babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » Reproductive Health - Doctor or no doctor?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Reproductive Health - Doctor or no doctor?
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 24 February 2002 08:46 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Just thought I would start this thread so earthmother and I can have our (friendly) argument without hijacking the men's thread.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 24 February 2002 08:53 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Earthmother, I found what you had to say really interesting. I would love to see midwifery expanded and become more mainstream, and for public perception to become better informed about the types of deliveries that are possible with midwives.

For instance, I didn't know that breech babies and - well any pregnancy complication, actually - could be adequately dealt with by a midwife.

Of course, I still wouldn't go with a midwife. I looked into it when I was pregnant, and there was no way to get painkillers from a midwife - and there's no way I would go through childbirth without an epidural.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 24 February 2002 09:06 AM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Painkillers affect baby

There's this link about painkillers, or there is always my story of having a c-section sans anesthetic of course that might encourage you to want painkillers even if you aren't pregnant.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 24 February 2002 09:11 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've heard it before that painkillers make the baby more lethargic after birth. And my answer to that was, "Fantastic! Because I'll probably be feeling pretty lethargic too! What a coincidence!"

Sorry, not a good enough reason for me to endure 20 hours of excruciating pain (I was actually in labour for 27 hours, but I'm cutting 7 hours off since people say that labour is shorter without painkillers). I figured I was born in the 20th century for a reason - so I could have drugs with my delivery. Heh.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 24 February 2002 09:37 AM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The problem is with our current way of providing care and delivery for the pregnant woman pain becomes a focal point because of stress.

A hospital environment suggests illness and alarm which the body responds to and of course labour becomes more painful and can actually stop altogether.

Studies have shown that women who are attended my midwives have less need for drugs as they are better supported emotionally and therefore can relax into their labour.

The problem with the baby being dopey from drugs, other than the natural worry of a newborn system being flushed with narcotic, is that it sets off a chain reaction in the nursing relationship

A sleepy baby doesnt nurse well, they therefore dont take in as much colustrum as they could,they start to become dehydrated, oh well give them one bottle this causes nipple confusion, mother feels like she cant nurse or baby cant nurse if not properly supported or motivated the mother abandons the nursing relationship altogether.

This link shows the cost savings to the healthcare system that could be realized through women being properly supported in wanting to nurse their babies.

health care savings from nursing


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 24 February 2002 10:10 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Actually, that sounds pretty much like what happened with my son and I in the hospital. I was supposed to have a "walking epidural" (whatever the hell THAT means), but I couldn't really tell when to push. When he was born, they had to resuscitate him because he didn't breathe at first - probably inside too long. And I had a really difficult time breast feeding too, but I think that's because of the size of my breasts - I couldn't hold him the usual way without smothering him, so I had to use the "football hold" and he didn't latch on very well that way. He had to be supplemented because he was a very big baby and he wasn't getting fed.

I think if I had to do it over again, I wouldn't even put myself through the week and a half of agony trying to nurse and having it be impossible - I would just use formula from the start. Not that I plan to have any more children. But mine turned out just fine with the epidural and with formula.

Even if I thought that the epidural was the entire cause of breastfeeding not working for my son and me, I still say I couldn't have handled that pain throughout the labour. My epidural was delayed for about an hour and a half because the anaesthetician was delayed by a difficult caesarean case, and I thought I was going to die. I couldn't handle the pain at all.

Oh, and as for lying on my back - I tried to get up and walk around and that made it worse. I had all these great ideas about using the jacuzzi that was in my absolutely fantastic birthing suite, and every time I stood up I threw up. I tried going on my hands and knees to see if that was really more comfortable and it felt like hell. Lying on my back and slightly to one side or the other was the only way I was comfortable.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 24 February 2002 05:46 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
You know, most prepared labours aren't 20 hours (or more) or excruciating pain.... And most women aren't taught techniques to lessen the pain.

I've had two babies, one born in the hospital with the usual mainstream medical care, and the second at home with a midwife. Night and day!

Seriously, I was bent on a med-free delivery with the first one, took the prenatal class that I felt was more pro-unmedicated, read and re-read books on technique, etc. But in the end, I was hijacked into an induction (which resulted in a runaway labour) and very nearly talked into an epidural that I didn't want and, as it turned out, was far from needing. I am so intensely grateful that the blond guy was as proactive as he was during my labour, because the inducement made it a very tough labour.

