"he had the cord wrapped around his neck and WOULD HAVE DIED!!" - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 73 Old 01-25-2010, 11:41 PM
 
ScarletBegonias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Perched on the Cheesewheel of Doom
Posts: 2,042
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheshire View Post
But, we also shouldn't leave moms to believe that home births are all rainbows and butterflies.
i'm sorry for your loss.

i want to address this statement, in a general way, not directed toward you, mama.

having a hospital birth does not guarantee a good outcome. we shouldn't lead moms to believe that if they birth in a hospital, all will be well.

either statement is blanket, unfair and untrue.

NO birth is all rainbows and butterflies. anyone thinking this about home birth OR hospital birth is a fool indeed. research bears this out.

despite what americans are led to believe, research shows that mothers who have a PLANNED hospital birth (or an UNPLANNED unattended birth), are more likely to end up with a difficult birth/unnecessary interventions/bad outcome (directly caused by interventions in the case of hospital birth). worldwide statistics and research shows that trained, experienced midwives are more able to deal with possible complications (like nuchal cord), BEFORE they become a complication, and with good outcomes, as compared to their hospital counterparts.

time and again, mothers are told one thing at their baby's birth, and when those same mothers ask for their records, a completely different story is told by the written records. which story is most accurate? in most cases, no one affected by the birth will ever know. this is an important point to bear in mind when comparing personal birth stories and comparing statistics.

eta: fwiw, both of my children had the cord wrapped around their necks at least once, with ds having a true knot that had become "stuck" on a node sticking out of the umbilical cord.
ScarletBegonias is offline  
#32 of 73 Old 01-25-2010, 11:48 PM
 
tygrss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarletBegonias View Post

NO birth is all rainbows and butterflies. anyone thinking this about home birth OR hospital birth is a fool indeed. research bears this out.
This is the key to the entire discussion IMO.

Most babies with nuchal cords are fine, some are not. None of us KNOWS what will happen until it does (sucks, but it's true), so we have to make the best decision for ourselves and OUR families. Fear-mongering on either side is unnecessary, as is down-playing another mother's concerns.

Lytorre, wife to one wonderful man. Mommy to two naturally-birthed, rough-and-tumble little men.

tygrss is offline  
#33 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 12:10 AM
 
~Katie~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 6,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
to the mama's who have experienced losses.

I think the OP is looking for reassurance and support in regards to her questions, it can be a bit unnerving to hear scary stories as a pregnant woman who plans to homebirth. It is my understanding that cords around necks are common, and true emergencies as a result are rare. I'm not a medical professional so I can only pull from my own experience. My DD was born with her cord around her neck, I felt for it after her head was born and my mama instinct kicked in and I knew to loop it off the back of her head. Then I pushed the rest of her out and she gave a good cry and was fine. I think there are many factors that come into play for every labor and their subsequent birth outcome and each woman has her own individual experience.

ribbonyellow.gif Army wife ribbonyellow.gif - Mama to Liam waterbirth.jpg (9/07), Laine uc.jpg (5/09), and Eliza h20homebirth.gif (7/11)

~Katie~ is offline  
#34 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 12:30 AM
 
khaoskat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bandgeek View Post
Babies have oxygen deprivation and brain injuries in the hospital all the time as well. Often times they can't prep for a c-section fast enough. Not one homebirthing mama on this board is "taking a chance" with her child's life any more than a hospital birthing mama is.
Just to back this up...

Miami Valley Hospital in Dayton, Ohio lost a $31+ million lawsuit this past July (2009) on a VBAC gone wrong. The baby was deprived oxygen, has CP, is wheel chair confined and will need skilled assistance 24/7 for the rest of his life. And yes, I have seen this child in person, not just read it on the news. I didn't know what was going on when I was in the Courthouse, but I happened to be walking by the family after one of the kids siblings testified and came out crying. I thought it was a criminal trial of some type, not med mal.
khaoskat is offline  
#35 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 12:37 AM
 
khaoskat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
BTW, Wikie, for once, has a nice article on this issue, with many references for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuchal_cord

Here is one that says single nuchal cord is great for vaginal delivery. Multiple wraps may need more monitoring or earlier intervention. Baby was born with 8 wraps via c/s after 6 hours of labor when it couldn't tolerate it any longer.

