Private Midwifery in Sydney Rotating Header Image

Birth

New induction policy a threat to women, or a threat to doctors? You be the judge.

An article in The Newcastle Herald yesterday states that:

pushing a policy to reduce caesarean births are creating rules that are potentially dangerous for patients and threatening to doctors … red tape is threatening professional independence.

It also discouraged treatment tailored to individual patients.

… Compliance with directives telling obstetricians when and how to deliver babies was mandatory, under the threat of disciplinary action and loss of indemnity cover …

… a recent directive requiring a reduction in caesarean section rates to 20per cent by 2015 was an illusory and possibly dangerous target.

What is being referred to here is the NSW Health Policy Directive on induction of labour at or beyond term. It is a well-written and thorough document that can inform best practice for induction of labour. Rather than “telling obstetricians when and how to deliver babies”, it guides practice in a woman-centered manner:

Induction of labour carries inherent risk and must be exercised with caution. There needs to be clear benefits for the mother and/or the fetus.

At term, women must be offered information about the risks associated with prolonged pregnancies, and the options available to them.

Induced labour has an impact on the birth experience for women. Labour is often more painful than spontaneous labour, and epidural analgesia and assisted delivery are more likely to be required.
Treatment and care should take into account a woman’s individual needs and preferences. Women who are having, or being offered, induction of labour must have the opportunity to receive accurate information and make informed decisions about their care and treatment, in partnership with their health care professionals.

This doesn’t sound like an approach that is potentially dangerous for patients or an approach that discourages treatment that is tailored to individual patients.

The article goes on to assert that:

Also concerning was a departmental policy that elective or pre-labour caesarean section must not routinely be carried out before 39weeks gestation, due to risk of respiratory morbidity in babies.

And the problem is? All this is saying is that an elective or pre-labour caesarean should not routinely be carried out before 39 weeks. This is not the same as saying that caesarean can never be performed prior to 39 weeks, yet the contributors to the article go on to say that:

‘‘[The policy] effectively forbids doctors in NSW public hospitals to schedule routine elective caesarean section before 39weeks,’’ …‘‘Anyone doing so risks disciplinary action and may forfeit indemnity cover.’’

This is clearly nonsense!

The policy directive does state that:

Induction of labour must not routinely be offered on maternal request alone.

Health care professionals offering induction of labour must:
• provide the woman with adequate time to discuss the information with her partner/support person before coming to a decision;
• encourage the woman to access a variety of sources of information;
• invite the woman to ask questions, and encourage her to think about her options; and
• support the woman in whatever decision she makes.

Women should be offered support and analgesia as required, and staff should encourage women to use their own coping strategies for pain relief. This includes the opportunity to labour in water.

I fail to understand what is unreasonable about this policy which is evidence-based, woman-centered and flexible so as to meet the woman’s present health needs. Most health professionals practice within evidence-based guidelines, best practice guidelines and accepted standards of practice. These are developed in consultation with industry experts and after consultation of the relevant literature on the subject. I am curious that the obstetricians in this article are critical of a policy directive that is based on evidence and safe practice, citing that such a policy would threaten professional independence. RANZCOG has policies and guidelines, as does the UK Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. A mark of a professional body is that it possesses its own information that is unique to the profession. Why has this new policy directive caused such concern for doctors? It is merely suggesting that women should not be induced willy-nilly for no good reason and we have good evidence to justify this position.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Maternal Death following a Homebirth

Much has been published recently about the very unfortunate death of a mother following a homebirth with private midwives. No details have been released that could allow us to form an opinion that this woman’s death was “because” she birthed at home, and it is also possible that an appropriate and timely transfer was arranged and that she died of complications that arose in hospital. I am not privy to any more details than what can be found in the local press. Even though at this stage, no-one really knows how or why Caroline died, many people have taken the opportunity to make assumptions as to the exact cause of death, and more so, they are certain that her death would have been preventable and hence avoidable had she birthed in hospital. I am astounded that anyone could make such assumptions – and that the media would publish such opinions – when they are not grounded in fact.

So, what do we know?

Maternal mortality includes deaths in women up to a year after giving birth or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy. The maternal mortality rate in Australia varies between about 8.4 and 11.1 per 100,000.

Direct maternal deaths are those that result from obstetric complications of pregnancy. This includes such things as amniotic fluid embolism, haemorrhage, infection and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.

As well as direct maternal deaths, there are also indirect maternal deaths, and these are deaths that result from pre-existing disease which maybe aggravated by pregnancy or birth. This can include such things as heart disease, psychiatric causes, epilepsy and so on.

It has been suggested that since 1999, there has only been one other woman who has died following a homebirth attended by a midwife. The AIHW report for 1997-99 also describes another maternal death following a homebirth, however that was an unattended homebirth (ie, the woman had given birth at home without a midwife present). Both women died of postpartum haemorrhages.

The question we need to ask, is whether these reports of maternal death following homebirth reach statistical significance. In statistics, a result is statistically significant if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance. It is possible that the two maternal deaths following midwife-attended home births are the only deaths we will have for the next 50-odd years; or it could be that in the next few years, we will have far more maternal deaths following midwife-attended homebirths. Certainly, other countries do not report an increased maternal mortality rate for women birthing at home with a midwife.

All of this said, it is incumbent on every midwife who attends homebirths to advise women of the increased risk of death and serious injury should a major complication occur at home. This is related to the lack of resources, staff and facilities at home and the time and distance needed to transfer to hospital in an urgent situation. This, however, is also the case in a smaller public or private hospital, where if something should go horribly wrong, those facilities would also not have the immediate capability to provide the best possible assistance.

In the event of major complications, a team effort is really needed: midwives, obstetricians, anaesthetist, operating theatre, intensive care unit, medications, IV lines, equipment for monitoring the heart and respiration and blood pressure, ultrasound imaging and so on. However, it also needs to be said that this would only be in very rare and exceptional circumstances that can mostly be known in advance. We also know that serious complications that can result in death are more likely when women have had interventions in labour and birth.

This is why women are encouraged to birth in hospital if their medical history suggests that they are at a higher risk of life-threatening complications in birth (eg epilepsy, clotting disorders, high blood pressure, and so on), and it also why midwives are reluctant to attend any form of intervention in the home setting. At the slightest hint of a complication, a responsible midwife will advise her client to transfer to hospital in the interests of safety.

All of this said (and done), low risk does not mean no risk. A perfectly healthy, low-risk woman experiencing a normal pregnancy and a normal labour can still experience a massive postpartum hemorrhage that cannot be effectively managed by the equipment available at a home birth. It also could not be managed at a small private or public hospital where theatre staff, anaesthetists, monitoring equipment etc might not be readily available. It is important for women to understand that while this is highly unlikely to ever happen, should it happen, it does increase the risk of death or serious injury (eg brain damage). It is a difficult task counselling women in very rare but very serious possibilities, and birthing women need to feel free to make the best decisions for them and their families, in the full knowledge of all possibilities. Midwives should not withhold this information from women as it is materially significant to their decisions about place of birth.

Certainly, the media takes the view that all homebirth deaths could be prevented by having those women birth in hospital. This may be true. Or maybe not. Private midwives examine the deaths of women in hospitals, and often comment that those deaths might have been preventable had those women birthed at home or with a private midwife in hospital. Cases of women dying following unnecessary caesareans. Women suiciding in the early postnatal period with no support in caring for their baby and ineffective antenatal planning for the possibility of postnatal depression. Women dying of postpartum haemorrhage following induced labour (induction is a risk for PPH) for hypertension: it might surprise you to know that rates of high blood pressure are very low amongst women cared for by private midwives. A PPH in a woman who had had a caesarean for her third baby – a breech baby: this woman could very easily have proceeded with a vaginal birth, especially given that it was her third baby. Avoidance of the caesarean might have meant no PPH and saved her life. These are the sorts of cases where hospital doesn’t “save” women from death: it might be seen, in some cases to actually cause the death, however the media will never report on this.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

“I’ve been told my baby is big”

and my care provider wants to induce me / schedule a caesarean.

An interesting dilemma. What to do? A recent article has found that ultrasound diagnosis of fetal macrosomia (a big baby) at term is inaccurate in the majority of cases, and this inaccuracy may be contributing to unnecessary caesarean sections.

In an observational cohort study of 235 pregnancies at term in which ultrasound measurements led to a diagnosis of fetal macrosomia, only about a third of the infants were actually macrosomic at birth. Additionally, these pregnancies with ultrasound-diagnosed fetal macrosomia were more than twice as likely as all pregnancies in the population to end in cesarean delivery

Surprisingly, the accuracy of ultrasound in assessing fetal weight is similar to that found with simple clinical palpation (feeling the size of the baby through the woman’s abdomen)

The [average] percentage error of the estimated fetal weight was 8.6% overall. Viewed another way, 44% of the weights were off by more than 10%, and 7% were off by more than 20%.