I can't say my first baby's birth was a bad experience -- far from it. I have relatively short labours (both came in at about 8 hours), and was able to nurse my girl right away, and from the good start we had, nursed her until she decided to give it up at about 13 mos old.

Now the second baby, we found the only midwife currently operating in Saskatchewan, and she runs her own childbirth classes. As she isn't permitted hospital priveleges here, she often acts as a doula for women who don't want to have their babies at home.

Our original thought was to have a midwife in hospital (they were recently "legalized" in Saskatchewan but have no access to facilities), and when we found out that was impossible, we looked into home birth. For a zero risk factor mama and baby, it made good sense.

Our prenatal care was more relaxed, less time-stressed. Our midwife got to know us, the whole family. She answered questions, suggested books, discussed them with us, explained her philosophy on pain meds (not opposed to them at all in some cases), showed us positions.... We got 10x the info any doctor cared to give us -- and we have a really great doctor!

Having a baby at home leaves you in control of your surroundings, in control over your body, what you want or don't want.... You don't have to submit to the restrictions of "policy". It was a warm, caring and safe-feeling place to be. And it was much less traumatic for both the baby and my older daughter, not to mention me.

I also figure I saved the province several thousand dollers into the bargain....

Anyway, sorry for the long rant.... We're pretty frustrated with how midwifery is stalled out here and so inaccessible for most women. It's a crying shame.


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
empee
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2240

posted 24 February 2002 11:19 PM      Profile for empee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm still just little and pre-baby, but I find your stories....interesting (read: scary when I think about the pain). My mom had my brother at home with the use of a mid wife and it was a far better experience than either my sister or myself (both hospital babies). If you feel so inclined you should check out a show on the LIFE network (?) called A Baby Story. They show different couples and their childbirth experiences. It seems that the best births (in terms of the level of anxiety, complications, comfort level and even pain factors) are births that happen with mid wives.

In a previous life I was interested in going into midwifery as a career, but found many barriers (not many acredited institutions, licensing is difficult, etc.) Basically there seems to be a perception that western medicine and science is the be-all/end-all. If you're not using all the latest equipment and drugs then you're putting yourself (and your baby) at risk. How did that become the perception?

I want to know if you think this is changing. My mom had my brother at home in 1981 without discussion/incident. Are home births more common or less now? Will it get easier or more difficult to find a midwife when I'm ready to have kids (not soon)? And why?


From: Mississauga | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Loretta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 222

posted 25 February 2002 01:38 AM      Profile for Loretta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've given birth to five children - four of whom were born in hospital. Without going into all the details of each delivery, I would heartily recommend the support of a midwife for childbirth. The experience and knowledge of these well-trained women is superlative. To be in the care of a midwife during pregnancy and birth is to not lose your power and ability to choose what is right for you and your baby each step along the way.

Although none of my hospital births were catastrophic (although my preemie baby came close and my midwife was a major resource in dealing with some of his medical issues), they were institutional settings and not as flexible as one might hope. Read Naomi Wolf's book (I think it's her newest and I don't remember the name) about childbirth - it gives an accurate picture of the current state of giving birth. Although it's written from an American point of view, it rings true here in Canada in many cases.

As to the question with respect to availability of midwifery care, in your area, I would say that there are likely many. Other areas of the country are not so fortunate. There is still opposition from MDs despite a wealth of well controlled studies demonstrating good maternal and infant outcomes. I'm glad we here in BC have this option available through our provincial health plan.


From: The West Kootenays of BC | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 25 February 2002 12:15 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's difficult to say how available midwifery care will be in the future, empee.... I notice you are in Ontario, and that is the most progressive province in terms of availability of midwifery. On the other hand, there are still many restrictions on midwives in the Ontario system, as a friend of mine discovered.

Here in Saskatchewan, home birth is really still a legal grey area. There was some talk, right after midwives were recognized in legislation (nearly 5 years ago) of a "pilot project" where midwives would be allowed to practice in a specific area in an institution. Home births were not even on the list. The project still hasn't been started, and the support group Friends of the Midwives is so frustrated they're ready to disband.