Again, along those lines. DD2 had it wrapped 4 times around her neck, and 2 times around her body. She was a textbook reading on the EFM through out my entire labor that I was there. No fetal decels, always passed NST's after finding the wraps with flying colors in about 5-10 minutes. During delivery there was never any indication of fetal distress. I did end up with a c/s, but it was not related to the nuchal cord, it was related to the fact that DD2 turned transverse during delivery and stuck her arm out the birth canal, engaging her shoulder in the pelvis. Even during all this, her fetal heart tones were perfect/text book.

So, that is my experience with a nuchal x6.

I also did research on this issue a while ago, when this happened, and found (but cannot right now) a study showing that there was no difference in waiting for labor on its own vs c/s w/o labor.
khaoskat is offline  
#36 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 12:51 AM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannah32 View Post
I don't think that's true at all. It was very common in previous centuries for women and babies to die in childbirth. Heck, it's common in some countries today. But women in previous centuries tended to attempt more pregnancies, thus ensuring the survival of the human race. Really, I think you're using a bit of a strawman argument there.
Do you have stats on how many babies women used to have? I hear all the time that women used to have these huge families, but I never see anything to back it up. Sure - families of 4, 5, 6 kids used to be a lot more comon, instead of the widespread 1-3 we see these days. But, doubling the number of kids isn't going to result in saving the race from cord accidents, if they happened at the rate OBs claim they happen at. They basically claim that every baby with a nuchal cord would have died without their intervention. It's just not true.

Child spacing is discussed here a lot, and the fact that at least some families in the 18th, 19th and early 20th century had a baby every year or two, and ended up with 10-15 kids, doesn't mean that's the norm throughout human history and pre-history.

Quote:
That doesn't mean that people can't homebirth if they want to, because as it's been said, babies can and do die in the hospital. There are no guarantees, but a modern hospital or a skilled midwife today is probably more adept at handling those emergencies compared to previous centuries.
Do you have any evidence? Personally, I'd rather have my life and my baby's life in the hands of a homebirth midwife than a hospital OB. Antibiotics and blood transfusion save a lot more women and babies than hospital protocols (such as nothing by mouth, routine IV, induction, augmentation, multiple vaginal exams, c-section, etc. etc.) do, imo. The fact that midwives 100, 200, 1000 years ago didn't have access to antibiotics doesn't mean they were any less skilled. It just means they didn't have the same tools.
member234098 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  
#37 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 01:03 AM
 
lunarlady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
When I was laboring at home, my daughter's HR dropped dramatically during pushing. One of my midwifes said "I really need to you to take some slow, deep breaths for baby." And I did. I continued to do so every time she said "deep breaths for baby." Each time, you could hear my DD heartrate jump up. It was amazing. In a hospital, I don't think I would have had that same instruction. Deep breaths might have been c-section, or an oxygen line, or some other intervention. My DD was born with the cord three times around her neck. The midwifes said it was like a Circue de Solei birth because I pushed her out so hard that she flipped coming out, the cord caught, and she twirled down to the bed. She was absolutly fine and continues to be so to this day.

While I do feel hospital birth is very safe for most women, I also know that it depends a lot on the hospital you are at. I know quite a few friends who labored almost right until their child was born with very limited checks, only once every half hour or so. One of our good friends didn't even have a doc or nurse in the room when her son started crowning. Her DH had to go out in the hall and yell for someone. What if there had been an emergancy? Would that 10 minutes have made a difference? So in my mind, the benefit of HB is that I have several professionals whose soul focus is me and my birth. Zero time from the start of an issue to the attention of my MW.

I find that most women with positive hospital births went to a hospital where they had nurses checking on them very often, or a doula along who was working with the hospital staff to moniter the birth, so they did get quite a bit of individual attention. It just goes to show that no matter what type of birth you are planning, it pays to plan ahead for your attendents. And that in labor, a good attendant is the key to recognizing and responding to any issues, regardless of the setting.

CD'ing, homebirthing, milk making school teacher. Supporting my family on my income and trying to get out of debt in 2013!
lunarlady is offline  
#38 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 03:29 AM - Thread Starter
 
craft_media_hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: I'm diggin for fire!
Posts: 1,863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheshire View Post

I would just encourage you to not doubt all of the stories you hear because, first, you weren't there and aren't a medical expert so you can't be sure, and second, because I'm sure there are plenty of cases where it does save a life versus the cases where it may have been an unnecessary intervention. Give that mother the benefit of the doubt - she doesn't need her birth second guessed because the listener believes they know more about birth than the care providers she trusted.
I'm sorry for your loss. I don't doubt all the stories I hear. I don't doubt your story or any of the other stories on this thread.