The mode of delivery was cesarean section in 66% of the pregnancies, compared with just 29% of all pregnancies in Calgary during the same period. “So it’s [more than] double, the percentage who are getting C-sections, on what is [an inaccurate weight]

It’s a difficult situation for the care provider when considering what to say to a pregnant woman. Tell any woman her baby might be “big” and she’ll rightly be scared. And this fear can impact the birth and lead to interventions. Conversely, is it ok to say, “Your baby is the perfect size for your pelvis and you’ll birth your baby beautifully”? What if it doesn’t quite work out this way for this woman?

I like to let women know that size isn’t everything. We all know this! The position of the baby is also really important as is the strength of the contractions, a woman’s morale and motivation, her support team, and the decisions she’ll make with her care provider.

A woman can have a “small” posterior baby that results in a long labour … or a “large” but well positioned baby that results in a smooth and easy labour. I’ve known many women to have a caesarean with their first baby – women will say, “He didn’t fit. It was a long labour and I only got to 4cm and he was only 3.4Kg” and they go on to have a 4kg baby next time in a four hour labour with no tears.

My feeling is that it is ok to let a woman know that her baby feels like it might be larger than expected so that the woman can proactively plan for her labour with things like upright positions in labour, positions that open the pelvis and positions that help her to relax. It’s always important to be truthful as this builds trust. It’s also really important to talk about the position of the baby as I often find that a baby’s position in labour is more important than its size. It’s not about creating fear and disappointment by suggesting, “Your baby is h.u.g.e … you’ll need a caesarean for sure. In fact, why don’t we book it in now and you can save yourself hours of labour only to end up with a caesarean?” But rather to explain that the baby feels larger than expected, that babies grow at different rates and that size is not the only important factor. And then work with her to help her to understand positions and strategies that will help her through her labour. In my own practice, only 4% women having their first babies have a caesarean, compared with 25% as the National average for first-time mums. I wonder how many caesareans can be avoided by providing continuity of care for women through pregnancy, birth and the new parenting experience?

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Cascade of intervention

A study has found that first-time mothers who have their care within the general hospital system and have their labour induced, face a greater risk of having a caesarean section than those who wait for labour to start on its own.

In the study, 44 percent women had their labour induced, and 20% of those inductions failed (ie, labour did not start) and caesareans were performed in those cases.

By definition, induction is performed before a woman’s body is ready for labour, and this may point to the reason for such a high rate of failed inductions. In other cases, the reason for the induction is also the reason that the caesarean became necessary. For example, a labour may be induced because of concerns for the baby, and once in labour, the baby shows signs that it is not tolerating labour well and so a caesarean is performed.

The study does point to the issue that inductions should not be performed unless they are genuinely necessary. Up to 50% inductions may not be “indicated”, that is, performed for a medical reason. They might be performed more for convenience, for example. However, if we limit inductions to those which really need to be done, we would lower the caesarean rate.

There are some reasons when an induction might be a good idea, such as when the woman’s blood pressure is high, if the pregnancy goes beyond 42 weeks, if the waters have broken for many hours and labour has not started, if there are concerns for the baby and so on.

Before any induction is commenced, it’s important that women are fully informed by their care provider of the reasons for the induction, the alternatives, the process and procedure, what to expect and the likely outcome.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Before you have a baby … Expert Financial Planning Advice

Many families have asked me over the years about issues relating to budgeting for a family, and also about their options for such things as paid parental leave versus the Baby Bonus. I am delighted to have met Boris Glushankov who is a Financial Planner at In Advance Financial Management. Boris has a special interest in all issues relating to budgeting and financial planning for new families and couples who are considering having their first baby.

You often hear new parents say that having a baby is an amazing life-changing experience. Nothing is ever the same again! At a time when every aspect of your life is changing, the last thing you want to think about is money. It may not be always possible to reduce your financial commitments, but there are things you can do to plan and manage them more effectively.

“In Advance Financial Management” has created a unique “Before Having a Baby Essentials Package” to help with your changing financial needs.
We have brought together a group of professionals from different areas (Financial Planning, Mortgage consulting, Accounting and Legal Services) to offer you a complete solution for preparing your finances for the arrival of a new member in your family.
The base “Before Having a Baby Essentials Package” includes:
• Two(2) written budgets – one for your current circumstances and one for when the baby is born
• A review of your debts to maximise cash-flow when your baby is born
• A review of your Insurances, both inside and outside of superannuation.
In addition to the “Before Having a Baby Essentials Package” we can also offer you:
• A review of your mortgage to free up cash-flow and see if any other benefits can be attained
• Advice on maximising Centrelink benefits and help with related Centrelink forms
• Review of your new Estate Planning Needs including creation of a Will
• Accounting service
Please see attached document for further explanation of each service and pricing.

If you decide to purchase or vary an AMP product, your financial planner, AMFP Financial Planning Limited and other companies within the AMP group will receive fees and other benefits, which will be a percentage of the premium you pay or the advice fee you agreed with us. You can ask us for more details about this.
This is general information only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. Before relying on the information, please consider the appropriateness of the information in light of your personal circumstances. No AMP company or AMP financial planner receives any payment for the general advice in this flyer.

In Advance Financial Management Pty Ltd
Shop 83, BKK Eastlakes Shopping Centre,
19 Evans Ave, Eastlakes, NSW, 2018
(02) 8970 0531
email: ask@inadvance.com.au
web: www.inadvance.com.au

In Advance Financial Management Pty Ltd, ABN 83 149 130 405, is an Authorised Representative of AMP Financial Planning Pty Limited.

What are the best positions for labour?

The best positions for labour and birth will be the positions that are the most comfortable for the woman. These are usually also the positions that will assist the baby into a good position to be born.

The positions you decide to use will have an effect on your sense of control and how you experience your labour. Generally, women who are able to move around as they need to, will expefince labour more positively and as being less painful, than women who are confined to the bed.

There are many positions that women will naturally adopt in labour, such as:
- Standing
- Leaning over a bench or couch
- All fours positions
- Kneeling positions
- Walking
- Lying on your side

Because gravity helps the baby’s head to descend deeply into the pelvis, upright positions are generally better for aiding progress in labour while also reducing pain. This is because upright positions work with the body in labour, rather than against it.

Many women choose to birth in the water because the sensation of being in water combined with the lack of gravity makes them feel more mobile and able to position in the best way possible to help the baby move through the pelvis.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Natural Twin Birth

I had a difficult delivery with my first baby, including posterior presentation, premature rupture of membranes, meconium staining, stalled labour, 18 hours of Syntocinon, a largely ineffectual epidural, a 4 hour second stage, and forceps delivery. My daughter had severe respiratory distress and was in the NICU for several days. It was a very tough introduction to parenthood and left me quite traumatised, especially the separation from my daughter. My husband and I decided that we would try for a homebirth if we had another baby, in the hope that a calmer environment would assist the birth process. When I fell pregnant again, we found a lovely homebirth midwife.

I started to show really early. At 8 weeks I was in maternity wear. I thought it was just because it was a second pregnancy, but a 9 week ultrasound showed TWO BABIES. We were completely shocked as there are no twins in my family. Twins of course meant that a homebirth was out of the question.

There followed many long months of argument with various obstetricians about our birth choices. We wanted as little intervention as possible. A standard twin delivery involves syntocinon (which I was very afraid of, after the previous experience), continuous monitoring (which I had hated with my first birth, as I felt chained to the bed) and an epidural prior to the second stage, in case positioning/version or a c-section is necessary to deliver the second twin. In my first birth, the epidural meant I had no pushing urge and seriously compromised my ability to deliver my daughter, hence the very prolonged second stage, so I did not want an epidural this time around, although I was prepared for Synto to be administered between the twins if labour did not re-establish. The hospital also wanted both twins delivered on the bed, which I did not agree with as I had found pushing in that position impossible the first time around. Our views were very challenging to the obstetricians and some were quite aggressive about it, although I must say the head OB was more reasonable and was prepared to admit that my refusal to consent to an epidural would be a “complete contraindication” to giving me one! Throughout this stage our midwife was a pillar of strength and information. She gave us the courage of our convictions and more than once came to the hospital to talk with the obstetricians on our behalf. Even so, the hospital was very unhappy with our birth preferences. It was a stressful time, helped somewhat by a Calmbirth ® course.

In the end all our arguments ended up being moot. At 33 weeks, I started to feel an ominous itching all over. Tests showed elevated bile salts and poor liver function results. I had obstetric cholestasis. Our midwife and the hospital agreed: the babies would need to be delivered by 37 weeks. And I knew that that early, an induction would almost certainly involve Syntocinon.

This was really difficult for me to accept. I was terribly afraid of the drug, and knew that Synto would mean continuous monitoring and therefore limit my movement, which I also feared. However, I knew that my fear would make the delivery more difficult and the pain worse. At this point the hospital dropped the bombshell that despite all their delivery rooms having deep birthing baths, I would not be allowed to use those or the shower if I had to have Synto, as they believe this risks pump damage to the Synto pump. Essentially this meant I was walking into a labour that was likely to be more painful, with less pain relief options. It was going to be down to Calmbirth ® alone, if I wanted to avoid drugs (and I did!).