In a sense, I'm glad I had my home birth before the project was started, though, because once it is in place, home birth will be verboten. There is massive doctor opposition to midwifery and home birth, and it's just so senseless. Cost effective, statistically better outcomes for moms and babes alike.... You'd think they'd jump at it.

It's an interesting thing, choosing a home birth is such a political choice. My doctor, who agreed to be in-hospital support, was terrified that the CCPS would find out it was a planned home birth and he'd be in trouble. So many people thought we were radicals.

It's like we have the choice whether or not we want to bring a child into the world, but once we make the choice to do so, we aren't smart enough to make decisions on how we are going to do it.

There it is.... Birth as a feminist issue....

[ February 25, 2002: Message edited by: Zoot Capri ]


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 25 February 2002 01:17 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Anyone who is interested in this subject should read "The American Way of Birth". Fantastic book, and convinced me that unless I have a very risky pregnancy or a sick feotus, there's no way I'm having my kids in a hospital. She also wrote American Way of Death, she does great investigative stories into human industries, and this is an industry, especially in the States.

This IS a feminist issue, for me, this is THE feminist issue. We women need to re-claim birth for the safe, natural, normal, and female process that it is. It isn't a medical issue in the VAST majority of the cases. And we don't need doctors telling us to lie back, hold our breath and push.
We don't need monitors and tubes stuck in every orifice. We don't need a list of "might go wrongs" clouding our minds at this very special and natural time.

If you want pain killers, that's totally okay. Heck, I may want them too. But, this is the least of the problems.

The "baby story" shows drive me crazy. Time and time and time again I see the hospitalization of births, this is an epidemic in the States. Some hospitals have a THIRTY percent C-section rate. Induction -usually because the labour isn't progessing as the DOCTOR would "like"-, epidural, subsequent lag in birth then either a caesarian or an episiotomy. Moms are usually flat on their backs, with about 4 tubes coming out of them, a crowd gathered round, yelling at her when to push, legs either in stirrups or being gripped by attendants or bewildred and demasculated fathers, eventual birth of baby, rub-down, vacuumed throat and nostrtils, clamp, cut, drops in the eyes and eventually handed to mom for a few minutes before they stich her up. My teeth or gritting the whole time. Then, we see home births, or progressive birthing centres attended by either midwives, or Obs with midwifery background. TOTAL opposite. You wouldn't think you're watching the same thing. Not once in the hospital births do I hear, "What would you like to do?" And not once in the midwife deliveries do I hear orders being barked.

BC had some great policies, however, I'm sure that Mr. Campbell has rolled all of those back to the dark ages.

I eventually want to study midwifery.


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 25 February 2002 04:35 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yes, I too find that shows like A Baby Story and Maternity Ward often medicalize birth to a disproportionate degree, and the latter is actually very scary, brings up all the things that go wrong in less than 5% of cases... Very disturbing.

I think there needs to be a cultural shift, where we no longer behave as if pregnancy and childbirth are illnesses. That's a long way off for the mainstream.

It is also very true that the medical system does not treat women with respect, and that was one of the most empowering things about choosing midwifery care.


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
empee
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2240

posted 25 February 2002 05:00 PM      Profile for empee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I know what you are saying about the TV shows, and I agree, mostly. They do show a disporportionate number of hospital births, but I think that just reflects what's happening in the "real (western) world". There have been a few amazing episodes where they've shown home births, use of birthing pools (which looks like a great idea), and midwife assisted hospital births.

Speaking of this feminist issue: why ARE doctors so much in opposition to natural childbirth methods? It's better for the mom, better for the babe, and considering the previous, it's got to be less stressful for the dad; our hospitals are overcrowded as it is (the Ottawa-Carleton Hospital tried to place a limit on the number of deliveries its doctors performed).

I have a hard time believing, in this day and age, that it's a big patriarchal conspiracy designed to prevent us from controlling our bodies while allowing men to take control of the birthing process. Are there practical (?) economic reasons? Are there liability concerns?


From: Mississauga | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 25 February 2002 05:05 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
In a word :

M-O-N-E-Y


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 25 February 2002 05:30 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Trinitty has about summed it up, empee....

There are really two factors here. The first factor is that medicine, even our own socialized system of medicine, is a business and that it has a definite bottom line. For every baby caught by a midwife, a doctor somewhere is $5000 (or thereabouts) shorter on the bottom line. So physicians who practice obstetrics are loath to allow those dollars to go to "less qualified"* personell.

