hmm. i think it's an interesting point, rhiandmoi.
I don't necessarily see the sorts of threads that you mention as seeking medical advice. I do see it as seeking a UC perspective toward certain information -- what did you, as a UCer do in this situation? what do you, as a UCer, think about this information. I think I assume that the individual already has access to medical information and advice, knows where to find it, and can, and in some or even many cases, they are not UPers -- they have midwives and doctors who have, in most cases, already discussed the issue with them and provided the medical perspective and information.
I've never personally had a problem with someone coming in and giving their perspective as a professional (midwives, etc) or a non-professional asserting that they would choose a more medical route. I, too, consider that supportive.
But, there is a point where it crosses a line. When the OP asserts that she will not be following medical advice, sometimes those offering it get pushy about it. Not just "I would do this" or "medical evidence is that" but really everything from "you're irresponsible" to "you're killing your baby!" It's not all that common, but it is not supportive of the woman's choice to UC against medical advice.
And, it is true that more "high risk" women are coming to UC. This is because they do not see these things as "risks" in the way that their care providers might. Perspectives change, you know?
What I mean is this. It used to be that a posterior baby was "variation of normal." When my son was born in 2008, it was still a variation of normal, but many women were encouraged to have a c-section during labor because there's "no need to suffer" and the baby hadn't changed position throughout labor. Today, I received an email from a friend in my former town who was risked out to the OB because her baby is posterior. She's about a month out, but the baby was "persistent."
I joked that it tells of the personality to come! ha! But anyway, the OB's appointment is coming up, and the midwife told her that they would talk about scheduling a c-section, but that she can choose to go into labor if she wants -- and then see if a c-section is needed for the malposition.
So, a person may come into this site next week, and say "my ob says my baby is malpositioned. Was yours? what would you do?" And I would say "Oh, I had a posterior baby, and it was a vaginal birth, and all is fine." Yes, there actually are increased risks in a posterior baby, just as with a breech. And so maybe the doctors are right and a c-section IS better, but I don't know if there's any evidence right now, and honestly, if my friend were at this midwife in 2008, this would not have been risked out (as another friend of mine used this midwife and also had a posterior baby who switched during labor).
That's only 3 years ago.
So, that person writes in here, and then we get lambasted for not providing medical advice of "I would get that checked out" or "i would listen to my doctor" in this instance.
I think that postdates definitely qualifies in this instance, particularly now that the situation has changed for women. You get to 40 days, and they're talking about induction right away -- not waiting a week, or two, or three. Four years ago, a friend of mine had an OB waiting 3 weeks before he got antsy about induction, and she went into labor later that day and birthed normally. Today, the same doctor -- for whatever reason -- is concerned taht she might go late like before, and said that he now *had to* induce before 41 weeks. I don't know if it was insurance, hospital policy, or what, but he "has to" now when he didn't "have to" 4 years ago.
With things like UBAMC, these are often women who feel, think, or believe that their c-sections were unnecessary and that VBAC is possible, but no one (doctor) will accept her desire to VBAC. In many cases, their *preference* is for a medical attendant at their birth -- and in most cases a midwife -- but they feel forced to UCing in order to get the birth that they want. And usually, those women are *well aware* of the medical perspectives and risks. So, no one needs to tell them that side of the equation (imo).
For the issue of GD, there is ample information that the tests are not accurate, and yet many doctors and midwives refuse to retest, or use an alternate test. So, women get risked out for that reason, when -- in fact -- they are perfectly healthy as determined by checking their blood sugar throughout the day, watching their diet, and their children are growing normally (by all kinds of measurements, including getting ultrasounds at their doctors, fundal height or what have you). So, here they are getting risked out and thereby into early inductions, and their options thin right out. The doctor's insist on their diagnosis based on a test that has many false positives, will refuse to accept any evidence to the contrary, and demand that a woman induces on their schedule (often early) only to bear a premature child. These women, too, are often "forced" to UC in this way -- which is something I don't like, btw.
But, I am of the mind that if these women truly believe that they don't have GD or that it's rightly controlled and not at issue, then I support their decision to disregard medical advice and move forward in their own ways. And, if a woman UBAMC feels that her uterus will be able to do it's work in a UC, then I will support that rather than saying "no, you should do what the doctor says" or these are thr increased risks and so on.
The blood pressure issues are more confusing, too, but i've also noted that many of the threads related included the fact that the woman was talking with her doctor or midwife about the issue as they go, and in both blood pressure discussions that I recall of late, both women have chosen to continue with their care providers not just for prenatal care, but for the birth as well. SO, they are not UCing, and therefore I don't get what the concern is (for them).
That is, i don't see how we would be creating problems or leading anyone astray because we aren't answering with "go see a doctor" or "medical information is as follows." Also, since other people usually provide that, I don't need to.