I did a lot of Calmbirth ® practice from then on. But the Calmbirth ® visualisation exercises presupposed a normal delivery without intervention, and I found it very upsetting to listen to them. I hit on the idea of doing my own visualisations, of a medicalised induction process. After a few of these I was able to work through some of my fears.

On the day of the induction, we kissed our daughter goodbye at 5am and met our midwife at the hospital. Preliminary checks showed a Bishop score of 5, very promising for 36 weeks. The hospital midwife applied prostaglandin gel and sent us out to freedom. We had a lovely breakfast. I started to have sporadic contractions but nothing serious. We returned to the hospital 6 hours later. My cervix had ripened to 2cm, and the very cheerful OB was able to break the waters for twin 1 (our second daughter) at 3.45pm. No meconium staining! I dared to ask the OB how she was presenting. ANTERIOR, WOOHOO! I was very pleased with that.

Contractions came rather more strongly after that point, but were still sporadic. The felt very “knifey”, and our midwife explained this was from the prostaglandin gel. We held off on the Synto as long as possible, but at 6.25pm the drip was put up and contractions started in earnest. Continuous monitoring was in place, but via telemetry so I could have moved. Ironically, though, I didn’t feel the need to. I went deep into calm breathing and spent most of the labour sitting beside the bed on a fit ball, sometimes circling my hips but more often just breathing to ride the contractions with my husband stroking my back. Unlike my first labour, I had no real idea of when the next contraction was coming, and ended up doing my calm breathing (in for 4, out for 6) solidly for hours. I wasn’t afraid of the contractions. I could really feel them doing their work, and little twin 1 moving firm and fast down. I was determined to “get out of the way” of labour and with each contraction focused on opening up and not clenching against the pain. Our midwife was convinced things were going quickly and asked us when we thought we would be having the babies. I told her anything before midnight was a sucker bet! She said 11pm.

At 8.30pm, about 2 hours after I started having regular contractions, the pain was starting to get BIG. The OB did a cervix check – I was 5cm. I was very disheartened by this, but our midwife told me that the first 5cm was the hardest, and the very encouraging OB tried to convince me that it wasn’t all about centimetres and that my cervix felt promisingly thin and stretchy. In hindsight, even in my first labour I dilated from 5 to 10cm in under an hour, so I should have known what was coming – but I didn’t!

Throughout this time I was not making any noise. The hospital’s midwife didn’t seem to think I was in established labour, and threatened to up the Synto dose to make the contractions “strong and regular”, even though they were already sufficient to dilate my cervix 3cm in under 2 hours. I managed to insist “no. more. Synto!” She reserved judgement, but it might have been the adrenaline kick I needed, as by 9.15pm I was having enormous contractions every 2-3 minutes. I could feel them as a giant swelling band of pain stretching around my whole belly and stretching lower. At this point I started vocalising “ah, ah, ah” throughout contractions, to help me ride the pain and stop me clenching down. I remember saying “if this isn’t transition, I’m in trouble!” I didn’t believe it could be transition, though – not so early, not when my first birth had taken almost 3 days. Our midwife said she thought we would have babies by 10pm, and I didn’t believe her.

I needed to get off the fit ball and change position, and asked if I could get on all fours, although the idea of moving seemed impossible to imagine. The hospital midwife set up a crash mat and a nice beanbag for me to lean on. I leaned forward and within one contraction of moving had started making some amazing noises. Unlike my “ah ah ahs” they were completely involuntary. And then I could feel twin 1 crowning. I did not believe it had happened so quickly, and cried out “what’s happening?” Everyone still makes fun of me for this. She was born in only a couple of pushes at 9.25pm, and our midwife had to tell the hospital midwife to put her gloves on to catch her. Our beautiful daughter, with a lovely round head, pink skin and a great big yell! There is a photo of me still on all fours, with a blissed-out grin. I could not believe how easy and quick it had been. I got to hold her straight away, but contractions started up again quite quickly, and she went to her daddy for some skin to skin time.

At this point the obstetricians arrived – a registrar and resident. I wanted to stay on the floor, but the registrar managed to persuade me up on the bed to check twin 2′s position, as we knew he was breech. Contractions started up again within minutes and were really agonising now, as I had lost my Calmbirth focus and as the position (twin 2′s spine to mine) had that sort of posterior feeling to it. But within seconds I was again feeling the inexorable urge to push. The OB flicked twin 2′s feet out as he was in a squatting position, the midwife and OB flexed twin 2′s head by pushing on my stomach and with a few mighty pushes he was out too, at 9.39pm. Our son! He was handed to me but unlike J, had a bit of trouble breathing, and spent some time in the special care nursery. He was back to us almost before we knew it. I must say he had a very breech-looking head, which looked like a mighty frown, but he’s ever so handsome and cheerful now.

J weighed in at 2.98kg (I was really ticked off she could not stretch to the extra 20gm), and P weighed 3.06kg, excellent weights for 36 weekers, let alone twins!

After twin 2 was out, I lost all patience for the pain – rather a pity as the Synto kept getting ramped up to deliver the placentas and then to deal with my uterus which did not want to shrink back down. I ended up with a Synto drip all night. I tell people this birth was meant to help me deal with my fear of Synto once and for all.

Both babies had beautiful breastfeeds within an hour or two of birth, which sadly was not an omen of things to come for twin 1, but it was lovely.


Anyway, that was our birth. Twins born without any pain relief (not even hot water) or really any intervention other than the induction drugs, with 4 hours of contractions total and only about 2 of those active labour. It wasn’t the birth I had wanted but it was a wonderful experience and very healing after my first daughter’s birth. I am so proud of myself, and look back on the birth with amazed gratitude all the time.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

The Unkindest Cut: Countdown to a C-Section

Link

… “Usually I start off by telling people my C-section started even before I got to the hospital …

… Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns had the highest rate of cesarean section deliveries in San Diego County in 2009. The California average was 29.8 per 100 births; at Sharp Mary Birch, the rate was 37.7.

… At 40 weeks … Cooper-Schultz’s water broke, though she was not in labor. In a birthing class … they told her, we have to get the baby out within 24 hours. So she and her husband went to the hospital right away.

“They pretty much wanted to put me on Pitocin the minute I walked in the door because I wasn’t having regular contractions,” …

… women believe their C-section deliveries at Mary Birch were the result of convenience for the doctors, fear of litigation, and/or lack of staff training in nonmedicated childbirth options.

… It is common for hospitals to use Pitocin if a woman has not gone into active labor within 24 hours after her water has broken to avoid the risk of infection. But the staff at Mary Birch wanted to give Cooper-Schultz Pitocin within the first two hours.

Cooper-Schultz refused the Pitocin at first. She wanted to get things going naturally … At the 12-hour mark, her cervix had dilated to four centimeters. She says she now understands that this “is a good natural labor progression for a first-time mom.”

But it wasn’t fast enough for the staff at Mary Birch. Cooper-Schultz … allowed them to give her the Pitocin that she says they’d been pushing since she’d arrived.

… “They weren’t honest with me. They didn’t say, ‘If you get the Pitocin, you’re probably going to need an epidural.’”

… Cooper-Schultz withstood the pain of Pitocin contractions for eight hours before she finally gave in and got an epidural … The epidural worked on only her left half.

At one point, the doctor came in to check on her and alerted the nurses that she was going home to take her kids to school. Sometime later, she returned with wet hair, checked Cooper-Schultz, found her at nine centimeters, and told her to try pushing.

“I pushed, and [the baby’s] heart rate went down … she said she’s worried about it. She said, ‘He’s not in distress, but he’s a little bit stressed.’”

The doctor told Cooper-Schultz it would go one of three ways. In the first scenario, Cooper-Schultz would push for 20 or so minutes and the baby would come out. In the second, she could push for 20 or so minutes, the baby would not come out, and they’d have to do an emergency cesarean section. Or, the doctor said, they could do a cesarean section right now.

Cooper-Schultz chose the cesarean. …
∗ ∗ ∗

Helen … welcomes me into her North Park apartment shortly after the dinner hour on a Tuesday evening in mid-September. She tells me she’s an unlikely candidate for natural childbirth.

“I’m like Woody Allen,” she says. “I am a New Yorker who likes living in the city, who likes creature comforts. And for somebody like me to be embracing [natural childbirth] is humongous.”

… Dover’s story is similar to Cooper-Schultz’s in that it begins with a desire to give birth naturally … and ends in what she considers an unnecessary C-section. One difference is that when Dover started out, she did know she might have to fight for what she wanted … She stayed home and labored for 10 to 12 hours before she went to the hospital, avoiding “the clock” for as long as she could.

When she arrived, armed with her research and her hopes for a natural birth, she found that the environment at Mary Birch had a greater impact on her than she’d imagined it would.