* Midwives are actually more qualified than physicians, generally speaking, in turning babies, preventing tearing and non-invasive techniques.... They are specialists in their fields. The only thing they can't do that a doc can is cut.

The second factor is cultural. I don't think it is even a conscious patriarchal conspiracy -- I have an FP who is a good, caring physician who respects his patients to a higher degree than any other physician I have gone to -- even better than every female physician who has treated me. But at the same time, we have been a patriarchal culture where women are not trusted to make decisions about our bodies, and we are all conditioned to trust medical science beyond reason. Women's medicine has been even more so....

Think about it. How many generations have obstetrics and gynecology been dominated by male physicians? In my city, it still is. That historical attitude bleeds through in how OB/GYNs are trained... They are as much or more conditioned to it than the average joe.

Sad but true, the patriarchy still abounds....

[ February 25, 2002: Message edited by: Zoot Capri ]


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 25 February 2002 09:32 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
One can't discount the financial incentive for hospital birth, but I think you have to give men some credit to on another count.

I watched all three of my girls being born. There was difficulty with our first, I think maybe because my wife was so scared and stressed-- and I was not much help on that account, being a rookie myself.

All went well, in the end, but it was a long and trying excersize. And, the next two births got progressively easier. I'm sure we could have had our youngest at home without much fanfare. In fact, we nearly did by accident.


But, it's frightening for men to see all this. You can't really fault us for wanting what looks like the "best". Women go through a lot and for some of us at least, it's difficult to see a woman in pain. So, I think men tend to want you in hospital because if something did go wrong, all the fancy equipment is there.

I thought a lot about what childbirth must have been like in the "old days." After watching my wife, particularly with our first born, it struck me that after a long labour a woman was utter worn out, and if something went wrong at the end, there would be no reserves. So, I'm for things like epidurals and shiny machines, and being in a place where there's plasma and surgeons and all that stuff at the ready.

But that's not to say there are not better ways; that a normal pregnancy and birth can't or shouldn't be done at home. There's no doubt it can be, and should be more often.

But, it just scares the hell out of the audience, so that's why we might tend to favour the hospital route.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 25 February 2002 09:46 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Interesting Tommy. My husband felt exactly the same way. I thought fleetingly about a midwife, and mentioned it to him, and he was adamantly against it. I think that's probably because his experience with midwives in what were probably third world conditions (his family was poor) was quite different than what midwives are like here, and he was terrified that I would die during childbirth. Hell, he had irrational fears of me dying in childbirth even WITH the very best that medical technology could give.

I wonder if this is something that many men feel - worried sick about their wives and wanting what we as a society have been brought to believe is the very best in obstetrics?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 25 February 2002 09:47 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I totally understand your point Tommy but if you saw someone running a marathon would you immediately phone the doctor stick him in the car and put him on an IV and painkillers? Or would you admire his strength and stamina?

As far as wearing out in the old days when a woman was getting tired and the labour was slowing she would be encouraged to eat a protein laced stew or soup whereas now the doctors refuse to allow women to eat or even drink in most cases all this IN CASE she needs a c section and of course all the things that they put in place almost assure that a csection will be necessary.

There are a rather large number of people involved in traffic accidents yet we dont routinely hook them up to IV's or ask them not to eat or drink in case they become involved in a serious accident that might require surgery.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 25 February 2002 10:06 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
That's true about the eating, earthmother. I wasn't allowed to eat anything during my labour because I had an epidural, and you can't eat anything on one of those because it makes you nauseous (and having morning sickness from the 3rd week of pregnancy until the delivery didn't help the situation any). By about the 20th hour into it, I was absolutely starving (when I was awake - I slept through most of my 27 hour labour) and begged my father to smuggle me something. So he gave me a cracker. Bad move. RAAAALPH.

So I guess that's one drawback to painkillers. I was hungry as a horse after the baby was born, let me tell you.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
peripatetic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1957

posted 25 February 2002 10:09 PM      Profile for peripatetic        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
There are really two factors here. The first factor is that medicine, even our own socialized system of medicine, is a business and that it has a definite bottom line. For every baby caught by a midwife, a doctor somewhere is $5000 (or thereabouts) shorter on the bottom line. So physicians who practice obstetrics are loath to allow those dollars to go to "less qualified"* personell.

