October 2011 Moms
KrisM86
member
AW: My birth story in TIME article
KrisM86
member
TIME magazine just put out an article on a national birth center study that had fantastic results. I was interviewed for the article and a bit of my experience and birth story are featured at the end of it. In case any of you want to check it out (not just because I'm in it; it's a really good article!)
This discussion has been closed.
Re: AW: My birth story in TIME article
Cool!
I am not all surprised that csections are on the rise. Especially when you get doctors like my friend had who schedule a csection because "he is a big baby..." He was 8lb 8oz. Umm....that's not big.
Burned by the Bear
I don't disagree, but just as a counterpoint, drs should really prepare their patients for the possibility of needing a c-section when they are clearly carrying a big baby. Not tell them it's 100% necessary, but suggest it might become necessary. My friend was carrying huge all through her pregnancy. They never even discussed c-sections with her, so she didn't mentally prepare for it as a possibility. She ended up needing one, partly because her labour didn't progress (bad positioning of baby) and partly because her daughter was born at 10lbs3oz. She would've found the whole thing much easier to deal with if somebody at some point had said "Hmmm, this looks like it's going to be a big baby. You could end up needing a c-section, but we'll see how things go."
Sorry for the tangent, now I'm off to read the actual article.
BFP #1: July 12, 2010 Natural M/C: July 26, 2010
BFP #2: January 30 ,2011 Born: September 29, 2011
BFP #3: January 5, 2013 Born: August 25, 2013
Interesting story, especially since you eventually had to transfer to a hospital to receive an epidural.
My hospital's c-section rates were about 29% at the time, but if you looked at c-section rates for FTM it was about 17%, which is reasonable. All of the CS moms (including myself) that I know IRL had to settle on that route because a complicating factor arose during birth, nobody wanted or planned a c-section ahead of time. I am curious about how those scenarios would have been dealt with at a birth center. What kind of fetal monitoring do they do because often fetal distress means a quick ticket to the ER.
What a small world! A friend on my FB just posted this same article. She delivered at one of the birth centers they mentioned (the one in SC).
Birth centers aren't my cup of tea, but that's just because I'm a wuss when it comes to pain. I need my epidural haha.
It was interesting to read, nonetheless, thanks for posting KrisM!
My birth center uses intermittent fetal monitoring...every 15 minutes. Many people assume constant fetal monitoring is better at catching issues, but every study that has been done has shown that there is no difference is newborn outcomes with intermittent or constant fetal monitoring. My birth center is 7 miles from a hospital and next door to the paramedics, so in case of an emergency, you'd immediately transfer to the hospital.
Just for clarity, I'm not trying to say all c sections are bad. I just think the study and article shed some light on how overused they are in the US. Midwives and birth centers can provide wonderful care for many low risk women and are a great option tht more people should be aware of. They can also save the health care system so much money.
I think everyone should have it in the back of their head that there COULD be a chance of csection. My cousin delivered her 10lb 5oz baby vaginally, and drug free....and she has a petite bone structure. But it was in the back of her head that there is a possibility that a csection would happen. I think that way too many women have their head in the clouds and think they WILL have a baby vaginally and are "shocked" or "blindsided" that they needed a csection. The baby is going to come out one way or another, might as well prepare yourself for both. But I think it's crazy to tell your patient they are automatically going to schedule a csection when the mom was measuring right on target and the baby at the time is weighing around 8lb, obviously give or take a pound or so. They did the csection and I had my baby a few weeks later and she was over 9lb. Not once did my doctor say anything about a csection, even though I was measuring ahead and they assumed I would have a big baby. But I am not all puppies and rainbows and knew there was a chance I would end up with a csection. So even though they didn't discuss it, to act like you had no idea there was a chance you might need a csection, regardless of the baby's size.....is just stupidity in my opinion.
I just think that a responsible dr mentions the possibility of c-section and finds out the patient's preferences. Some women might say "I will do everything I can to avoid it, even if it means labouring for 3 days," and some might say "If things start to go wrong, go for it immediately." But to never mention it at all is short-sighted, imo.
And they're pretty sure her labour didn't progress BECAUSE her daughter was so big. She has since had an 8lb baby vaginally and labour progressed no problem. They think that the shape of her pelvis wouldn't allow her larger daughter to get into the right position to apply pressure for things to progress. So it was a combination of factors, including her daughter's size.
Elsa, I agree that most women should be aware of the possibility of needing interventions. But c-sections and other interventions are less common here than in the States, and if every single woman you know has given birth vaginally, you don't necessarily think of it as being a possibility. Which is why I think it's the doctor's responsibility to bring it up at some point. To me, it's like discussing pain management: find out the patient's wishes and explain the pros/cons from a medical perspective.
BFP #1: July 12, 2010 Natural M/C: July 26, 2010
BFP #2: January 30 ,2011 Born: September 29, 2011
BFP #3: January 5, 2013 Born: August 25, 2013