I do doubt that every complication that results in c-section actually needs a c-section, so I'm sorry, but I do doubt how necessary some of these procedures are.

I don't "believe I know more about birth than the care providers" which is why I have questions. I do give the mom the benefit of the doubt (I know she believes her story), BUT I also believe that a full episiotomy and the doc pulling her son out may not have been the only way for the birth to be handled with a positive outcome.

I don't believe that all cord stories are myths, either. There are true cord injuries, obviously. There are also A LOT of horror stories that are not true, where any and every complication is blamed on the cord being around the neck. The "myth" I am looking to dispel is that the cord is the cause of fetal distress and cord issues=c-section as the only way to keep the baby from dying.

I'm not fear-mongering. I'm doing the opposite. People are fear-mongering me, and I'm trying to work through their horror stories by taking a grain of salt here with you all.

Thank you all for participating in this discussion; a lot of beneficial information has come forward here.

I feel like I'm getting a more "real" perspective on this subject here than I am IRL where it seems like the second people hear I'm pregnant they have to go on and on about every horror story or everyone they know who has had a bad experience, and it's tiresome and really insensitive.

I'm hearing lots of positive cord stories and also some tragic ones, but in general what I'm getting is that these issues are rare but can happen, they're not always predictable, and even having a fetal monitor can't always tell you if there is a cord abnormality or not.

Happy and in love with my family!
craft_media_hero is offline  
#39 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 01:54 PM
 
MegBoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 2,125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
Do you have any evidence? Personally, I'd rather have my life and my baby's life in the hands of a homebirth midwife than a hospital OB.
I've joked often that "I'd squat alone in the woods before giving birth at GBMC." (hospital in the area with the highest CS rate - 44%.) To those who aren't familiar with the concept of intentional UC, this sounds like an extreme statement. But I really do think that UC can be preferable to some of these awful hospitals. (And I personally WOULD chose it if faced with UC vs. bad hospital.)

That being said, it is a fact that hospital-attended birth is safer for both mama & baby than UC. Of course, no one has studied intentional, planned UC vs. hospital birth. So we don't know how they would compare. But, again, when comparing people who have no medical care whatsoever to even bad hospitals, the hospital outcome, at least in terms of death, is better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by craft_media_hero View Post
IRL where it seems like the second people hear I'm pregnant they have to go on and on about every horror story or everyone they know who has had a bad experience, and it's tiresome and really insensitive.
Yup, that's how it is. Of course, if you mention you're even thinking about HB, you'll get it a lot worse. Because, of course, ya know, "My baby would have died if we weren't in the hospital." Well, yes, that is absolutely positively TRUE in many cases. But the fact of the matter is that it's probably 100% FALSE in even MORE cases. (OR, the truth is that the hospital interventions CAUSED the fetal distress that the baby needed to be saved from via CS.) Hence... my exasperation at the attitude of Americans towards birth (and the atrocity that is American maternity 'care' today.)

Yes, as others have said, education is key. There are no guarantees anywhere you birth.
MegBoz is offline  
#40 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 03:33 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MegBoz View Post
Yup, that's how it is. Of course, if you mention you're even thinking about HB, you'll get it a lot worse. Because, of course, ya know, "My baby would have died if we weren't in the hospital." Well, yes, that is absolutely positively TRUE in many cases.
I agree. I think Aaron would have lived, if I'd transferred sooner, and that's incredibly hard to live with. Of course, if I hadn't been treated with so little respect in my previous hospital stays, I might not have been too terrified to transfer, so I think there's lots of burden to go around there...too bad none of the other people who contributed (the nurses from previous hospital stays, the OB who bullied me into the surgery that cost me so much of my abdominal/pelvic sensation, the person who called CPS on me while I was in labour, etc.) will ever feel the weight.
member234098 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  
#41 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 07:37 PM
 
Hannah32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post
The reason that so many women died in childbirth 100-200 years ago is because doctors refused to wash their hands in their rounds between the morgue and the maternity ward. It was called puerperal fever and doctors blamed it on the mothers and told them it was a mental condition - "it is all in your mind". If you do not believe me, google Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis and see how his colleagues treated him when he confronted them with the truth and with a remedy - handwashing with chlorinated lime solutions to kill the germs.

It is not universal hospitalization that saves women in childbirth today; it is antibiotics for infections and blood transfusions for excessive bleeding, neither of which needs to be in a hospital.

In the 1940s-70s, women would be recuperating in a hospital for a week after the birth. Today, most women are shown the door after three days.
So why do more babies survive very early childhood today, at least in very industrialized countries? Infant death used to be far more common and I did think that's what we were primarily talking about.

It's quite easy to find human population graphs online. You can study the line for yourselves. Flat flat flat flat, then this dramatic curve upward around the year 1800. That's pretty good evidence, IMO, regarding all sorts of issues...from childbirth to disease survival in general.

None of this means that homebirth is a not a good choice. Midwives also have better tools today, as others have mentioned.

I think homebirth is a totally cool choice for those who want to. I don't think the OP should be afraid. I think she should go for it if that's what makes her feel right.
Hannah32 is offline  
#42 of 73 Old 01-26-2010, 11:02 PM
 
member234098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Behind you.
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was responding to a PPs statement as to why women died 100+ years ago. It was not the women's fault.

There is better nutrition and sanitation today and women are having fewer children per woman. Women are able to recuperate and recover from childbirth more easily. More dependable birth control has lowered the number of children per woman.

Women averaged six children each to about 1750, losing most in early childhood to disease or exposure. This is also shown on historical population charts. Women also died earlier than their husbands, so many men had two families.
member234098 is offline  
#43 of 73 Old 01-27-2010, 05:13 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannah32 View Post
So why do more babies survive very early childhood today, at least in very industrialized countries? Infant death used to be far more common and I did think that's what we were primarily talking about.

It's quite easy to find human population graphs online. You can study the line for yourselves. Flat flat flat flat, then this dramatic curve upward around the year 1800. That's pretty good evidence, IMO, regarding all sorts of issues...from childbirth to disease survival in general.

None of this means that homebirth is a not a good choice. Midwives also have better tools today, as others have mentioned.

I think homebirth is a totally cool choice for those who want to. I don't think the OP should be afraid. I think she should go for it if that's what makes her feel right.
I think you and I are talking about two different things. I'm not looking at 17th, 18th & 19th century vs. 20th & 21st century numbers. We don't have good data on populations that were reasonably well nourished (eg. moms who didn't have pelvis deformations from childhood rickets), supported by their communities, breastfed and breastfeeding, etc. etc.

Infant death, outside the neonatal period, is a whole other issue, as it can be completely unrelated to anything the midwife/doctor/taxi driver/mother/father/older child/other did at the birth (or even during the pregnancy). Hospital birth isn't going to do anything about the deaths of babies who don't have enough food, or clean water, or anything else we consider basic.

Human population graphs, likewise, prove very little about childbirth, in and of themselves. We're surviving infancy in greater numbers. We're surviving childhood in greater numbers. We're surviving adolescence in greater numbers. None of those things address childbirth.

And, I maintain that if true cord emergencies (or any other obstetrical emergencies) happened at the rates OBs state, or strongly imply, the race would have died out. Mothers wouldn't have attempted more pregnancies, because we'd have been dropping like flies, too.

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  
#44 of 73 Old 01-27-2010, 06:10 PM
 
calmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: beautiful CA foothills
Posts: 1,225
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i want to share my story without getting involved in the debate. my son DID die because of a nuchal cord but i also do realize that having a nuchal cord is very common and most babies are just fine. his cord was wrapped very tightly 3 times around his neck. the ob said the point at which it was wrapped played a part in his death. the cord was pulled tightly from his navel directly to his neck and then wrapped around. she said it might have been different if it had been loose from his navel to his neck and then wrapped 3 times. that makes sense to me.

i am a big homebirth supporter (my Matthew was a planned homebirth and I have had 3 successful homebirths) but i no longer think that all homebirths are safe and all hospital births are dangerous like i did before.

Christie

Vegan, homeschooling mom to my 3 boys and my girl, missing Matthew born still at 34 weeks
 

calmom is offline  
#45 of 73 Old 01-27-2010, 06:43 PM
 
GuildJenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,776
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by craft_media_hero View Post
So it seems like whenever I mention homebirth, I get one of these cord horror stories in response. Instinctually, I don't believe it, but I'm not a birth professional and don't really know enough to understand what's really happening here....

The story before that was that the momma was laboring for about 60-70 minutes. The fetal monitor showed that the heart rate dropped during contractions. Mom received an emergency cesarean, and the babe was born "with the cord tightly around his neck". This was "a close call" and if they hadn't had a cesarean, I am told the babe would have died. FWIW this mom had a very "medical" OB attending her.