Zoot, like most Canadians you have a wildly exaggerated impression of physicians' fees. From the Saskatchewan Physicians Payment Schedule the fee for an obstetrician performing a vaginal delivery with post-natal care in hospital (40P) is $353. The initial pre-natal assessment (5P) pays $32.60 and subsequent pre- or post-natal visits (8P) pay $19.25. From these fees the obstetrician must pay all expenses, including office costs and substantial insurance premiums. The "bottom line" is after all of these expenses.

Most Canadian obstetricians have all the work they can handle, thus have little need to discourage midwifery for economic reasons. What they may dislike is having midwives take the easy cases and then when a complication arises hand off the delivery at the last minute to an obstetrician who will not be familiar with the patient yet will be fully liable if the delivery results in injury to the mother or baby. Although there are fee premiums for difficult births, physicians make their money on the easy procedures but do most of their work on the difficult ones.


From: hogtown-on-don | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 27 February 2002 01:26 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Most Canadian obstetricians have all the work they can handle, thus have little need to discourage midwifery for economic reasons. What they may dislike is having midwives take the easy cases and then when a complication arises hand off the delivery at the last minute to an obstetrician who will not be familiar with the patient yet will be fully liable if the delivery results in injury to the mother or baby.

In Saskatchewan, as there is a shortage of OB/GYNs, no obstetrician gets "easy" cases referred to him/her. They are all high-risk referrals, whether they're sent in early or called in at the last minute. It's the Family Practitioners who are delivering babies who are putting up the most resistence, and they are backed quite strongly by by the specialists.

And, I reiterate, there are more factors than economics, here. Part of it is definitely cultural.

quote:
But, it's frightening for men to see all this. You can't really fault us for wanting what looks like the "best". Women go through a lot and for some of us at least, it's difficult to see a woman in pain. So, I think men tend to want you in hospital because if something did go wrong, all the fancy equipment is there.

Your post really got me thinking, Tommy, so I had my hubby come read the thread, give me his perspective, since he was very active in the decision to have a home birth.

In a nutshell, he says that in one sense, being at the hospital offers a sense of security, and we did have one slightly tense moment in our home birth (not going to get into details here, too much info), suffice it to say it was minor and easily handled, but it definitely gave him an "Oh, shit..." moment...

On the other hand, he also feels that when you really do the homework, look at the numbers and how so many of the "comforting big shiny machine" procedures vastly increase the chances of having a c-section, his biggest concern was that his wife was going to be cut open unnecessarily. Things like an epidural increase the chances by varying percentages, depending on how early it's given, induction immediately increases chances by 100%, and the list goes on. In the end, he was a bigger advocate for home birth than I was.

I can understand men being worried, and being the support is a hard role to play. And men are often rendered passive by the medical system, which makes it even harder. Active support is the best thing for both partners. I've often said that if it were not for the blond guy's active involvement -- suggesting I move, massaging my shoulders, giving counter-pressure on my back, and telling me how beatiful/strong/tough/amazing I was, I don't know if I would have done nearly as well.

Fathers' contributions are also discounted by the medical system, and they are SOOOOOOO important!

Egads, another long one! Wonder if this is a hot issue for me, huh?


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 28 February 2002 11:03 AM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I had a baby almost six months ago - saw a midwife, planned a homebirth, healthy and uneventful pregnancy. There was no way I was going to a hospital. You see, my eldest daughter had been born in a hospital after a very long and difficult labour, during which I was bullied relentlessly by hospital staff about painkillers, internal fetal heart monitors, even about shaving my crotch. I ended up having her medication-free, but the bastards did an unneccesary episiotomy - slashed and stitched from my vagina to my rectum (for a 6.5 lb baby!?) without anaesthetic. Boy was I pissed.

As much as I wanted the second one at home, after being in labour for two days (the baby was turned around and got wedged against my spine), I was carted off by ambulance to the hospital where I was eventually pumped full of morphine while I waited to get the cocktail that would freeze me from the tits down. The c-section got under way about 52 hours after labour began, with my midwife there beside me holding my hand, and me so stoned I joked with the anaesthesiologist while they cut my daughter out of my body. Interesting experience, that.

