally, I would not feel comfortable having a twin or breech delivery at home. I do agree with you that the stats that say homebirth is safe do not include twin or breech deliveries so it's really not proven to be safe in those circumstances. 

 

However, if you want to say The Skeptical OB is correct (which is what the OP is about) then that's where we disagree. Homebirth has been demonstrated to be a safe option for most women. Most women are in fact low risk. Most women are expecting one baby, and only 4% of babies are in breech presentation....

 

 

^Basically this (save for the fact that nikkijames and I have a different feeling about birthing twin or breech at home).

 

The posts DID come across as anti-homebirth....which is fine, if somebody feels that way they feel that way. But I can only tolerate (personally) a couple of pages of that on a thread in the homebirth forum. By the time I get around to page six or so and we've veered completely off topic and are discussing whether or not there are risks associated with getting epidurals and I'm being called a "NBC type" and the research that I have accepted as correct (that I have based some pretty important decisions on) is being smugly dismissed as trash...well, I get a little testy, sorry.

 

You're not showing me anything new, Mambera...you're citing old research...either, imagining that I haven't read it (which insults me) or that I did read it and, what? I'm an idiot for not believing it? What? You know many of us here believe very strongly that the chemical cocktails and workings of hospital procedure (and the environment itself) lead to intervention after intervention and, in many cases, to c/s....30-60% of the time, to be precise, depending upon what hospital you're lucky enough to live close to and what demographic you happen to fall into.

 

Homebirth, believe it or not, is not always the easiest choice. Many women here have to sacrifice, pay out of pocket, endure ridicule from family and strangers alike, etc to have a homebirth....and they don't do it because they are "Thrill Junkies". They do it, because they research and study and come to the conclusion that it is the place for them for safety, spiritual or any number of other reasons. To come here and casually dismiss those choices as being based on false evidence and trash research while citing studies (which, thanks Mambera, many of us here have definitely also read - and dismissed - you're not some super genius, stunning us with crazy research we've never bothered to look for) that many, if not most, in the NBC view as flawed, is silly and insulting.

 

Whatever the reason, it's a legal, valid choice. Not only that, but a person has a right to hang out in the forum that has been designed for positive and supportive exploration and discussion of the choices they've made and enjoy some peace. Discussion of the blog posted at the beginning of this thread is fine....but six pages of the same few people coming back over and over again with "yeah, it's actually not safe" and "yeah there's no such thing as the cascade of intervention" and basically continuously and smugly dismissing many of the arguments which serve as the basic underpinnings of a series of pretty serious decisions that mamas here are making, is not fair. I don't go over to the c/section forum and cite research that IMO proves that for many women VBAC is a safer option than repeat c/section.....while also casually citing research that underscores the major and minor risks associated with c/s for mama and baby. Why would I do that? Right? It's just stupid and disrespectful, right? Yes, right.

 

Mambera, I don't have a damn thing to post for you. I'm not going to waste a single moment of my time digging around in my computer files for research to cite or prove anything to you. I don't need to do that. You've most likely read a lot of what I've read (and agreed with) and have dismissed it as silly. I've read at least some of what you've read (I'm not going to try and guess at how much, as I couldn't begin to try and determine how much of your research may have been done on such awesome sites as the one posted at the beginning of this thread) and I don't generally agree with most of it. If it is your belief that breech HB is inherently unsafe and that twins must always be "delivered" at hospitals, I can promise you we're agreeing with different research. I didn't ask for your studies, don't personally care for the Cochrane studies you cited and think they are flawed for several reasons. An article from the New England Journal of medicine is really not very impressive to me, either...I would have to find and open up the specific article you mentioned to see if it is one I have read.....but a lot of what is published in journals and what is held as "generally agreed upon fact" in the medical community gives me the creeps for how completely unscientific and idiotic it is. In fact, most of the ways in which the modern western medical community approaches health, healing and natural life events such as death and birth absolutely shock and disgust me. I can think of a number of times, right here on MDC, where articles exposing the fraudulent and extremely suspicious nature of funding for major studies in the areas of birth and newborn health/care have been posted. I can even think of a couple of times (mainly to do with vaccines) that whole articles touting the safety and efficacy of a certain medicine, in "peer reviewed" medical journals, have been exposed as being written entirely by the companies that manufacture the drugs in the article.

 

I'm not saying doctors are always wrong, I'm not saying the journals don't hold information worth reading...I'm saying don't come here and throw around studies we've already read and expect that just because they are "highly regarded" in the medical community means that the flaws in them are not apparent to some of us on the other side of the discussion or that we'll all feel compelled to accept the validity of said research/articles because they are published by nationally recognized institutions.

