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.
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!
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.
[QUOTE=loneviking;225429]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.[/QUOTE]
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. [URL="http://www.ican-online.org/community/videos/laureen/question-cpd"]Question CPD[/URL]
[URL="http://www.ican-online.org/vbac/cephalopelvic-disproportion-cpd"]Information about CPD[/URL]
[QUOTE=avocado;224309]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=ZoŽ;224030] It is true that they do not [I]witness[/I] a vaginal birth until residency and even so [/QUOTE]
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'.
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.