Can we talk about this?

It's my understanding that the cord is around the neck in 1/4 or 1/5 births. Can the cord around the neck really cut of oxygen and cause stillbirth? Would the babe be born, cord unwrapped, and isn't it still receiving oxygen from the placenta even if the cord is wrapped?

What about the heart tones slowing or "stopping"? Is this caused by the nuchal cord? Even if the heart rate slows during ctx, could that birth work out ok w/out interventions?

Without the fetal monitor, would these births have simply progressed naturally with the babies pinking up after birth? Or would they really have been stillborn because the cord was too tight? At that point, isn't birth pretty much imminent?

I hated the fetal monitor and only let them put it on my for a minute, and I don't want one in this next birth I'm preparing for either.

I'd like to understand what's really going on here and dispel the "horror cord" myth. Can you all help me out, here?
I'll talk about my experience, but as a warning, it's not a happy one.

I went for a hospital birth in a hospital with a low intervention rate and a pretty natural approach to labour. Midwives were available but because of other issues I had opted for an OB, and ended up with the OB on rotation that day.

Labour progressed pretty well until the pushing phase. At that point I pushed for 2.5 hrs; there was an unusual series of emergencies in the L&D ward and the ob was in emergency surgery for much of that time. There was an inexperienced nurse attending and she missed the decel pattern on the monitor, until my daughter's heart stopped (2x nuchal cord). She was revived, but died 4 days later. I pretty much blame the hospital.

To answer your questions - my umbilical cord was WHITE when it came out; the 2x nuchal combined with the pushing resulted in a total failure of oxygen to the baby. Regardless of what interventions should or should not have taken place there was no question that it was the nuchal cord that caused the problem. It may be rare and it may not be something you choose to worry about but I've experienced it personally and yes, it can cause death. Sorry for everyone who thinks that you can will a good birth or that cord accidents are a myth.

The monitoring did indicate a problem but the pattern (not coming up fast enough) was missed. It's not just how long the heartrate drops but how it comes back up. (We didn't know this prior to delivery.)

I probably would have done better with an experienced midwife than I did at the hospital, so I don't really consider it an argument against homebirth.

That said, a c-section would have saved my daughter's life and actually the revival effort could have worked had the period of oxygen deprivation not been so long. The things I learned were:

- when things go wrong, they can go wrong pretty quickly. Whatever your plan is, be sure you have a sense of what will happen at that point.
- your team seriously matters
- you cannot plan for everything and a certain point you have to just accept there are risks

Good luck with your decision. FYI I had my son in a hospital afterwards and it was an uneventful and respectful delivery.

~ Mum to Emily, March 12-16 2004, Noah, born Aug 2005, Liam, born January 2011, and wife to Carl since 1994. ~
GuildJenn is offline  
#46 of 73 Old 01-28-2010, 02:39 PM
 
MegBoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 2,125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannah32 View Post
So why do more babies survive very early childhood today, at least in very industrialized countries? Infant death used to be far more common and I did think that's what we were primarily talking about.
Well, I think you're both right.
I just don't like when people use the point that, "Women used to die in CB all the time centuries ago." They often use this as an argument against HB or even against low-tech birth (i.e. 'expectant' vs. 'active' management.)

But the fact of the matter is that birth is not that dangerous, most of the time! Yes, we should have a skilled MW there (or be very well educated & prepared if we're going to UC), and yes, sometimes we will need medical technology and that technology can, and does, save lives. But that doesn't mean that birth is inherently dangerous! it's just not! Most of the time, mamas just need emotional support & a little monitoring to confirm mama & babe are fine. That's it!

I think personally, I just classify the statement of "But women & babies used to die in CB all the time!" as a, generally, ignorant statement made by uneducated people who assume that hospitals, OBs, drugs & intervention lead to the best outcomes. & we all know that's wrong! In that regard, it reminds me of the phrase, "Natural birth makes as much sense as natural dentistry."

While technically it is true, it still irks me due to the context in which it's most often used.
MegBoz is offline  
#47 of 73 Old 01-28-2010, 04:07 PM
 
thefragile7393's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 2,857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No one has mentioned how many years ago the OP's godmother's incident was. 30 years ago birth was very different for a lot of patients. Doctors were trained very differently back then and the extent of the interventions she had shows. I'm not pooh-poohing the possible dangers at all...but it's quite possible the situation wasn't what the doctor made it out to be---doctors still do this now, why wouldn't it have been any different back then? Heck, my own mom was told she was too "old" for a homebirth and "had" to have me in a hospital 30 years ago. Now we know that isn't true....she was a very healthy 41 year old person back then, but she didn't think to question the doctor.

I would take this person's experience with a grain of salt, given the circumstances (I'm sure she believes it's true, and maybe it is, but since there's no way to know for sure, take it for what it is...an experience) and do research, ask the midwife what to do. Sadly unforseen things happen whether at home or at a hospital...but that does not mean that it happens as many times as people think. Since they do happen, educate yourself on the real possibilities, look at the stats, get reassurance from your midwife on what to do in situations...and go from there.

fambedsingle2.gifnovaxnocirc.gifHappy to be a mommy and teacher to D fencing.gif, born 1-17-06 via waterbirth.jpg  and A  blahblah.gif, born 10-6-08 with a homebirth.jpghomeschool.gif

thefragile7393 is offline  
#48 of 73 Old 01-28-2010, 09:08 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuildJenn View Post
- you cannot plan for everything and a certain point you have to just accept there are risks
This.
There are risks, no matter where we give birth. I don't subscribe to the belief that homebirth is some kind of guarantee of a good outcome. I just don't subscribe to the belief that hospital birth is such a guarantee, either. There is no guarantee.

Quote:
Good luck with your decision. FYI I had my son in a hospital afterwards and it was an uneventful and respectful delivery.
Yeah. I've had a total of one respectful delivery. Mine was also after my stillbirth. If hospital treated all mothers-to-be the way they treat those of us who have had a loss, I'm guessing their "patient" satisfaction rates would be a lot higher. It was kind of refreshing being on the maternity ward and being treated like I had a brain and deserved some kind of respect and consideration. I think I was actually out of the hospital before it sank in that I'd actually been treated well.

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  
#49 of 73 Old 01-28-2010, 09:38 PM
 
annekh23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 896
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
On a list I'm on, someone summed it up rather nicely, "some babies die because they are born at home, some babies die because they are born in the hospital, right now, the rates are similar".

Which means there is scope for improval in both areas and having read many many case studies, my overall impression is that there may well be more scope for reducing the in hospital rate, because a lot of the hospital ones you can pick up details like lack of continuity of care, poor communication etc which can be improved on. But there is also plenty of scope for improvements in care of homebirths, like good coordination of care, delays between a problem being noticed at home and getting intervention because you have to go through the ER, or the hospital treats you as a newly arrived labour patient, not a transfer from a compentent professional.

However, when you look at the death rates at home for midwives that have developed reputations for outstanding care and have good relationships with doctors. In most scenarios, I'd rather have Mary Cronk, Ina May Gaskin, Gloria Lemay etc, than an OB resident, but ideally they'd work together, so when one of those fantastic midwives says help is needed, help is given, fast.

Sadly, some of these fantastic midwives are forced to only attend births at home or in freestanding birth centers, when there are some situations and individual preferences that would indicate hospital birth, so that back up is available quickly.

The WHO ideal is continuous care from a midwife, with obstetric back up and they put an awful lot of research into that.

Anne, Christian mummy to Nathanael 05/28/03, Ada 06/10/05, Grace 05/24/09
annekh23 is offline  
#50 of 73 Old 01-28-2010, 09:59 PM
 
Pumpkin_Pie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vermont
Posts: 4,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Just wanted to add one more nuchal cord story to the thread. My son was born only a few days after his due date, but about 55 hours after my water broke. His cord was around his neck three times, and was so short that it prevented him from descending. I also had an episiotomy and a vacuum extraction and the midwife delivering ended up cutting the loops off his neck before his body was delivered in order for him to fully descend. He was blue and had to be resuscitated with a rub down and oxygen, but was pretty much fine after that.

It was a very scary start (the very first words I heard after he was born were, "Don't worry, he's not dead"), but I feel extremely confident that if I had birthed him at home he would have been just fine with a competant midwife. They only real interventions needed were the episiotomy and vacuum and a bit of oxygen and a towel to rub him down with to stimulate him a bit. Could he have died? Yes, easily. Would I do it again at home? Definitely. Just because there is a cord issue, does not mean being in a hospital will make the outcome different in all cases.

Good luck with your upcoming birth mama. May you have no cord issues!

Formerly single Mama to the zaniest boy on the block, born on my birthday on 3/28/07. Soon to be Mama to a new little and can't wait to bfinfant.gif and femalesling.GIF and familybed1.gif again! 
Pumpkin_Pie is offline  
#51 of 73 Old 01-28-2010, 10:03 PM
 
dannic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,711
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My mom had a stillborn son after me who died a few days before labor from the cord being wrapped around his neck. they didn't know til birth. It would be a very difficult thing to lose a child in any instance, and naturally, any family who does lose a child is going to be fearful of it happening again, no matter the cause. (Whether from cancer, cords, or a car accident). When I planned my first homebirth, one of my first questions was about cord issues and how they would be handled at home. My midwife gave the stats and then proceeded to show me with a teddy bear how she would unwrap baby. My dd born at home did have one loop around her neck and the midwife just sort of somersaulted her as she came out.

For those of you as mothers who have lost a child, my heart goes out to you! I am planning my second hb now. We all have to make our decisions with the knowledge we have and we all have to deal with the consequences of those decisions. They must be our own.

caution: one-handed nak

typos likely

dannic is offline  
#52 of 73 Old 01-28-2010, 10:20 PM
 
2sweetboysmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Still feeling lost in So.Cal. after 17 years.
Posts: 1,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Another personal experience. Mine has nothing to do with nuchal cord but a true knot coupled with a short cord.
My third son Elijah was all set to be born at home, we all needed a really quiet, low key birth. He was breach so I went for an ultrasound to see if we could see why. He turned around, but measured small and I was diagnosed IUGR. Through a series of perinatal visits and a naging intuition we decided to induce. (remember I was planning a quiet home birth) So way ramped up on pit my water was broken. 2.5 hours of intense labor later he was born with a single involuntary push. His cord was white between the tight knot and his belly, and the length of the cord was so short that his feet were still in me but the cord was pulled tight.
If I had a more "normal" deliverey at the hospital or home we would have lost him in pushing. Period.
Mothers are given good sense and an intuition for a reason. The choice of place and method of delivery are very personal and even change over a lifetime of experience.
As much as I long for a quiet home birth and fully suppport any woman's right to choose such, after that experience and the mid term loss of Michael and Providence, I am choosing the hospital this time.

DH&Me  Christ follower, homeschooler, gardener, (insert lots of additional crunchiness here) chicken mama, & occasionally blogger. intactlact.gifMama of  boys 9,7,3.5,&11months....& SURPRISE jaw2.gif  expecting a BOY in November!  7 sweet-babes gone too soon.

2sweetboysmom is offline  
#53 of 73 Old 01-28-2010, 10:35 PM - Thread Starter
 
craft_media_hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: I'm diggin for fire!
Posts: 1,863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Wow, I am so sorry to hear about everyone's difficult births and those of you who have shared the stories of your losses.

Happy and in love with my family!
craft_media_hero is offline  
#54 of 73 Old 01-29-2010, 04:55 PM
 
AllofGrace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The midwife who delivered DD2 tells an amazing story of a baby who was fine (developed normally and had great apgars) with a cord wrapped SEVEN (7!!) times around his neck. The mom was a first-timer with a very normal labor at the birth center. When pushing started, the baby had major decels, but always recovered well. Mom couldn't make any progress pushing, and MW could feel the head not budging at all during pushing.

MW says she normally doesn't transport so quickly for a c/s, but something told her she needed to in this case. The operating OBs were stunned with the number of wraps---the most they had seen in their 30-yr careers. All agreed it was a miracle the little boy not only survived labor so well, but that he had developed normally too.
member234098 likes this.
AllofGrace is offline  
#55 of 73 Old 01-29-2010, 05:03 PM
 
mamabearsoblessed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: nursing about the foothills
Posts: 3,139
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sweetboysmom View Post
Another personal experience. Mine has nothing to do with nuchal cord but a true knot coupled with a short cord.
My third son Elijah was all set to be born at home, we all needed a really quiet, low key birth. He was breach so I went for an ultrasound to see if we could see why. He turned around, but measured small and I was diagnosed IUGR. Through a series of perinatal visits and a naging intuition we decided to induce. (remember I was planning a quiet home birth) So way ramped up on pit my water was broken. 2.5 hours of intense labor later he was born with a single involuntary push. His cord was white between the tight knot and his belly, and the length of the cord was so short that his feet were still in me but the cord was pulled tight.
If I had a more "normal" deliverey at the hospital or home we would have lost him in pushing. Period.
Mothers are given good sense and an intuition for a reason. The choice of place and method of delivery are very personal and even change over a lifetime of experience. As much as I long for a quiet home birth and fully suppport any woman's right to choose such, after that experience and the mid term loss of Michael and Providence, I am choosing the hospital this time.
bolded ~ Yes.

natural birthin', baby catchin', cloth addicted, intactalactavist mama of 12/00, 6/03, 10/07, 8/10 & our angelcubs three
mamabearsoblessed is offline  
#56 of 73 Old 01-30-2010, 01:40 AM
 
erin_brycesmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,051
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
After having a baby with a tight double nuchal cord suffer an unnecessary traumatic entry into the world because of my choice to birth in the hospital, I feel way more confident birthing at home in the event of nuchal cords.

A nuchal cord is just a variation of normal. It is not dangerous in and of itself:

From AJOG (American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology)

CONCLUSIONS: Nuchal cord loops and tight cord do not cause significant peripartum morbidity.

http://pt.wkhealth.com/pt/re/ajog/us...195629!8091!-1


From Perinatal Journal:

Conclusion: There is no significant correlation between nuchal cord entanglement and adverse perinatal outcomes. Therefore nuchal cord entanglement alone is not an indication for cesarean section.

http://www.perinatology.org.tr/journ...ext/txt_05.asp


From NEJM (New England Journal of Medicine)

CONCLUSION: Nuchal cords do not influence clinical management at delivery, and neonatal primary adaption is not impaired.

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/medline/...urcetype=HWCIT


From AIUM (American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine):

Conclusions. A sonographically detected nuchal cord is not associated with important perinatal complications.

http://www.jultrasoundmed.org/cgi/co...stract/23/1/43


another study:

CONCLUSION: Nuchal cord is not associated with adverse perinatal outcome.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18604054


and yet another study with the same conclusion as above:

CONCLUSIONS: Nuchal cord is not associated with adverse perinatal outcome. Thus, labor induction in such cases is probably unnecessary.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16374604
erin_brycesmom is offline  
#57 of 73 Old 01-30-2010, 03:01 AM
 
JessicaS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 43,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sweetboysmom View Post
Another personal experience. Mine has nothing to do with nuchal cord but a true knot coupled with a short cord.
Hey! I had a short cord with a true knot baby too

Not all those who wander are lost 
JessicaS is offline  
#58 of 73 Old 01-31-2010, 01:40 AM
 
baileyandmikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 3,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My ds1 was born with his around his neck three times, very tight, he was purple, and i mean purple, but he was fine. his heart rate was wacky during the delivery, but it all ended well.

my friends ds was in a dire situation at birth, cord was knotted and around his neck multiple times, delivered via csection 4 weeks early due to ultrasounds and fetal monitoring said the baby wasn't doing well. He was on a breathing machine for three weeks due to his lungs not working properly, but I don't think this happens as often as people say.

Kristin- Wife to J, Mommy to B (11), M-S (8), and little J (4) and J&J (7 months)
baileyandmikey is offline  
#59 of 73 Old 02-03-2010, 02:38 AM
 
mmaramba's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think the thing that's tough about these stories-- and again, not doubting anyone-- is that (especially in the case of second-and-third-hand retellings) it's very hard to distinguish babies who died because of a cord around the neck from babies who died with a cord around the neck.

AFAIK, when there is no apparent cause of death, but there is a cord around the baby's neck, this is the official "reason" given for the stillbirth, for "the record" and malpractice purposes.

And of course, we have sampling error here. Anyone who lost a baby for known (or even suspected) cord issues-- or who knows someone who did-- will comment that this is why her baby died. Ask this question on a mainstream board and you would get even more such answers.
mmaramba is offline  
#60 of 73 Old 06-22-2011, 08:33 PM
 
pinchbeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I think home birthing is great! So many women I know have easy births including a mom who had twins and just plopped them out! However, my experience with childbirth has proven difficult. During my second birth (8 years after the first) my son's heartbeat went down to half what is considered normal. His heartrate did not recover. A c-section was performed immediately since they couldn't get in there to loosen the cord. I was told that the cord had been wrapped around my son's shoulders and that my contractions were causing a decel in heart beat. It was sad because I was almost fully dilated and I could have pushed him out (about 40 minutes later). I am thankful he is here.

pinchbeck 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