In the olden days (say, anytime before 1970), dads-to-be weren’t allowed in the delivery room. Instead, they had to bide their time in the waiting room before they could break out the cigars. Think of Ricky Ricardo and other sitcom dads pacing in the waiting room as their wives did the hard work off-screen.

But times have changed and nowadays, most fathers I know would never agree to miss out on the big event.

I certainly wasn’t planning on going through labor without my husband by my side. After all, it wasn’t just my baby I was having. It was ours and I wanted him to be part of the experience. But I was admittedly, a bit nervous that he would be grossed out by the actual event.

Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It

Imagine giving birth to a beautiful baby and then immediately having that child taken away from you.

That’s what happened to a New Jersey mother, identified in court papers as V.M., who refused to sign a pre-consent form for a c-section at St. Barnabas hospital in Livingston.  A c-section she didn’t need, since her baby was born vaginally without complications.

Pregnant women hear lots of talk from hospitals and doctors encouraging them to take charge of their labor and delivery.  Indeed, even the St. Barnabas website says, “You should take an active role by talking with your physician or midwife and asking specific questions such as when a c-section would be recommended; what steps would be taken prior to performing a c-section; whether to seek a second opinion.  It is important that you feel comfortable with the views of your physician or midwife on c-section deliveries.”  But St. Barnabas has a 50% c-section rate, and New Jersey hospitals have the highest overall cesarean rate in the nation.

We know c-section rates have been steadily on the rise.  C-sections are easier and more convenient for doctors to perform, but they generally require more recovery time for the patient.  Plus, if hospitals are going to encourage women to breastfeed by making them bring their own formula, then they should be encouraging drug-free vaginal birth as well.  Time reports that among ”women giving birth for the first time, those whose labor was induced were twice as likely to have a c-section delivery.”  And Pitocin inductions are known to cause breastfeeding problems.

So who can blame V.M. for not wanting to pre-authorize a c-section?  As it turns out, St. Barnabas could.  Court records indicate that “hospital staff referred V.M.’s case to the Division of Youth and Family Services at least in part because of concerns regarding V.M.’s decisions during labor, including her decision not to preauthorize consent to cesarean surgery.”

But it gets worse.  V.M. had a history of psychiatric issues, “having been on a range of medication including Zoloft and Prozac and in psychotherapy prior to her pregnancy.”  Newman writes, “She went off her medication during her pregnancy for fear of its effect on her fetus. Prior to coming to the hospital to give birth, there was no indication that she was a danger to herself or to others.”

Since hospital staff described V.M.’s attitude during labor as “combative,” she was deemed a danger to her unborn child and has not been able to raise her baby, who is now 3-years-old. Continue reading »

Tweet

33

Pin It

Researchers are trying to figure out how to keep moms and doctors from choosing to induce labor early for non-medical reasons. It’s an all-to-popular practice, they say, for doctors to electively induce a woman in the 37th or 38th week, even though the accepted wisdom is that it’s needlessly risky to jumpstart the process before week 39.

A baby is considered “full term” at 37 weeks, and many babies born at this point are perfectly healthy. But there is a greater chance of complications (like breathing problems) and a higher likelihood that the woman will deliver via C-section when babies are given a nudge to come into the world this early.

It’s not just a health risk, says the report in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. There are economic reasons to keep babies in the womb longer.

Continue reading »

Tweet

0

Pin It

Natasha Ramirez of Sydney Australia says that she was turned away from a hospital because they didn’t have “enough room.” And besides, the nurse told her, you won’t be in labor “for another 24 to 48 hours.” So she went home. “Five hours later baby Anjelita was born” on her bedroom floor, according to Australia’s Daliy Telegraph.

The 27-year-old new mom claims that she was bleeding and “in labour” (they spell things funny in Australia) when she arrived at Liverpool Hospital. Apparently Ramirez was 4 days past her due date, “needed anti-D injections because of her O-negative blood type” and due to complications with a previous birth, and oh yeah — she was having contractions. But a nurse “assessed” her and told Ramirez to go home. She says that she was not seen by a doctor. Continue reading »

Tweet

11

Pin It