Anyway, my daughter was uneffected by the drugs because they were delivered at the last possible moment. She was alert right from the getgo, never slept any more or less than expected, and is now a healthy, active 18 lb breastfed baby.

I don't want to think about the hell it would've been if we'd had to manually turn her around and I had to push her out after more than two exhausting days of contractions and active labour. I'm so glad I had a midwife with me through the entire pregnancy and the birth, but I'm also glad there was a hospital and lots of pain medication to get me through the ordeal* at the end.

* Disclaimer - for those now reconsidering having children, sorry about the horror story, but this stuff almost never happens, and I still strongly support midwife-assisted homebirths


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 28 February 2002 11:49 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I am aged and spayed, but I gotta tell you guys, I find these stories absolutely gripping. I was hanging on your every word, there, Rebecca West. I'm sure you all deserve medals.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 28 February 2002 01:19 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Holy Cats, Rebecca!!!

You know, I'm not saying drugs and intervention is all bad. They have their place. After two days of active labour, you're just exhausted, and you had real complications. It happens. And that's when all of Tommy's shiny comforting machines need to be used.

I'm so glad your baby was fine and alert. 18 lbs at 6 mos! Wow! Mine are both breastfeed, too, but were both only around 20 lbs at a year, and they were big babies, too, about 8 lbs each!

I have a friend who was in active labour for 24 hours, with the midwife in attendance (as a doula, it was a planned hospital birth), and when my friend was having weak and erratic contractions due to fatigue, it was the midwife who suggested she take the epi for a couple of hours to rest, then push baby out with more strength. It did the trick. And in that instance it was exactly the right thing for her to choose. She let the epi wear off and pushed the baby out on her own.

I guess the bee in my bonnet is that it only happens for real to a small percentage of births, provided the medicos don't muck with you and mess up Ma Nature's wonderful mechanisms.

I tend to take my own case as an example. I got talked into an induction because I was an arbitrary number of days "overdue". I was fine, the baby was fine, but I got seriously bullied into it, frightened half to death by the OB. After having my daughter, I did a little investigation -- to find that there was no real medical reason to induce, and that the induction increased the odds of c-section to 1 in 2. Nobody explained the risks to me, and I was very upset by this. I was also pressured to take an epidural (induced contractions are wicked), which I turned down. That would have raised my odds even more.

quote:
I'm sure you all deserve medals.

I know Rebecca does, but me -- Nah. I'm no tougher than anybody else. Just a wee bit stubborn.


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 28 February 2002 07:58 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
And that's when all of Tommy's shiny comforting machines need to be used.

Well, Rebecca's experience shows the weakness in my argument, I think. Something did go wrong, and with the skills of a good midwife, who did her best for the home delivery, but knew when the hospital was needed, safety was ensured, and everything-- excuse the phraseolgy-- came out okay in the end.

You have to remember, men are sucks when it comes to pain. I don't think I truly became fully a man until the day my eldest was born and I watched.

It changes you. Matures you. Humbles you.

Peripatetic,

quote:
Zoot, like most Canadians you have a wildly exaggerated impression of physicians' fees.

I'm probably in that group, but there are a few things I do know.


quote:
. From these fees the obstetrician must pay all expenses, including office costs and substantial insurance premiums.

Like all business people, there are tax deductions for office and other expenses, so those costs are not fully absorbed by the Doctor.

I'm not familiar with the Saskatchewan government's treatment of G.P.'s and Specialists, but in Ontario, the malpractice insurance for G.P's is subsidized by the tax payer to a certain extent, and Specialists enjoy full subsidy for their premiums.

And, I don't understand why premiums are so high. It's much rarer in Canada that malpractice suits succeed. If Doctor's are paying high premiums, it seems that's something they should address as a group with the insurance companies instead of passing, what appears to my less than fully informed opinion, price gouging on to the taxpayer.

There's also about 43 million dollars missing from the Ontario health budget since 1998, due to over billing and fraudulent billing by Doctors. Some of it, particularly from the over billing part, has been and is being recovered. The larger part due to fraud doesn't enjoy much pay back. It's a small part of the overall budget in the same time period, but when we discuss Doctor's renumeration frequently there are lots of things-- plus and minus-- conveniently left out.

I'd love to see an actual full accounting.

Including the amount the taxpayer subsidizes Doctor's education, too.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca