Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Using ultrasounds to determine gestational age could result in baby's death

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by lizch View Post
    I'm amazed the message about not inducing/doing c-sections prior to 39 weeks unless absolutely necessary has not reached the respiratory therapist community! You're in a position to put pressure to change this.

    http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-93...073-6/fulltext

    The pelvis flex notion is not even remotely nonsense. Why do you think you can pour pitocin into a mom's veins at 36 weeks pregnant, and get nowhere, if pitocin is all it takes? There's a whole orchestra of hormones that precede oxytocin, including prostaglandins and relaxin.

    Pushing a big baby out "usually" results in decels? That's not the major concern with big babies. I've seen 10-11lb babies born without a single decel and 6lbers decel'ing like crazy. The concern with big babies is primarily shoulder dystocia, and even ACOG is lukewarm about induction for macrosomia as a solution to that.

    Yes, there are dangers in waiting too long for birth to happen naturally, including meconium aspiration, SGA, and stillbirth. But there are also risks to birth being forced prior to 39 weeks, whether you want to believe it or not.
    C-Sections, I'd agree with you on that. And as for Pit, what I said is that it doesn't damp down or eliminate the mothers natural hormones. I'm well aware of the prostaglandin cascade and relaxin, both of which still occur when labor is artificially induced which in turn means that mom is all set and ready to deliver.

    As as for the big babies and shoulder dystocia, all you're doing is trying to sidetrack the issue again. In your post, you decried having a C-section done because of the 'excuse' of a big baby. Big babies can be a real problem, and if there are decels or failure to progress, you need to take the baby by C-Section. There is also a formula for evaluating the size of the birth canal vs. the size of the baby to determine whether an elective C-section is advised. That evaluation is quite accurate, and given the low risks of a C-Section as weighed against the danger to mother and baby, most moms choose to go with a C-Section. And yes, it is a choice!

    And as for risks before 39 weeks, there are risks involved in childbirth to both mom and baby no matter how many weeks along they are! But, I've been in on the deliveries of many babies in the 36-38 week area and from my experience, it's rare to have a problem. Usually, the problems that occur in that period of time would have occurred anyway. We just had a baby born with a neoblastoma at 37 weeks---delaying for two or three more weeks wouldn't have changed the outcome.

    Comment


    • #17
      Both my babies were delivered at 35 1/2 weeks. I was induced with pitocin for 36 hours with my first one, and finally had a C-section. Thank God my second doctor would not allow that and we just did an 'Insurance mandated" 6 hour induction before taking my daughter by C-section. Pitocin caused labor, but nothing was going to convince my cervix that it was ready to deliver! After 36 hours---with 28 of those hours considered 'active-hard labor' I was only at a 3 dialation!

      My body was done being pregnant and was going to start protesting (high blood pressure, liver, kidney, etc) I spent 4 weeks at home in bed and 18 days in the hospital in bed before my first one was born. And I really thank God for the medical team that did ultasounds every 4-5 days to measure femurs, and everything else--to come to that day when they said 'its a GO!' Neither of my kids went to NICU at all, although they were on stand by. They were small, 6 pounds and 5 pounds, but very healthy. I cannot image life if I were trying to have those children with out the ultrasound, or without the doctors and hospital---I am nearly confident that I would not have made it, and my son may not have either.

      Hats off to the medical profession!

      Comment


      • #18
        I think that's the most retarded article I've read in a while. The whole thing makes it sound as if the dr "has" to deliver the baby right at the perfect time or it's going to die. The mom is just a machine that has to be "removed of child" when the time is right. All three of mine have been homebirths, they came out when they were ready, I didn't even have a due date for the 3rd, I figured about the general couple of weeks it would be and that was good enough for me. Meconium is a much bigger problem when you are on pitocin and your poor infant is being slammed around in your uterus under way more stress than God (or nature take your pick) planned. There are plenty of babies out there that were born way earlier than they should have been as the dr took an ultrasound and decided that the baby was too big to go to term, and then when induced it comes out tiny and premature. I chose not to have any ultrasounds with my children. I felt that it wasn't necessary and I didn't want to expose my baby to any possible risk that ultrasounds may have. I have been blessed with healthy babies and ridiculously easy labors, I know the medical profession is there for a reason and they are wonderful if they are needed, but childbirth isn't a disease and shouldn't be treated as such.

        Comment


        • #19
          Isfahel, I'm sure homebirthing mothers that took a similar path but lost their babies have a different opinion. Its a bit naive to be so high and mighty in your opinion just because everything worked out perfectly 'for you'.

          FTR, I don't mind being overseen by medical professionals, nor do I mind ultrasounds. I also don't mind midwives and natural births without intervention of any kind. Birth is such a personal thing...every mother MUST be comfortable with their decisions as a negative outcome is possible in any situation and you have to be able to live with yourself at the end of the day, whether a squiggly baby in your arms or not.

          Comment


          • #20
            Yes, exactly. It's always very convenient when labor and birth go according to God/Nature's plan. When that is how it works out for folks, I'm happy for them -- they got the nice birth experience they were hoping for, it was safe and easy, yay, etc.

            But personally I'm glad in our case that we had actual medical assistance available to us if needed, since as it turned out, we did end up needing it. And I'm happy for us, too. If we didn't live in this century my baby or I would've been more likely to die.

            But Bukawww, I wouldn't call that "high and mighty". High and mighty are the various women who snidely inform me that my labor went the way it did because I didn't really want it enough, or because I just didn't try hard enough. Ugh.

            I think Isfahel is in a different, far more reasonable category here -- she has a good point about the article making it sound like it's ALL due to the doctor's choices. And beyond that she's just relaying her own experience, how she felt, her priorities, etc... no generalizations there toward others. Thankfully.
            "Trust me, you will soon enter a magical land full of delicious steakflowers, with butterbacons fluttering around over the extremely rompable grass and hillsides."

            Comment


            • #21
              Oops, wasn't trying to be high and mighty, was just trying to say that the article was just vary poorly written, and then I got off on homebirth.... Which I do tend to do more than I should, I'm definetly pro homebirth. I've had several friends and family who were tortured at the hands of dr's during their hospital births. And I'm not exaggerating.... Well, maybe a bit But I've heard and seen enough to know that many many hospital births are over managed and the needs of the mother ignored in the interest of the dr's time and comfort.

              Comment


              • #22
                Ah, you and I posted around the same time, do go back and see that comment -- I'll add here that I've heard horror stories like that too. I'd say that in at least some cases, people need to make sure they picked the right doctors to start with. Birth is an incredibly important experience... I made sure I had a team of doctors who shared my philosophy and priorities. Therefore it all worked great for me. (and our hospital's birth center has a great rep for support of moms in labor, they teach classes all about the different positions and options for you, etc. etc. etc. Not one of those "stay here on your back and don't move" hospitals!)

                But of course not everybody has a ton of choice there, depends on your local options and healthcare/insurance, I know...

                And as for the article yeah, it's all kinds of poorly done. I certainly hope the actual study was better than the journalist's write-up!
                "Trust me, you will soon enter a magical land full of delicious steakflowers, with butterbacons fluttering around over the extremely rompable grass and hillsides."

                Comment


                • #23
                  That's great that you've got a good birth center, here in AR we have one of the highest rates of c-secs and horrible dr's. And then half the time you don't even get your dr because he/she is off duty when your babe decides to come out. I know that hospitals save the lives of many babies who wouldn't otherwise make it and it is a wonderful thing that we have that available. But they also endanger many lives and ruin what could otherwise be a wonderful, enjoyable birth and turn it into a horror story by unnecessary inductions, overmanagement of births, strapping women on their backs, and unnecessary c-sections. Ok, I'll get off my soapbox now.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by loneviking View Post
                    C-Sections, I'd agree with you on that. And as for Pit, what I said is that it doesn't damp down or eliminate the mothers natural hormones. I'm well aware of the prostaglandin cascade and relaxin, both of which still occur when labor is artificially induced which in turn means that mom is all set and ready to deliver.

                    As as for the big babies and shoulder dystocia, all you're doing is trying to sidetrack the issue again. In your post, you decried having a C-section done because of the 'excuse' of a big baby. Big babies can be a real problem, and if there are decels or failure to progress, you need to take the baby by C-Section. There is also a formula for evaluating the size of the birth canal vs. the size of the baby to determine whether an elective C-section is advised. That evaluation is quite accurate, and given the low risks of a C-Section as weighed against the danger to mother and baby, most moms choose to go with a C-Section. And yes, it is a choice!

                    And as for risks before 39 weeks, there are risks involved in childbirth to both mom and baby no matter how many weeks along they are! But, I've been in on the deliveries of many babies in the 36-38 week area and from my experience, it's rare to have a problem. Usually, the problems that occur in that period of time would have occurred anyway. We just had a baby born with a neoblastoma at 37 weeks---delaying for two or three more weeks wouldn't have changed the outcome.

                    First, I am wondering if you read the supplied link. Babies born electively, as in induced or by elective c-section before 39 weeks are at an increased risk for complications.

                    Second, induction does indeed interfere with the natural labor process. And measurements done before labor on the pelvis are not accurate. Even during labor they are not accurate as the baby's head will help to open up the pelvis even wider. Another important point on the 'big baby' issue is that in the absence of gestational diabetes, with a baby in good position and a mother that is properly supported by her attendants it is unlikely that a woman will have an issue. True CPD is very rare in the absence of malnutrition and a severe injury. Question CPD
                    Information about CPD
                    Meghan

                    My MDA journal

                    Primal Ponderings- my blog- finally added some food pron :P

                    And best of all my Body Fat Makeover!!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by avocado View Post
                      I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I don't know where the heck you're getting this stuff from. Not even close to true.
                      It's okay, I totally understand. I think the truth is worth seeking no matter what.
                      It may have changed now or may depend on the medical school (I HIGHLY doubt it, let me know if you find information that states otherwise) but from what I understand, medical school uses mostly classroom techniques and cadavers (I have talked to several family members who have gone through medical school (as well as my own doctor, who is a friend of my whole family, he's really cool--we talk about everything and he thinks I should be a doctor.... no way :P)). Residency is where they are introduced to the hospital setting and it is only then that the scenarios they are taught in textbooks gain faces. They do not witness births until that time, and even then, they may only witness (and not even participate) in one or two before they obtain their licence.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by ZoŽ View Post
                        It is true that they do not witness a vaginal birth until residency and even so
                        I was at a birth last week and we had a fabulous med student present - and a resident....with one of my favorite OBs doing some once-in-a-lifetime teaching. It was great.

                        I really can't stand the online publication shemdog keeps linking to. The titles are so outrageous that it reads like the National Enquirer.

                        "Using ultrasounds to determine gestational age could result in baby's death". I mean, really? Sensationalistic journalism much? It would be so much more meaningful if they would stick to the facts. It's titles and articles like this - purposefully hyperbolic- that caused me to stop reading Mercola.

                        I won't waste my time reading anything from 'naturalnews'.



                        iherb referral code CIL457- $5 off first order

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Zoe, typically medical school is primarily in the classroom for the first two years, and the second two years are primarily clerkships, which means working on hospital wards and in offices. Most students actually deliver babies themselves while still in medical school.

                          They are introduced to the hospital setting long before residency, and this is nothing new. The last two years of med school have always been primarily clinical, and are very hands on.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X