 

The reasons I HB go so far beyond "cascade of intervention" and "miniscule elevation in risk" type conversations. The same goes for non-vaxxing, non-circ'ing and even homeschooling, etc. These are not just political decisions, based on the trend of the year. My mother gave birth to four children naturally. Her mother, two. HER mother, many more than my mother, her mother and ME combined. These choices I make, are based on research, yes, and much of it.......but they are as deep as my soul. These are spiritual decisions for me. Very deeply spiritual decisions.

 

So your tone, demeanor and insulting insinuations are just a bit much for me. I've done my research. It's not research you agree with. The forum I'm in is pretty supportive of and in alignment with my belief system. There is a forum on these boards about which you could say the same. Hint, you're not currently posting in it.

 

Unsubbing from this thread. Way too hormonal for this kind of thing right now. Sorry.

 

 

 


 

 


Me and DH ...lovin' DD dust.gif(6/08) and DS kid.gif(11/09) Plus NEW BABY!! DD baby.gif (UC-5/12) We heartbeat.gif Water Birth/Homebirth/No Vax or Circ/BF/BW/Country Livin'! chicken3.gif

BroodyWoodsgal is offline  
#122 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 05:52 AM
 
Niniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

just speaking from personal experience here but 

 

first labour - in hospital, epidural, cascade of interventions, real difficulty establishing breastfeeding with a drugged up baby, severe postpartum depression, back ache, headaches etc

 

2nd & 3rd labours - at home, no pain relief (apart from a novacane shot while I was getting a 2nd degree tear stitched), absolutely no complications, problems or on-going difficulties what-so-ever. 

 

And I just read some interesting statistics about birth here in the UK this morning. 60% of a normal birth in an obstetric unit, 76% of a normal birth in a midwife unit attached to a OB unit, 83% in a freestanding midwife unit and 90% at home and the chance of harm to a baby born at home? Under 1%. 

 

I know what I'm choosing for this baby. 

 

and just to add the 2nd degree tear was a breeze compared to the epi first time round


me(33), DH (35), SAHM to DD (Jan '02), DS (Sept '08) DD2 (Nov '09) DD3 (June '12) (, mostly    MC Jan '09, Sept '11, ectopic Dec '13   due 10/09/14
Niniel is offline  
#123 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 07:09 AM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,035
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzbuzz View Post

 

Unrelieved pain in labor also comes with risks -- increased risk of PPD and PTSD and chronic pain issues, etc.


Evidence, please?

 

 

 


In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#124 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 07:11 AM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,035
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)

I’m starting to shy away from these Mommy War threads because they’ve become about as futile as discussing abortion—hackneyed arguments, mudslinging and judgment-hurling, etc.  We have the aforementioned blogger to thank for fanning these flames, by the way, but we’ve obviously gotten off-topic from that. 

 

 Despite my personal frustrations, I did want to clarify a couple of matters.  Here is what Cochrane has to say about the risks of epidurals:  http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD000331/epidurals-for-pain-relief-in-labour

 

I opted for natural childbirth not because I’m some hippy dippy with something to prove, but because A) my babies are OP (and yes, my midwives handled them quite well, thank you) and freedom of movement is essential for me (http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD002006/position-in-the-second-stage-of-labour-for-women-without-epidural-anaesthesia ) and B) with my blood pressure dipping down as low as 80/50 during pregnancy, I really didn’t care to have it go any lower with the anesthesia. 

 

With that in mind......if I promised everybody that women who choose natural childbirth do so for diverse reasons and do NOT belong to some grand monolith with a secret handshake, (e.g. “NCB types,” “NCB community”), could we ick-snay on the ereotypes-stay?  Ease-play??

Youngfrankenstein likes this.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#125 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 07:15 AM
 
nikkijames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Washington State
Posts: 22
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

yeah, even the medical community and the world health organization agrees the c-section rate is appalling. If the cascade of interventions has no bearing, do you really think over 30% of American women require a c-section?? 

 

Sorry, but if that were true humanity would have died out long ago.


Melissa, momma to Hunter 8 , Julianna 7, Harley 23 months,  and breastfeeding, babywearing and bedsharing with my Dylan, born 1/18/2011.

intactivist.gifslingboy.giflactivist.gif

nikkijames is offline  
#126 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 07:27 AM
 
GuildJenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,517
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Niniel View Post

just speaking from personal experience here but 

 

first labour - in hospital, epidural, cascade of interventions, real difficulty establishing breastfeeding with a drugged up baby, severe postpartum depression, back ache, headaches etc

 

2nd & 3rd labours - at home, no pain relief (apart from a novacane shot while I was getting a 2nd degree tear stitched), absolutely no complications, problems or on-going difficulties what-so-ever. 

 

And I just read some interesting statistics about birth here in the UK this morning. 60% of a normal birth in an obstetric unit, 76% of a normal birth in a midwife unit attached to a OB unit, 83% in a freestanding midwife unit and 90% at home and the chance of harm to a baby born at home? Under 1%. 

 

I know what I'm choosing for this baby. 

 

and just to add the 2nd degree tear was a breeze compared to the epi first time round


This is what I found heartbreaking in this thread. How you just write that off, and yet the "risk" of an epidural - oh no, a headache - is somehow comparable. Also - just say no to the epidural if that's your main concern, honestly. Epidurals are not synonymous with hospital delivery.

 

When women who have been in that 1% - although the poster in this thread wasn't; her child survived, but with significant damage - no one listens. There's a lot of FEAR that somehow that truth - things happen - will put people off homebirthing and so everyone starts armchair quarterbacking, where ridiculous statements like an OP baby always leads to a c-section are left hanging. Also the idea that as soon as you walk into a hospital you will be slapped with a cascade of intervention.

 

I have given birth in hospital 3 times. The first was tragic. The middle one was a breeze. The last one was really painful and hard and I am dealing with some residual issues like stool incontinence may develop (trust me I'm doing my Kegels).

 

I was supported in all my choices. The last time I didn't get so much as a Tylenol until after delivery - and my baby was OP. (Hence the issues.)

 

Just as homebirth is not a guarantee of death, hospital birth is not a guarantee of whatever horrible intervention.  I have always been respected in hospital, as well as my choices. However, in my first delivery my baby's health was not respected by a nurse who was "helping avoid a c-section" (something I bought into) and my baby died. After 4 days of a very very tough life.

 

Under 1% sounds small until it's your baby. I realize those of us who have been through it are just never going to convince women of how it feels to be the 1:100 or 1:1,000 or 1:10,000. I support the right of women to choose but I do not support the way the homebirth community continues to slap this kind of statistic around as if it's nothing, or as if hospital rates are comparable (they are not in almost every study) or as if when you make decisions to redefine breech and twin deliveries as low-risk you are not increasing the risk of poor outcomes. Have a look at Oregon homebirth stats and tell me you are ready to put your most precious child at risk in that state.

 

I wish homebirth advocates would stop being so hysterical about the risks of interventions and so. dismissive. about babies' lives. Putting the risk of a headache up against a child permanently brain damaged is just - unspeakable to me.


~ Mum to Emily, March 12-16 2004, Noah, born Aug 2005, Liam, born January 2011, and wife to Carl since 1994. ~
GuildJenn is offline  
#127 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 07:52 AM
 
starrlamia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 533
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

homebirth and hospital rates are very similar with no statistical difference except in very few studies (like the wax review) which were done improperly and skewed the statistic in their favour.For low risk women, babies do not die more at home and the morbidity rates are not higher either.

 

I do agree with you in point though, most people who are very pro or anti homebirth like to throw random statistics around without actually having done any research or having anything more then superficial knowledge (reading birth books is good... but it doesnt compare to studying midwifery or obstetrics etc).

 

Oh and if you want to know more about PTSD and birth trauma, I just did a paper on it, so ask away.


Aspiring Midwife applying to University for fall 2011!
starrlamia is offline  
#128 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 08:25 AM
 
Niniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I'm just talking about my personal experience, and I won't home birth no matter what, assuming that I have a straight forward pregnancy it will be my plan, and if there are any signs of trouble in labour I will transfer (luckily the hospital is less than 5 minutes from my house). I will have two highly trained and experienced midwives with me (probably better care than I'd get in the hospital where the midwives will be responsible for other women and would leave me alone from time to time) and there will be an ambulance on stand by to transfer me to the hospital if there are any problems, but then there is an excellent home birth set up here in the UK. 

 

I would never put my child at risk for the sake of a birth "experience" but I do believe the experience is important too, not as important as the baby, but important nonetheless. 

Youngfrankenstein likes this.

me(33), DH (35), SAHM to DD (Jan '02), DS (Sept '08) DD2 (Nov '09) DD3 (June '12) (, mostly    MC Jan '09, Sept '11, ectopic Dec '13   due 10/09/14
Niniel is offline  
#129 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 08:26 AM
 
GuildJenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,517
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by starrlamia View Post

homebirth and hospital rates are very similar with no statistical difference except in very few studies (like the wax review) which were done improperly and skewed the statistic in their favour.For low risk women, babies do not die more at home and the morbidity rates are not higher either.

 

I do agree with you in point though, most people who are very pro or anti homebirth like to throw random statistics around without actually having done any research or having anything more then superficial knowledge (reading birth books is good... but it doesnt compare to studying midwifery or obstetrics etc).

 

Oh and if you want to know more about PTSD and birth trauma, I just did a paper on it, so ask away.


That's not true, except in B.C. Homebirth advocates like to skew their numbers, but it doesn't change that it's been pretty consistent. Even on this board the deaths (erased, in previous moderation) have been pretty horrific.

 

I don't need a lecture on PTSD thanks.

 

DoubleDouble likes this.

~ Mum to Emily, March 12-16 2004, Noah, born Aug 2005, Liam, born January 2011, and wife to Carl since 1994. ~
GuildJenn is offline  
#130 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 12:37 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 25,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by GuildJenn View Post

 


I wish homebirth advocates would stop being so hysterical about the risks of interventions and so. dismissive. about babies' lives.



Soem homebirth advocates (me, for instance) are coming from a very different place. I believe there's a strong probability that, without the interventions I'm so "hysterical" about, my son would have actually lived. The research on homebirth vs. hospital birth doesn't factor in the interventions in previous pregnancies, yk?

 

And, while I agree that it can't be compared to a baby's life, throwing out "what, a headache?", as though it's something that can be completely eliminated by popping a Tylenol, is also dismissive. I know a woman who spent 2 full days wishing she were dead, from a spinal headache. She couldn't eat, could barely drink water, was unable to stand up, or even sit up, for most of that time. She couldn't stand to have anyone talk to her, and if they had to, they whispered. She couldn't stand the light from an open window. She basically stayed in bed, doing nothing, in excruciating agony, for 2 days. And...she had no way to know how long it would last. It's not the same as a dead baby - but it's far from "just a headache".

 

I'm a homebirth advocate, because if I could go back to my 24 year old self, I'd say, "run, don't walk, to an underground midwife". (Midwifery wasn't legal here at all when I had my first, so an underground midwife would have been my only alternative to a doctor.)


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#131 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 01:49 PM
 
DoubleDouble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

And, while I agree that it can't be compared to a baby's life, throwing out "what, a headache?", as though it's something that can be completely eliminated by popping a Tylenol, is also dismissive. I know a woman who spent 2 full days wishing she were dead, from a spinal headache. She couldn't eat, could barely drink water, was unable to stand up, or even sit up, for most of that time. She couldn't stand to have anyone talk to her, and if they had to, they whispered. She couldn't stand the light from an open window. She basically stayed in bed, doing nothing, in excruciating agony, for 2 days. And...she had no way to know how long it would last.

 

I don't want to barge into this thread disrespectfully, but what you describe is what I would call "oh yeah, another one - there I go again". I have those "headaches" pretty often. I've had them for... "decades" sounds too grand, but that's what it is.

 

I wouldn't wish them on anyone, but... we all have different perspectives.

DoubleDouble is offline  
#132 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 02:30 PM
 
mambera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

Whoa. I'm just posting a quick general disclaimer to say that the hormonal (her word) screed above by Averysmomma imagines that I hold a lot of positions that I don't hold at all (anti-homebirth, unilateral support for standard hospital birthing procedures and whatever else).  Just bc I think the NCB community has wrongly targeted the epidural doesn't tell you much about my other opinions.  Anyways.

 

 

Also, as I read the Wax analysis, I actually think it is telling us something important, which is that homebirth *in the US* is less safe than elsewhere.  Wax did include one large study (Pang) which was very poorly done and shouldn't be taken into consideration.  But they also had a number of (albeit smaller) other US-based studies which did show increased (though still low) risks for baby with HB.  Compare this with the De Jonge study (also reviewed by Wax), which found absolutely no difference in safety btw home and hospital - in the Netherlands, where HB is a supported choice.  To me this says HB is as safe as hospital (*for low risk women*) *when it is supported by the culture and infrastructure*.  But when there is a culture of mutual antagonism and mistrust between hospital staff and homebirth staff, outcomes suffer. 

 

Btw StormBride and any others who want fulltexts of specific articles discussed, feel free to pm me.


Me, DH, DD1 (5/2009) and DD2 (10/2011).
I'm not crunchy. I'm evidence-based.

Vaccines save lives.

mambera is offline  
#133 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 02:35 PM
 
mambera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post

With that in mind......if I promised everybody that women who choose natural childbirth do so for diverse reasons and do NOT belong to some grand monolith with a secret handshake, (e.g. “NCB types,” “NCB community”), could we ick-snay on the ereotypes-stay?  Ease-play??



hey, sorry about the use of 'types' - I am nakking and typing one-handed, and in trying to be succinct I ended up offensive.  But there is a loose community of NCB-promoting people who do often overplay the epi-leads-to-section thing; if not 'NCB community' what term would you like me to use?

 

Also, in general I don't discuss my own experiences in policy debates bc they are irrelevant, but I see I am being assumed to have no experience with NCB, which isn't true (#1 was intervention-free with midwives in hospital, #2 was UC at home).  The fact that I have no personal experience with epidurals would be a more relevant charge, but noone here seems to be worried about that.


Me, DH, DD1 (5/2009) and DD2 (10/2011).
I'm not crunchy. I'm evidence-based.

Vaccines save lives.

mambera is offline  
#134 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 03:38 PM
 
GuildJenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,517
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post





Soem homebirth advocates (me, for instance) are coming from a very different place. I believe there's a strong probability that, without the interventions I'm so "hysterical" about, my son would have actually lived. The research on homebirth vs. hospital birth doesn't factor in the interventions in previous pregnancies, yk?

 

And, while I agree that it can't be compared to a baby's life, throwing out "what, a headache?", as though it's something that can be completely eliminated by popping a Tylenol, is also dismissive. I know a woman who spent 2 full days wishing she were dead, from a spinal headache. She couldn't eat, could barely drink water, was unable to stand up, or even sit up, for most of that time. She couldn't stand to have anyone talk to her, and if they had to, they whispered. She couldn't stand the light from an open window. She basically stayed in bed, doing nothing, in excruciating agony, for 2 days. And...she had no way to know how long it would last. It's not the same as a dead baby - but it's far from "just a headache".

 

I'm a homebirth advocate, because if I could go back to my 24 year old self, I'd say, "run, don't walk, to an underground midwife". (Midwifery wasn't legal here at all when I had my first, so an underground midwife would have been my only alternative to a doctor.)


Yes and you have a right to your narrative. I might not agree with your conclusions but I have never come into one of your discussions to negate it because it's yours, even if I think it was a tragedy you got so much support for staying home and so little support way earlier in your pregnancy for help, real help, dealing with your very very real trauma so that when it came down to it you could have had a whole web of professionals that you knew waiting for you when/if you did need to transfer, like I did in my third when I went into PTL and delaying even an hour could have resulted in a 23 week preemie. I don't put that just on midwives or hospitals but I do not think it serves WOMEN to downplay risk or continue to behave like any woman should not be prepared to transfer.

I support midwifery, but not when the risks are downplayed and there's no insurance etc. But I get particularly annoyed when someone tells her story and gets poo-pooed. It is not a BAD thing for a pregnant woman to really sit with the possibility of loss or brain damage. Most people will never have to go through it, and good. Listening to people - even Dr. Amy, even stats in areas without good results, is information. If homebirth really is robust then it will stand up to it. If your story is a part of that then good.

I was NOT there and it is your story and really important and you have a right to cone out on the 'side' you do. You do. I would say the same thing if it had been you getting slammed for your story.

~ Mum to Emily, March 12-16 2004, Noah, born Aug 2005, Liam, born January 2011, and wife to Carl since 1994. ~
GuildJenn is offline  
#135 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 04:54 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 25,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by GuildJenn View Post


Yes and you have a right to your narrative. I might not agree with your conclusions but I have never come into one of your discussions to negate it because it's yours, even if I think it was a tragedy you got so much support for staying home and so little support way earlier in your pregnancy for help, real help, dealing with your very very real trauma so that when it came down to it you could have had a whole web of professionals that you knew waiting for you when/if you did need to transfer,
 
What support would that be? If I'd had ANY interest in having a "whole team of professionals" involved in my care, in any way at all, I wouldn't have been doing what I was doing in the first place. My experience with "professionals" at that point - after three pregnancies - is that they are simply not interested in supporting expectant mothers, unless those mothers are doing exactly what they're telling them to do. Support early in my pregnancy wasn't relevant. If we hadn't already decided on the HBA3C attempt, I probably wouldn't have been able to bring myself to ttc again, even though I really wanted another baby. I transferred, deliberately, to a completely different hospital, precisely to ensure that I didn't encounter any professionals that I knew! And, honestly - the professionals at the other end handled it about as well as they would have if they'd known I was coming, imo (not sure how I would have had a "whole web waiting for me" at that time of night, anyway - it would have been the on-call OB, no matter where I went).  The only real reason I went to an OB with dd2 is because that was the only way dh would agree to having another baby. I certainly didn't do it because I thought it was a good idea. And, honestly - the OB I saw for her was the best one I've ever had...and I still wouldn't go back to her, unless I thought I was dying.

I think it's a tragedy that our whole effing culture "supported" me in repeatedly making decisions that were tremendously harmful to me, but somebody took it upon themselves to sic CPS on me when I went the other way. (FWIW, my labour was progressing beautifully...until the CPS worker showed up, freaked me out, and my labour stalled, upon which everything went down the toilet. There's no way to tell if I'd have had Aaron at home without that interference or not, but there's no doubt that it changed the course of my labour.)
 
like I did in my third when I went into PTL and delaying even an hour could have resulted in a 23 week preemie. I don't put that just on midwives or hospitals but I do not think it serves WOMEN to downplay risk or continue to behave like any woman should not be prepared to transfer.
 
I was always prepared to transfer, so I'm not sure what that has to do with my case. My situation ended up being a lot more nebulous than I was expecting, is all.

I support midwifery, but not when the risks are downplayed and there's no insurance etc. But I get particularly annoyed when someone tells her story and gets poo-pooed. It is not a BAD thing for a pregnant woman to really sit with the possibility of loss or brain damage. Most people will never have to go through it, and good. Listening to people - even Dr. Amy, even stats in areas without good results, is information. If homebirth really is robust then it will stand up to it. If your story is a part of that then good.
I was NOT there and it is your story and really important and you have a right to cone out on the 'side' you do. You do. I would say the same thing if it had been you getting slammed for your story.
 
I actually agree with you...but I also understand why the other poster in this thread was being poo-pooed. My heart breaks for her - and they tried to resuscitate Aaron for a long time, and if they'd ultimately been successful, it's a pretty safe bet that he'd have had brain damage, so that's something I've thought about a lot. However, basically posting "my baby has this issue because of homebirth", with no details, isn't really a story. It's a warning, and it doesn't contain any information. The first two women I ever met who had lost babies lost them in hospital births (actually, that's not accurate - one of them died in utero, at about 38.5 weeks, but the mom was getting her prenatal care with a family physician, with OB backup, not a midwife). It wouldn't be information if one of them came here and basically said, "my baby died in the hospital, so I know hospital birth is a big mistake". I mean...the mom we're talking about wasn't even having a homebirth in the first place...

That said...I think many of us post our stories in possibly inappropriate places, because there really aren't very many "appropriate" places to post a birth trauma or infant loss story. They're not usually considered socially acceptable, so they spill out in whatever place they may even remotely fit into. (I think that's also the source of a lot of scare stories that moms tell pregnant women, honestly.)
Oh - and I won't read Dr. Amy, no matter what. She has bits of useful information in her writing, but I find her venom towards the homebirth/NCB movement, and complete lack of introspection about what aspects of obstetrics might be driving women out of hospitals, to be insanely frustrating to wade through. If she were my OB, and I couldn't find another one, I'd probably seriously consider UC, which is way outside my personal comfort zone.


 

Youngfrankenstein likes this.

Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#136 of 192 Old 11-25-2011, 08:40 PM
 
Buzzbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Just to clarify my personal position, since I have been called anti-homebirth above.

 

I have had a homebirth.  However, in light of my sister's very recent, very positive experience with her hospital twin birth and all the research we both did leading up to that birth, I am feeling very unsure about the choices I previously made and the birth choices I will need to make again.  This is the case despite substantial reading before my homebirth (darn selection bias in the books!).

 

Right now I'm feeling a bit like homebirth is the guy I brought home from the bar who in the cold, sober light of day ain't looking or sounding so hot. 

 

So I'm working through those issues and maybe I'll come back around to homebirth again.  Realistically, I think that possibility is becoming more and more remote though.  


I support homebirth that meets the qualifications set forth in the AAP's 2013 policy on homebirth.

Buzzbuzz is offline  
#137 of 192 Old 11-26-2011, 06:37 AM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,035
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by mambera View Post



hey, sorry about the use of 'types' - I am nakking and typing one-handed, and in trying to be succinct I ended up offensive.  But there is a loose community of NCB-promoting people who do often overplay the epi-leads-to-section thing; if not 'NCB community' what term would you like me to use?

 

Also, in general I don't discuss my own experiences in policy debates bc they are irrelevant, but I see I am being assumed to have no experience with NCB, which isn't true (#1 was intervention-free with midwives in hospital, #2 was UC at home).  The fact that I have no personal experience with epidurals would be a more relevant charge, but noone here seems to be worried about that.


My own experiences are irrelevant to home birth policy, but they are relevant to my point that each woman is unique, and generalizations about us "NCB types" are unwarranted. 

 

A replacement term misses the point.  There shouldn't be any term because there shouldn't be any generalizations.  If you take issue with what somebody in this thread has said, please address the individual without dragging every single home-birthing/natural-birthing woman into it.  The "you-NCBers-are-all-alike" mentality does nothing to advance the discussion.

 


In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#138 of 192 Old 11-26-2011, 09:49 AM
 
starrlamia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 533
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

i kind of wonder if epidurals themselves dont neccessarily increase c-section rates, but rather the use of EFM when a woman has had an epidural, it is well documented that EFM increases false rates of fetal distress and leads to more intervention (specifically c-section). Every women I have been with in labour who had an epi also had EFM, I believe its pretty much standard of practice.

 

Thoughts?


Aspiring Midwife applying to University for fall 2011!
starrlamia is offline  
#139 of 192 Old 11-26-2011, 10:55 AM
 
mambera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzbuzz View Post

Just to clarify my personal position, since I have been called anti-homebirth above.

 

I have had a homebirth.  However, in light of my sister's very recent, very positive experience with her hospital twin birth and all the research we both did leading up to that birth, I am feeling very unsure about the choices I previously made and the birth choices I will need to make again.  This is the case despite substantial reading before my homebirth (darn selection bias in the books!).

 

Right now I'm feeling a bit like homebirth is the guy I brought home from the bar who in the cold, sober light of day ain't looking or sounding so hot. 

 

So I'm working through those issues and maybe I'll come back around to homebirth again.  Realistically, I think that possibility is becoming more and more remote though.  

 

I don't think I've heard anyone say this before.  I'm really interested - would you care to say more about your second thoughts on the homebirth?
 

 


Me, DH, DD1 (5/2009) and DD2 (10/2011).
I'm not crunchy. I'm evidence-based.

Vaccines save lives.

mambera is offline  
#140 of 192 Old 11-26-2011, 11:07 AM
 
mambera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by starrlamia View Post

i kind of wonder if epidurals themselves dont neccessarily increase c-section rates, but rather the use of EFM when a woman has had an epidural, it is well documented that EFM increases false rates of fetal distress and leads to more intervention (specifically c-section). Every women I have been with in labour who had an epi also had EFM, I believe its pretty much standard of practice.

 

Thoughts?


Sounds likely to me.  One would have to go back to the cEFM studies to see how they controlled for anesthesia use.  A lot of them were rather old, and may not reflect current practices, though I think there was a  good review in the NEJM within the last six years or so.

 

(I have seen women who did not have epidurals coached to stay in bed so they could stay on the monitor actually - a double anti-EBM whammy.)


Me, DH, DD1 (5/2009) and DD2 (10/2011).
I'm not crunchy. I'm evidence-based.

Vaccines save lives.

mambera is offline  
#141 of 192 Old 11-26-2011, 04:32 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 25,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleDouble View Post

 

I don't want to barge into this thread disrespectfully, but what you describe is what I would call "oh yeah, another one - there I go again". I have those "headaches" pretty often. I've had them for... "decades" sounds too grand, but that's what it is.

 

I wouldn't wish them on anyone, but... we all have different perspectives.



Of course we do, but you must realize that such headaches are not day-to-day life for most people. I have known two other people who get something very similar (cluster headaches), but they do at least know from experience that the pain will end (although I'd imagine the first one is fairly terrifying). This woman had no idea how long it was going to last, or if it was possibly going to be permanent...and had absolutely no idea going in that she was risking headaches at all.


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#142 of 192 Old 11-28-2011, 07:46 AM
 
UnassistedMomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: CNY
Posts: 448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

However, basically posting "my baby has this issue because of homebirth", with no details, isn't really a story. It's a warning, and it doesn't contain any information.


Again, a reminder that the woman who posted that Never. Had. A. Homebirth.  That is important to remember in light of her forum-bombings with her warnings.  She never had a homebirth.

 


dizzy.gif DS1: 10/89 - DD1: 06/94 - DD2: 02/97 - DS2: 12/05 - DS3: 12/08 - DC6: ETA 04/26/12

I'll be 42 when the newest little one is born! Yowza!

 

 

UnassistedMomma is offline  
#143 of 192 Old 11-28-2011, 05:07 PM
 
Buzzbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

But, of course, she had midwifery care versus obstetrical care. 


I support homebirth that meets the qualifications set forth in the AAP's 2013 policy on homebirth.

Buzzbuzz is offline  
#144 of 192 Old 11-28-2011, 06:25 PM
 
UnassistedMomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: CNY
Posts: 448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I just wish she would clarify exactly what the issue was.  Posterior positioning keeps coming up, but then she says it had nothing to do with that.  The whole thing is kind of strange, and very unclear.

 

Midwives, depending on their legal status and certifications can work both in and out of hospitals or homes so the 'not an OB' thing isn't enough on it's own to be the issue.  She said birthcenter... but attached or freestanding?

 

So much that never got clarified. 


dizzy.gif DS1: 10/89 - DD1: 06/94 - DD2: 02/97 - DS2: 12/05 - DS3: 12/08 - DC6: ETA 04/26/12

I'll be 42 when the newest little one is born! Yowza!

 

 

UnassistedMomma is offline  
#145 of 192 Old 11-28-2011, 09:08 PM
 
Buzzbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I don't think its a big mystery -- clearly the baby was oxygen deprived during labor and birth. 

 

So there are a couple likely scenarios where she could feel harmed by midwifery care -- if the midwives missed the fetal distress and should have transferred her much earlier for a c-section, if the midwives did not have proper equipment and/or training to resus. the baby appropriately or if she feels that in a hospital setting superior monitoring (EFM) would have caught the fetal distress in time to avoid harm.

 

 


I support homebirth that meets the qualifications set forth in the AAP's 2013 policy on homebirth.

Buzzbuzz is offline  
#146 of 192 Old 11-29-2011, 04:26 AM
 
Buzzbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

And honestly, I don't blame her for not wanting the whole thing picked over for evidence about how "AHA!  You're wrong, it wasn't the midwifery care you received!" 

 

While I think you need to be prepared for that if you are going into forums like this one to post, she may have not been ready for the reaction she received or prepared to fully discuss the medical side of it.  And I really can't blame her for that.

Jo Mama likes this.

I support homebirth that meets the qualifications set forth in the AAP's 2013 policy on homebirth.

Buzzbuzz is offline  
#147 of 192 Old 11-29-2011, 06:25 AM
 
UnassistedMomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: CNY
Posts: 448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

If she can't or won't say WHY her birth choices were responsible for her son's injury, then she has no business and no right to come into the homebirth forum telling others that homebirth was responsible and that they shouldn't do it.  It's that simple.  This isn't the fearmongering forum, it's the homebirth forum.


dizzy.gif DS1: 10/89 - DD1: 06/94 - DD2: 02/97 - DS2: 12/05 - DS3: 12/08 - DC6: ETA 04/26/12

I'll be 42 when the newest little one is born! Yowza!

 

 

UnassistedMomma is offline  
#148 of 192 Old 11-29-2011, 09:06 AM
 
starrlamia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 533
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I think a lot of people like to jump to conclusions or blame something when birth doesnt go exactly as planned. Without having been there, known the person, known their care provider and see the medical charts none of us can come to any conclusions. It is all speculation.

 

And BTW EFM is not superior monitoring. Numerous studies have shown intermittent monitoring is just as effective as continuous monitoring. In fact EFM increases the risk of false fetal distress and increases use of unneccessary intervention. Using EFM in low risk pregnancies/birth is not evidence based care.

Turquesa likes this.

Aspiring Midwife applying to University for fall 2011!
starrlamia is offline  
#149 of 192 Old 11-29-2011, 10:05 AM
 
Buzzbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Except, of course, here the baby WAS in distress and DID need intervention which the baby did not get.


I support homebirth that meets the qualifications set forth in the AAP's 2013 policy on homebirth.

Buzzbuzz is offline  
#150 of 192 Old 11-29-2011, 10:43 AM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 25,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by starrlamia View Post

I think a lot of people like to jump to conclusions or blame something when birth doesnt go exactly as planned. Without having been there, known the person, known their care provider and see the medical charts none of us can come to any conclusions. It is all speculation.

 

 

I can't speak to the particular case we're discussing here (she may know exactly what happened), but this absolutely true. I've had many people reach all kinds of weird conclusions about why Aaron died, and most of them know nothing about what happened, except that I was attempting a homebirth (most, but not all, know it was a HBA3C) and transferred. Most of them assume that Aaron was in distress when I transferred, or had already died. Both are completely wrong. When he died, the OB didn't know why. The pediatrician didn't know why. The coroner didn't know why. But, there are several people who never so much as saw me or talked to me while I was in labour, who are convinced they know exactly what it was. (I had one woman assume I'd had a uterine rupture, and she was suprised they were "lettting" me go to 40 weeks with dd2.)


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride 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