… The progression she’d experienced at home, from two centimeters to four, slowed drastically when she arrived at the hospital. A doctor told her that it might help if he broke her water. So she allowed it. But nothing happened …

… Dover lists her regrets: Not waiting and laboring longer at home. Allowing the Pitocin at 12 hours. Giving in to the epidural after 8 more hours. But the regrets go as far back as her pregnancy, when she chose to stay with Sharp.

“I should’ve just switched … “In order for me to switch to Scripps and go to one of the birth rooms at Scripps, which has a much better record, would have meant changing everything: changing my primary care physician, changing my OBG. I would’ve had to totally change my insurance policy. And at the time, I already had a pediatrician picked out for her and everything. We’d interviewed, and just the idea of doing all of that was overwhelming. I thought I didn’t have the strength to do it.”

… “[The doctor] said, ‘You need a C-section,’” she says. “I said, ‘I don’t understand why I need a C-section. Everything seems to be fine. Her heart rate’s not dropping.’ And he said, ‘Well, she’s stuck.’”

“… I was totally against using the suction, but anything besides the total hands-off. He said, ‘I don’t want to hurt your baby, and you don’t want to hurt your baby.’ I started crying. And I just finally said, ‘Fine. Cut me open.’” …

∗ ∗ ∗

The obstetrician a woman chooses plays as large a role in her birth experience as the place she chooses to deliver her baby. Some doctors have a reputation for being more inclined to help with a natural birth, and others for being less inclined …

Thompson cites the “bait and switch,” where a doctor claims to support a woman’s birth choices up until the final weeks, when it’s too late to change doctors. Messer says she’s seen doctors who’ve initially said they’d support the hypnobirthing process but later changed their minds.

“All of a sudden it’s, ‘That’s not going to work. No, you can’t be on your hands and knees. That’s not safe, and this isn’t,’” Messer says. “And that’s at 40 weeks. So now, where can I switch?”

… Christine Stewart, a petite redhead and mother of twin girls born at Mary Birch in September 2009, says she experienced something similar with her doctor.

… “… we took a Bradley Method childbirth class,” Stewart says, “which is a 12-week class, pretty in-depth, and we decided we wanted to do natural, unmedicated labor.”

When she first mentioned this to her doctor, Stewart says the doctor told her to “keep an open mind” and not to “fixate on any particular way of labor and delivery.” At the time, Stewart thought the doctor didn’t want her to be disappointed if natural birth didn’t work out, but now she speculates that the doctor was always leaning toward a C-section.

At 36 weeks, the doctor suggested they induce her at 38 weeks. Stewart refused.

“From what I can tell,” she says, “it’s just common that it’s more manageable to have twins at 38 weeks because of size. Sometimes they’re concerned about size. But [my girls] were normal-sized.”

The doctor suggested 39 weeks, then 40. Finally, Stewart agreed to induce at 41 weeks if she hadn’t gone into labor by then. But it was unnecessary. At 40 weeks, three days short of her original due date, Stewart went into labor.

Stewart chose Mary Birch because it had everything she was looking for. Originally, she’d wanted to deliver at Best Start Birth Center in Hillcrest, but they don’t accept women who are pregnant with twins. Mary Birch, she says, seemed like the next best thing.

“It had the facilities, doctors on hand, and all these different classes — prenatal yoga — and since I was diagnosed high-risk because I had the twins and since I was over 35,” she says, “I just thought their whole entire focus is for women and newborns, so I’ll probably get the best care because they’ve got all the resources for that.”

Stewart had heard about other women going into the hospital prematurely and getting “strapped down” immediately. But in her natural childbirth class she’d learned that mobility helps with labor. So she and her husband didn’t go in right away.

Once they did arrive at the hospital, Stewart was four centimeters dilated. She gave the nursing staff her birth plan, which stated that she did not want any mention of pain medication.

“Thankfully, they did not offer medication. They were respectful of that … I was slowly dilating in a normal time frame. They were telling me that was normal …

… Christine Stewart believes that the main reason she ended up having a C-section was that her nurses had no training in natural childbirth.

“Ultimately, the outcome was because there was no one in the labor room who had the experience to help get the babies in position to be delivered,” she says.

By the time the doctor arrived, Stewart was fully dilated. She knew her babies were healthy, that they were both head down, in a good position, face forward. Her blood pressure was not elevated, she had no fever, and she’d been in labor for less than 24 hours. Everything was normal except that the babies were wedged in, each trying to get out first.

… At 2:00 a.m., the doctor came in and said, “It’s time to meet your girls.”

… I kind of resigned myself, like, ‘If this is what we have to do, this is what we have to do.’ I felt like crying because it just went against everything I had hoped for, everything I had planned and practiced for.”

“I think the hospital has some standard protocols, and I think that if you don’t follow their standard protocols, they just don’t know what to do with you,” she says. “And a C-section is manageable. They know exactly how to do it, and I think at 2:30 in the morning it’s, ‘We can manage this, and then we can all go home.’”

∗ ∗ ∗

Last March, when her first son was two and a half years old, Elizabeth Cooper-Schultz had her second child in the back bedroom of her UTC apartment, in the company of her husband, her midwife, two apprentice midwives, and a doula.

Today, Helen Dover is pregnant again. When I ask if she plans to give birth at Mary Birch, she and Henry simultaneously answer, “No.”

“What I’ve learned is that at Mary Birch, everybody’s going to try to get you to do the birth that they want you to do,” Dover explains.

For their next baby, the Dovers will stay with Sharp in order to take advantage of the tests, which would cost them thousands of dollars out-of-pocket. They will also register at Mary Birch so that they are prepared in the event of an emergency. But they have hired a midwife to help them birth at home.

“We’re going just to get what doctors are good for,” Henry says, “and then to use the midwives for what they’re good for.”….

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Care during Labour and Birth

A recent study from QLD has surveyed 20,371 women who recently gave birth. Experiences of pregnancy, labour, birth and after birth care were assessed for the most recent birth, retrospectively four to five months after birth. The findings were very interesting! The only issues with the data and study is that mothers self-reported their answers and there was no verification of the information, or cross-checking with the midwives and obstetricians who provided the care. In other words, it was based on women’s subjective experiences rather than what might perhaps be factual or accurate. That being said, I wanted to draw a few points out of the study and elaborate more on them. The other aspect to raise is that I am making an inference when I write about this study: the study compared women who were cared for in public facilities (public hospital delivery suites and birth centres: women who for the most part would have had public care providers) with women who gave birth in private facilities. Those women would, for the most part, have booked with a private obstetrician and given birth under their care. So from this, I am inferring that public care = care from public hospital staff where the woman does not choose her care provider; and private facility care = private obstetric care.

Care during Labour and Birth
Most women received labour and birth care from a midwife, and saw an average of 2.3 different midwives during their labour and birth. This is an interesting fact to consider, as many women believe they will have only one midwife in labour. The reality, in a hospital (public or private) is that midwives work in shifts, and there are three shifts in a day. Private midwifery and to a lesser degree, caseload models, do not work so much on shifts (although with many caseload models, the midwives are on-call for 12 hours at a time, so it is possible that you will go through two shifts of midwives even if you are only in the birthing facility for say 6 hours). Private midwives work their time around your labour, rather than the timing of a shift.

Half of all women who birthed in public facilities had never met any of their labour and birth care providers before, and this was significantly less common among women who birthed in private facilities because their obstetrician would be present for the birth, representing a familiar face. This is also an interesting point to raise: many women believe their obstetrician will be there with them during labour, or at least in the birth unit. This is not the case for the most part. For the most part, your obstetrician will be in the operating theatre, in his/her private consulting rooms or sleeping (eg if you’re labouring at night) and s/he comes in only if there is a problem and of course for the birth. Therefore, although there is continuity of sorts (the obstetrician you booked with will attend the birth), your actual care (which may be several hours) would be with midwives you have not met before, who all work in shifts. In contrast, private midwifery care is delivered by the midwife you booked with. Your private midwife would be there with you for the duration of your labour.

The majority of women in the study wanted to have a vaginal birth. Among women who wanted a vaginal birth, women who birthed in public facilities were more likely to have a vaginal birth than women who birthed in private facilities. This might be a reflection of the choices that women make, or of the recommendations of the woman’s care provider. For the purposes of the study, the private setting would have equated to private obstetric care because private midwives cannot admit directly to a private hospital. The possibility that obstetricians are influencing a caesarean rate of almost 50% in private hospitals in QLD was quite alarming, because many obstetricians would like us to believe that the caesareans that are performed are dome so because the women ask for them or because they are genuinely needed.

The truth is that with a study such as this, we will never really know. The women were surveyed 4-5 months after the birth of their baby, not before the birth. Before the birth, they may well have asked for a caesarean, but afterwards experienced too much bleeding, wound infection, pain, complications, separation from their baby and breastfeeding issues and come to regret their decision to pursue an elective caesarean. In this case, some women might have named their care provider as the one who recommended the caesarean, rather than admitting to themselves that they chose it. That is one view.

Personally, I do believe that some obstetricians have influenced the almost 50% caesarean rate. I believe this because every day I meet women who have birthed with, or are about to birth with, a private obstetrician. They tell me that they are scheduled for a caesarean, not because they have chosen this, but because it has been recommended to them. Sometimes the intention of the “recommendation” is to assist with “informed decision making”. This is where things get a bit muddied. The woman comes away believing the caesarean has been recommended, whereas the obstetrician interprets it as providing information to the woman so that she can then make an informed decision, and then reports that the caesarean was the woman’s choice. In any event, there are ways of wording things to illicit a response or decision that favours our bias. Some are more skilled at this than others.

For example, if I told you:

Caesareans have been shown in some studies to be safer for the baby, and given that your last labour was quite long and difficult, resulting in a painful forceps delivery with an episiotomy, you might like to consider a caesarean this time. Your baby would be spared the use of forceps, so he may well feed better than your last baby, because he won’t have a headache. You are also less likely to experience any pelvic floor issues. Most likely, given that you had an episiotomy last time, I might have to perform one again. I would try not to do this, but sometimes it is necessary. I know how painful the recovery was for you last time, so a caesarean might be preferable. Yes, you would still have stitches either way, but it’s far more comfortable having stitches on your tummy than your perineum.

Given this “information”, would you choose a caesarean? Possibly as this care provider has given some good arguments (some factual and others not so factual) for a caesarean, and has used emotive and persuasive language that plays on this woman’s traumatic last birth.

Now consider a different conversation:

Caesareans have been shown in some studies to be more harmful for the baby in terms of breathing difficulties and the need to admit the baby to the nursery. This would mean that you would be separated from your baby, and I know that after your last experience, you want nothing more than to hold your baby when he is born. Given that your last labour was quite long and difficult, resulting in a painful forceps delivery with an episiotomy, we can talk through some ideas to try that will minimise the risk of tearing. I believe that an intact perineum (no stitches) is absolutely possible for you. Also, there are many courses – such as Calmbirth – that will help you to manage the sensations of labour, along with labouring in a deep, warm bath. You know, I wouldn’t be surprised if you find you don’t even think of having an epidural this time! I know you’re worried that your baby might have a sore head and be a difficult feeder if forceps are needed, as this is what happened last time, but I’d like tor reassure you that forceps are really unlikely. Your body has birthed before and it will remember what to do this time. It would be very unusual that forceps would be needed again. This is a different pregnancy, different baby, different place of birth and different care provider. We can work together to make this experience very different – and very healing – from last time.

Given this “information”, would you choose to try a natural birth? Possibly as this care provider has given some good arguments for a natural birth, and has used emotive and persuasive language that plays on this woman’s traumatic last birth.

So, that is how it comes to be that women go with the recommendations of their care providers, and all the while, the care provider believes that it is the woman’s decision, while the woman believes it’s the care provider’s recommendation. If you’re now feeling very confused and like you don’t know who to trust anymore, my word of advice would be to interview a few midwives and obstetricians and ask lots of questions of them, and then go with the care provider that feels right for you. Also ensure that their statistics (birth outcomes) are aligned with the sort of birth you are trying to achieve. Once you have done this, trust your care provider and follow their advice if their advice makes sense to you and feels right. If it doesn’t, speak up and let them know.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Satisfaction and support in birth

A recent study from QLD has surveyed 20,371 women who recently gave birth. Experiences of pregnancy, labour, birth and after birth care were assessed for the most recent birth, retrospectively four to five months after birth. The findings were very interesting! The only issues with the data and study is that mothers self-reported their answers and there was no verification of the information, or cross-checking with the midwives and obstetricians who provided the care. In other words, it was based on women’s subjective experiences rather than what might perhaps be factual or accurate. That being said, I wanted to draw a few points out of the study and elaborate more on them. The other aspect to raise is that I am making an inference when I write about this study: the study compared women who were cared for in public facilities (public hospital delivery suites and birth centres: women who for the most part would have had public care providers) with women who gave birth in private facilities. Those women would, for the most part, have booked with a private obstetrician and given birth under their care. So from this, I am inferring that public care = care from public hospital staff where the woman does not choose her care provider; and private facility care = private obstetric care.

Being cared for well during pregnancy

The study found that women who birthed in private facilities were significantly more likely to say they were cared for very well during pregnancy than women who birthed in public facilities.

This is not surprising as women birthing in private facilities would be cared for in pregnancy by one obstetrician who was chosen by them.

Women who birthed in private facilities were also significantly more likely to report being treated with respect, treated with kindness and understanding, and treated as an individual by their pregnancy care providers.

This too is not surprising as their care provider was chosen by them.

Women who birthed in private facilities were also significantly more likely to say their pregnancy care providers were open and honest, respected their privacy, respected their decisions, and genuinely cared about their well-being.

This is all good news for continuity of carer models in pregnancy. Continuity of carer is very different to continuity of care. Continuity of care means continuous care from a small group of people – or even a large organisation – who shares a similar philosophy. It is interesting to see how far (and wide) this definition is stretched. Some would have us believe that we can give birth at the largest and busiest tertiary hospital as a public patient and receive continuity of care even though we had 30 care providers and never saw the same person twice. This definition – continuity of care – would still hold even in the above situation because all of the hospital staff would be working to the same philosophy and policies. Hence, continuity.

Continuity of carer, on the other hand, means that care is provided by one person for the most part. This is what we generally see with private obstetric care and private midwifery care.

Women who birthed in private facilities were more likely to say they were cared for very well in labour and birth than women who birthed in public facilities. However, the study found marked variations between public birth facilities with birth centres and midwifery-led units having the highest proportion of women saying they were cared for very well during their labour and birth.

This is good news for all those women who book with a private midwife or a public hospital-based caseload model.

Women who birthed in a private facility were generally more satisfied with the support they received after the birth, although only about 50% women were satisfied. The public hospital care rated even more poorly than that! This is evidence that the delivery of postnatal care needs to shift to meet the needs of women and babies.

Generally, women are discharged home early after the birth of their baby, with lengths of stay generally being around 24 – 48 hours in a public hospital. Women are then visited by a midwife once or twice following discharge; some hospitals provide more visits than this. Women who book with a private midwife generally enjoy more postnatal visits: 7 to 14 on average, with each visit lasting about an hour. A s well as this, women are generally prepared thoroughly in pregnancy for breastfeeding and baby care so that it is not so scary when the baby arrives.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Labour induction methods compare favourably

Link

… a method of inducing labour that dates back to the 1930s “has been found to work as well as modern treatments but with fewer side effects”.

The news is based on a large Dutch trial that examined inducing labour using of a simple mechanical device, called a Foley catheter. Researchers tested the device against the use of hormone gels designed to trigger contractions. The study … found that both techniques led to similar rates of spontaneous vaginal deliveries, instrumental deliveries … and women requiring a caesarean section.

The Foley catheter also seemed to lead to fewer side effects in the women and their babies, although using the method of induction … led to longer labours …

Current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommend the use of hormone gels for induction of labour, but not the routine use of mechanical devices for induction … This new, relatively large trial has shown no important differences between the two methods used in these women. It is possible that the mechanical technique might find a place for women where there may be risks from using hormone gel …

… a high proportion of induced labours are performed because a woman’s cervix is not ready for the birth and does not open appropriately.

This randomised controlled trial compared two methods for inducing birth in women who had single babies and a reason to be induced. The women were either induced using mechanical means (a Foley catheter) or with application of a hormone gel into the vagina. A Foley catheter is a mechanical device that helps open the cervix. A fluid-filled balloon is inflated in the cervix, which stretches it until it is at an appropriate size to allow birth. The prostaglandin hormone gel mimics the natural mechanism by which a woman’s hormones cause the cervix to open.

The researchers say that hormonal induction has become the method of choice in several countries, but that use of the Foley catheter may result in similar numbers of successful inductions without the need for a caesarean section. They also say that the Foley catheter induction may have several advantages over hormone methods, such as not causing “over-stimulation” of the birthing processes …

… the caesarean section rates were much the same between the two groups: 23% of women who had been induced using a Foley catheter required a caesarean section compared to 20% of the women induced using the hormone gel … Likewise, a similar number of women in each group needed extra mechanical help with the birth, such as the use of forceps (11% in the Foley catheter group and 13% in the hormone gel group).

A greater number of women induced with the Foley catheter required a caesarean because they failed to progress in the first stage of birth (12%) than the hormone gel group (8%) … Similar proportions of each group had a caesarean section because their baby was becoming distressed (7% in the Foley catheter group compared to 9% in the hormone gel group).

… Fewer women in the prostaglandin hormone group (59%) needed an additional hormone called oxytocin to stimulate uterus contractions than in the Foley catheter group (86%). The time from the start of induction to birth was on average 29 hours (range 15-35 hours) in the Foley catheter group and 18 hours (range 12-33 hours) in the hormone gel group.

The groups did not differ in terms of painkillers taken, haemorrhage, overstimulation or health status of the baby. Fewer babies delivered with the Foley catheter (12%) needed to be admitted to the general ward (not an intensive care ward) than those induced using hormones (20%). More women treated with the hormone gel (3%) had suspected infections during birth compared to those induced with Foley catheter (1%) …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Choosing the best care provider for your needs

Choosing the best practitioner for your needs is a very important and personal decision. Ultimately, there is no right or wrong choice: some women will choose a private obstetrician, others will choose a private midwife and others will choose public hospital care. Some women will make an initial choice of care provider and decide to change care providers during the pregnancy. Other women will make one choice in their first pregnancy and then a different choice in a subsequent pregnancy. What’s important is to have an accurate understanding all the options available so that you can feel confident to choose the best option for your needs. The best people to talk to are the people who actually provide the service, rather than a GP who is removed from the actual services of an obstetrician / midwife / public hospital. Get referred to a private obstetrician or two; interview them; reflect on how you feel after meeting them. Go and visit your local public hospital. Have a tour and speak with the midwives there. And interview a couple of eligible midwives. You do not need a GP referral to see an eligible midwife and you can claim their services through medicare. An eligible midwife is a private midwife who has met an additional registration standard that enables them to have a Medicare provider number.

When you are considering a care provider, it’s also necessary to consider where you would like to give birth and to ensure that your care provider can attend you in your chosen setting. You might choose to birth your baby in a public hospital as a public or private patient, in a private hospital as a private patient, in a birth centre or at home. It can be helpful when trying to make a decision to write down a list of questions you may have and also consider what is important to you as you make your choices. For example:

What do I want from my care?
What type of practitioner would I feel most comfortable with?
What do I need from my practitioner to feel comfortable and safe?
Do I want public or private care?
Is continuity of care important to me?

These are questions only you can answer. Other questions are for your care providers to answer with you, and it’s a good idea to interview a few care providers – midwives and obstetricians – before making a choice. Midwives and obstetricians will charge a fee for interviews and you are able to claim this through Medicare (your midwife will need to be eligible in order for you to claim a Medicare benefit). It is important during the interview that you ask all the questions that are on your mind, and to be aware of how you feel throughout the interview. Your care provider should inspire you with confidence, help you to feel at ease and comfortable, and the appointment should feel unhurried.

Likewise, your care provider may like to “interview” you, and this is so that your care provider can be sure that s/he can meet your needs. Maternity care is provided in a partnership and so it’s important that both parties feel really comfortable with the other.

There are many questions you might wish to ask your care provider; the best suggestion is to consider what is important to you and write a list of questions.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

I’m pregnant and I have private health insurance. What are my options?

Great question! There are a few options available to you as a private patient, as well as all of the options that are available to public patients. The private options are either a private midwife, or a private obstetrician.

Private midwife
To receive care from a private midwife and obtain Medicare benefits, your midwife will need to be an “eligible midwife” (meet an additional registration standard) and work with an obstetrician or a doctor who provides obstetric services. Some private midwives are able to provide labour and birth care in hospital settings, while others are only able to provide labour and birth care at home. All private midwives can provide pregnancy and postnatal care. Hospital options may include private or public hospitals; it’s best to ask your midwife which hospitals she attends births at. Eligible midwives provide complete continuity of care: the midwife you book with will be the same midwife who provides all of your pregnancy, birth and postnatal care.

Private obstetrician
Private obstetricians provide pregnancy, birth and postnatal care, although birth care would also be provided by hospital midwives who may be unknown to you until birth. Private obstetricians deliver babies at public and private hospitals. Continuity is provided during the pregnancy, but birth care is mostly provided by hospital midwives. Postnatal care is almost always provided by hospital midwives, with your obstetrician visiting you each day in hospital and at 6 weeks.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Pregnancy Symptoms

I am often asked by women what they might expect to experience in early pregnancy. Here’s a guide below:

The symptoms below are some of the more common symptoms that women experience. It’s always best that women contact their eligible midwife or GP early in pregnancy to arrange for a pregnancy test and a dating scan if needed. Eligible midwives are able to order all of the necessary tests and scans and no referral is needed.

Late period
This is a common sign of pregnancy, and it is the one that it most often found first.

Morning sickness
Some women experience this, while other women do not. Some experience it as a later sign of pregnancy.

Sore, tingly breasts
This can also be one of the earlier signs of pregnancy and it can feel similar to premenstrual breast tenderness.

Tiredness
Tiredness is a common pregnancy symptom in early pregnancy.

Changed tastes or strange tastes and off-putting smells
Some women will have a strange taste in their mouth, like / dislike food that was previously disliked / liked, and may be put off by smells that were previously quite ok.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

First-time mums learn the hard way: informed mums choose private midwives

A recent article has suggested that first-time mums have overly unrealistic ideas about their birth – that it will be a natural, uncomplicated birth, when in reality it is not, for the majority. We know that women choosing care through the general hospital system will experience high rates of interventions, leading ultimately to a caesarean. But few women know that if they engage a private midwife for a hospital or homebirth, they will experience much lower rates of intervention, but with the same level of safety. Care with an eligible private midwife will attract medicare benefits, and obstetric care is readily available if it is needed. The article below described one woman’s experience of general hospital care. I can only assume that this reporter has written the article in response to the outcry about the original research.

HERVEY Bay first-time mum Jasmine Adame has experienced first-hand just how difficult childbirth can be.

And she agrees with new research … that suggests that many first-time mums are unprepared for the realities of a complicated labour.

Jasmine delivered her little girl … at Hervey Bay Hospital after spending a day and a half in labour.

In the end, she was told her labour had stalled and she had to have an emergency caesarean.

We are not told how long labour stalled for, whether she had her own midwife with her throughout her labour (unlikely since this is not available to most women through the general hospital system) and we are also not told how far through her labour she was. It is true that some caesareans are performed for “failure to progress” when the woman’s cervix is less than 3 centimeters dilated, indicating that she is not yet in established labour.

Jasmine had attended antenatal classes prior to having her first child and said it was the midwives who held these classes who gave her the best idea of what labour was actually going to be like.

Hospital classes are great at telling women about hospital policies, but independent childbirth education will inspire women with confidence about what their bodies are capable of, with the right support.

“I knew it wasn’t going to be fun.

“But I didn’t expect it to be as horrid as it was,” she said.

It sounds like she didn’t have the care of a midwife who was known and trusted. Most women I work with will experience their labour extremely positively, as if it was the best (hardest and most challenging, but oh so rewarding) experience of their life.

… The chances of having a medically uncomplicated birth were actually 21%.

This applies to women birthing in the general hospital system, where they will not be cared for by one midwife who is known to them, chosen by them and trusted by them. The chance of a medically uncomplicated birth when a woman chooses private midwifery care is around 70% – 80%. This is a huge difference.

Because she had been focused on a natural delivery, the decision to deliver the baby by caesarean took Jasmine by surprise – and the time between the decision and the birth was very swift, allowing her little time to adjust …

This is addressed during care with a private midwife, where there is ample time to explore all options and possibilities, so that there are few surprises on the day (or night!). Hour-long appointments allow plenty of time for questions and education. The possibility of a first-time mum “needing” a caesarean in the general hospital system is 25%, or one in four. Given this large minority, we would think that all women going through the hospital system would be thoroughly appraised of this possibility. In my private practice, a mere 3% first-time mums need a caesarean. This is not because we push the boundaries of safety: it is because women who are well supported, well-informed, relaxed and confident about their birth will generally start labour on their own at term, labour normally and birth their babies unassisted by any instruments or operations.

Hopefully Jasmine will choose private midwifery care with her next pregnancy (private midwifery care is available for a planned hospital birth), where she can expect an 80% – 90% chance of a vaginal birth following her caesarean in her first pregnancy. Or will she choose to go back to the general hospital system, where she has a mere 15% chance of a vaginal birth?

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Chinese medicine could double chances of conceiving child

Link

Couples with fertility problems are twice as likely to conceive using traditional Chinese medicine as compared to western drugs …

The researchers at Adelaide University, Australia, reviewed eight clinical trials, 13 other studies and case reports comparing the efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) with western drugs or IVF treatment.

The review … included 1,851 women with infertility problems, and the clinical trials alone found a 3.5 rise in pregnancies over a four-month period among women using TCM compared with western medicine.

… 50 percent of women having TCM got pregnant compared with 30 percent of those receiving IVF treatment.

… “Our meta-analysis suggests traditional Chinese herbal medicine to be more effective in the treatment of female infertility – achieving on average a 60 percent pregnancy rate over four months compared with 30 percent achieved with standard western drug treatment,” …

According to the study, the difference appeared to be due to the careful analysis of the menstrual cycle, the period when it is possible for a woman to conceive, by TCM practitioners …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Physiological third stage for women at low risk of postpartum haemorrhage

Link

No previous study has focused on true physiological third stage for women at low risk of postpartum haemorrhage. Physiological third stage is often chosen by women who birth at home or in a birth centre, however hospital policies urge active management of the third stage (injection of syntocinon, immediate clamping and cutting of the cord and then pulling the placenta out) because studies have shown that this form of management reduces bleeding. However, it is unfortunate that those studies have either a) not clearly defined physiological management or b) have not managed the “physiological” third stages in a physiological manner. Hence, those studies have shown that active management is the safer option and hospitals have gone with those recommendations.

This study clearly defines what is meant by physiological management and also the women who are suitable for physiological management. Some women are at a higher risk of PPH and so active management was recommended to those women in the study.

The study compared active management which was standard at the tertiary hospital, with physiological management which was the norm at the free-standing birth centre. At the tertiary unit, 11.2% low-risk women experienced a PPH. At the midwifery-led unit, where physiological management was practiced, PPH only occurred in 2.8% women. Active management was associated with 11.5% PPHs compared with physiological management which was 1.7% PPHs. Active management was associated with a seven to eight fold increase in PPH for low-risk women.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Mums turn to Twitter for pregnancy tips

Link

MUMS-TO-BE might soon turn to Facebook and Twitter for the latest medical support, if a health study involving pregnant northern women proves successful.

The two-year study … will gauge how social networking can encourage healthy pregnancies.

The University of Adelaide project will survey what forms of social media have the most influence over mums-to-be.

It will then develop new ways to communicate health advice to them via Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and text messages.

This could include anything from reminding them to take medication or attend appointments, to encouraging them to avoid smoking and drinking alcohol.

… the study would help provide correct lifestyle and dietary information to pregnant women.

… Dr Michael Wilmore hoped the study would lead to healthier babies …

It’s sad that women are being encouraged away from their care providers and towards non-relationship-based care when we know the benefits of continuity of carer. The best outcome is where a woman feels comfortable to ask her midwife or obstetrician all of her questions and feel supported in her care.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Do first-time mothers have unrealistic views about having uncomplicated births, or does the health system fail them?

An interesting report in The Telegraph states that first-time mums have unrealistic expectations of drug-free, natural, uncomplicated births, when in reality, they have a mere 21% chance of:

  • a labour that starts on its own (ie, is not induced
  • not using an epidural
  • birthing without the use of instruments or operations
  • If we exclude from that figure the proportion of women who also birth without stitches, that figure becomes a mere 8%. The papers would like us to believe that

    first-time mothers have unrealistic views about having uncomplicated births, increasing the risk of post-natal depression

    In other words, postnatal depression is caused by womens’ unmet and unrealistic expectations of an uncomplicated birth.

    The suggests that health system has no part to play in this. It is merely a case of women wanting too much from their experience. If we expect too much, we set ourselves up for disappointment, and this leads to postnatal depression!

    Wow!

    The article goes on to say that

    expectant mothers … believe there is a 56.2 per cent chance of an uncomplicated birth, which means a baby being born without the use of forceps, suction cups, caesarean section or induced labour.

    Whereas

    the chance of having a medically uncomplicated birth is 21 per cent.

    A further 30.7 per cent said they believed women would have uncomplicated births without needing sutures. The actual figure is 8 per cent.

    My readers will well know that I don’t subscribe to the view that a crappy birth experience and postnatal depression is all the fault of the health service; but at the same time, it’s not all the fault of the woman either.

    We’re each responsible for the choices we make and for informing ourselves of all available options before we make a choice. Health services are also responsible for accurately representing their services and outcomes so that women can make a considered choice. If women have a mere 8% chance of birthing normally and without stitches, that needs to be well-known so that women may seek other care options if they so choose.

    The health system is here to provide a basic and safe level of care. If we expect or desire more than what can be considered “basic”, then we do need to look into other options, and these will generally be found in the private system, be it private midwifery care or private obstetric care (although I dare say that the average private obstetrician will have lower rates of normal birth that a public service).

    All of that said, it seems appalling that 79% first-time Mums go through the public system and come out the other side with an intervened-with birth. In my private practice, those figures are reversed. Do women know what they are signing up for when the choose their local hospital for care? And perhaps more importantly, should the hospitals be held to account for these poor outcomes, or at least acknowledge that they are failing women?

    Most first-time mums should expect to birth without intervention. Most should not need any intervention. The birthing process is a normal, natural, female bodily function. We don’t question the potential for our bodies to ovulate, urinate, digest food, menstruate, circulate blood, metabolise substances and so on. These processes generally “work”; birth generally “works” too. Provided we, as care providers, don’t mess it up with unnecessary interventions and an environment that is not conducive to labouring and birthing a baby.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Do deceptive medical birth procedures de-humanize women?

    Link

    It was a rainy Wednesday late afternoon when pregnant Ana Cristina realized it was time to get ‘to know’ her unborn son João. She went to the Maternity Hospital Leonor Mendes de Barros in hopes of an easy delivery. Despite the pain and restlessness, Ana stood quietly for four hours waiting for care. “It’s a scandal that they treat you badly,” she said. After waiting so many hours … Ana was informed that there were no vacancies and she should find another place to have her son.

    … They would have make it across São Paulo city to go to another facility, the … famous teaching hospital in Santa Casa renowned in Brazil for its quality of health care …

    … Many women face the happiness of their baby’s arrival with a fear of dying, along with the desire to care for their child and also to be cared for by their medical team. They have confidence in the hospital as the safest place to have a child. But they also carry the suspicion that their delivery can be abused by impunity and deceptive medical ethics by some medical teams.

    Some women OB/GYN patients hear humiliating phrases from their medical providers during the process of childbirth, such as:

    “Aren’t you too old to be having a baby?”
    “If you don’t shut your mouth…”
    “It didn’t hurt to make it, right?”
    “You didn’t close your legs then, now deal with it!”

    Often women patients do their best not to complain and to follow the orders of the medical team …

    … André François, founder of ImageMagica, an organization that promotes education, culture and health through photography, has worked to document ‘humane medicine’ … In the process he has also documented medical abuse …

    Can an unwanted caesarian be a form violence against women?

    … vast differences in the health care system do exist. A universal healthcare system set to serve the poor in Brazil was widely established in 1988 offering free public healthcare for the first time to many in need. The system has suffered under many financial strains though with crumbling medical facilities and the theft of medical supplies in over crowed medical clinics that have had long lines with services that have turned critical needs patients away. But improvements in many levels of care have been made as some hospitals have been equipped with the newest medical equipment and trained medical staff.

    François saw Brazil’s system of health care up close when he witnessed the case of one woman from the Amazon who urgently needed a caesarean section. But her journey to the doctor would not be an easy one. To get the medical attention she needed, she would have to face 12 hours of … pain as she traveled by motor canoe to the nearest medical facility. In many regions of the country “when a woman needs a caesarean section, she will usually die,” says André.

    In spite of attempts to offer free health care to many of the underprivileged, a 2010 Brazilian study, “Women and Gender in Brazilian public and private spaces,” … 1 in 4 women in the country suffer today from some form of abuse during delivery.

    But is there a difference between abuse and violence against women during delivery? What is the perception?

    “Women with lower education, do not consider that the treatment they received was mistreatment and disrespect,” … “Through accounts of friends and people of the same social group, they listen that the hospital delivery is like that: it will hurt, you will scream, they will scream at you,” … “There is a perception of a picture that indeed is negative, but it is seen as normal. It is not even seen as mistreatment.”

    In the public hospital in the town of Ceará in northeastern Brazil there is a sign on the wall alerting patients about their human rights. It tells them that they must demand decent public medical service. At the same hospital though, another sign outlines a very different picture. On another sign is a quote from Article 331 of Brazil’s Criminal Code, known as the ‘Desacato laws,’ that prevents freedom of speech for anyone who wants to speak out against injustice, including any patient who wants to talk about their medical care.

    … Female patients who come from poor, rural and uneducated families often tend to be less acknowledged or counted as they become ‘objects’ in the hands of medical staff who can and do hold authority and power over them.

    The World Health Organization recommends that the rate of cesarean section in a country should not exceed 15 percent. In Brazil the latest data for cesarean in most public hospitals is 35 percent. … an alarming 80 percent of private hospital [use] cesarean section commonly. When women are asked if they want a cesarean delivery about 70 percent of women patients say no …

    Cesarean section, episiotomy, oxytocin and cosmetic vaginal surgery

    … “most women go to birth without information.” Many are also convinced to accept cesarean section during labor while they are suffering from acute pain and unable to make the best decision. Women who are able to give birth ‘naturally’ are also most often submitted to episiotomy during childbirth …

    … 90 percent of hospital births throughout Latin America use surgical procedures for episiotomy without any medical need or indication. Without consultation with their patients numerous doctors cut and sew the vagina to shrink it after childbirth and to ‘satisfy the husbands.’ This operation is known in Brazil as the ‘husband’s point.’ …

    … The time a woman takes to complete labor in birth is another issue for medical teams who want to speed up the process. “There are reports that in some public hospitals, a woman should not be in labor from one shift to another, and all cases have to be ‘fully managed’ during the same shift,” …

    In addition to episiotomy, some women receive doses of oxytocin to enhance uterine contractions – and consequently the pain – so their delivery with childbirth is faster. But is it safe? Distinct dangers to the mother with incorrect use of the drug can cause fatal fetal hypoxia, a condition that denies a woman’s baby of life saving oxygen during the process of childbirth …

    Is there a solution to the problems?

    Why do some medical teams mistreat patients in labor? Professional studies indicate that trivialization of social injustice, especially injustice against women, may be the cause. This can affect the entire society in Brazil, both male and female.

    … Finding and supporting a good team of health professionals who will seek better quality health care for Brazil is the goal of photojournalist André François …

    Since 2000 the Brazilian program called ‘Working with Traditional Midwives’ … has aimed to improve care for women with birth delivery at home. They also seek to raise awareness among health professionals to recognize midwives as important partners in the birth process for women.

    As the definition of violence against women during childbirth can be wide and subject to many interpretations, so can the concept in the ‘humanization’ of childbirth. Numerous advocates who believe that babies who are born through a philosophy of ‘woman-centered childbirth’ are also beginning to see how natural and appropriate approaches to new technology with birthing can work together. The hope by many women’s advocates in Brazil is to see the rates of abuse during childbirth labor decrease sharply.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    An amazing homebirth story

    Isabel is an amazing, strong woman who came to me for pregnancy care. She had planned to move overseas, and as you’ll read, her pregnancy came as a surprise. She planned a homebirth with a midwife overseas – but the story has a twist in it! We went about the pregnancy, preparing thoroughly for an active, natural and drug-free birth. I was thrilled to receive Isabel’s birth story, and she has kindly agreed to share it here.

    Thank You to all the women out there who shared their birth stories and experiences which gave me to determination to birth at home. Now it is my turn to write the story I have been so looking forward to… I hope I help inspire another mum-to-be to have the great confidence in her own ability and her body’s ability to birth her baby safely and naturally…love Isabel xx

    Our beautiful birth story of baby Zachary by Isabel and Jed

    It started in mid-April when I noticed an unusual change in my body. I pee-ed my pants when I sneezed. Even though I have a very weak bladder control and recurrent cystitis I had never done that before. I decided to get a urine test and after 4 weak positives I decided the product was defective and I needed to go see a real doctor tomorrow.
    Half way through a busy day at work as a Veterinarian, caring for animals, it hit me that I might be pregnant and that we weren’t really ready for this big change in our lives. I broke down and cried. I left work early to go see the doctor. Jed met me at the clinic and we saw the doctor together. The doctor promptly told me, “My Dear, there isn’t such a thing as false positive results. Only false negative are possible. You ARE pregnant!”

    I guess at that point both Jed and I had a lot of conflicting feelings. We had only just gotten married less than a month ago. We had a wedding dinner to attend in Malaysia followed by a honeymoon which required us to trek over 4000km up a mountain. At the same time it was such a big surprise and blessing to know that we were able to have a baby. We both set about sorting through our feelings and thoughts for a couple of weeks before letting the rest of the family and friends know about it.

    It was a smooth pregnancy and we had amazing help and support from friends and family. We learnt so much from our lovely midwife, Melissa Maimann and our ante natal teacher, Julie Clarke. It was basically life changing. I had known I would have needed to hit the books for this but who would have thought I find so much conflicting information. It was hard making the right choices. It was doubly hard to not have my sisters around which I rely on so much for guidance. Jed was so good and read everything I told him to. I only had to chuck temper tantrums once a month. =)

    In the end, I decided I wanted to have a home birth because I dislike being told what to do with regards to my body and I strongly dislike needles. I spent a lot of time visualising what my ideal birth/labour would be like and tried to get the support network I needed to achieve this dream. It wasn’t easy finding medical people to agree so in the end I realised it would probably just be Jed, Alicia and my mom helping me. I prayed to whoever was listening that everything would go smoothly and I that neither Zachary or I would not need medical help.

    Fast forward about 9 months to December, my mucus plug came out throughout the day on the 13th with no signs of labour. So we decided to head over to the homeopath for back up help if needed to get the contractions going.
    Almost a week later, on the 22nd of December my waters broke at 2am. It was such a surreal feeling as I sneezed and wet the bed. I was surprised at how wet the bed was and decided to stand up and this big gush of clear warm water ran down my legs. I then realised that my waters had broken and that I would be meeting my baby today.
    I woke Jed up and told him the news. Since there were no signs of contractions once again I decided to take the homeopathic remedy and we both went back to sleep.

    By 4am, I was uncomfortable enough to wake up and walk around. I emptied my bowels multiple times and drank lots of water and ate some fruit. At 5am I woke Jed up and told him to pump up the exercise ball and warm up the heat packs. By 6am, contractions were regular and about 15 minutes apart, Jed started filling up the bath tub. However, there was no hot water because the water heater had been turned off. So off he woke mom up to take over comforting me and went to boil many many pots of water.

    I sat on the bathroom floor rocking on the exercise ball and constantly visualising a soft open cervix and my baby descending nicely. I breathed nicely through each contraction remember our Calmbirth classes.
    Heat packs placed on the lower back and under the belly helped with the discomfort as well.
    The exercise ball was good for sleeping and resting on between contractions. Around 7 o’clock the bath tub was finally ready, got in and felt lots better. Alicia came shortly after and took over from mom. She gave awesome back rubs and was such a grounding energy which was exactly what I needed to get things done. Things went quickly after that.

    Jed got into the water around 8am and I knelt down with my arms wrapped around him. Contractions were about 5 minutes apart then and required a lot more attention. I kept reminding myself that each contraction meant one step closer to seeing Zachary. I felt him slowly pressing down on my cervix and my cervix dilating.
    Vocalising helped during the contractions. Jed was a great help reminding me to breathe and not hold my breath.
    He was like a rock I knew I could rely on. Did a few self vaginal exams and could feel Zachary’s head progressing downwards.
    At about 8.20am I realised I was in transition, his head was crowning and I wasn’t fully dilated. Was upset and freaked out but Alicia reminded me to trust in my body. Took a deep breath and focused on opening my cervix up. A few minutes later I was ready to push, Zachary came out head first with a hand. I rested for a few seconds till the next contractions came and looked up at Jed and said “Are you ready? He is coming.” Jed caught Zachary Francis McKenna at 8.38am
    We were both ecstatic and sat there admiring for a while. He started crying almost immediately and looked around at all of us.
    Stood up and tried to birth placenta but couldn’t so I went back to the room. He started feeding soon after and I was enjoying his skin to skin contact. The doctor arrived soon after he advised us to clamp the cord and get the placenta out.
    Jed was frantic and really wanted the placenta out because he was worried about bleeding. I was getting a little annoyed by his constant fussing. We clamped the cord and Jed cut it. The doctor applied gentle traction and got the placenta out. Finally we were left alone for some quiet time.

    I would like to thank my lovely husband for supporting me through the pregnancy and birth and agreeing to a home birth and studying so hard.
    I would also like to thank Melissa and Julie for their teachings which allowed me to have the confidence to do this, although neither of them endorsed free birthing they were not judgmental.

    No amount of thank you can express my gratitude for having Alicia around to show me there were many options and that we need to take charge of our own births.
    Many thanks to my Mom and Dad for allowing me to use their house. Last of all, Thank You to all the women out there who shared their birth stories and experiences which gave me to determination to birth at home.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Delivering better maternity care

    Link

    Despite countless inquiries, initiatives and ministerial pledges … maternity care remains one of the NHS’s problem areas …

    In recent weeks there have been two significant pieces of evidence published that will help shape practice affecting the UK’s 800,000 births a year. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) produced new guidelines for the NHS in England and Wales on the circumstances in which mothers-to-be should be able to have a Caesarean-section delivery.

    Meanwhile the landmark Birthplace study … sought to clarify the relative risks of having a baby at home, in hospital or in a birth centre run by midwives; the study found all settings carried a low level of risk. Both documents aim to advise maternity teams on how to give mothers and their babies the best possible experience.

    … It is no wonder maternity services are under pressure … England has had a 22% increase in births over the past decade …

    But the maternity workforce is not just short of midwives, the roundtable heard. Of those 800,000 annual births, 94% of them take place in hospitals where doctors are present along with midwives; the others, at home (2%) and in birth centres (4%), have midwives solely in charge. But the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) believes the 2,186 senior doctors working as consultants in that area of medicine is too few. It wants the NHS to boost numbers to 3,000-3,300.

    Mothers-to-be would benefit because every hospital maternity unit would have a consultant on hand 24/7 and less experienced doctors would no longer be in charge overnight and at weekends …

    … “the current system of maternity care is unsustainable. You have to reconfigure”. The participant meant that some maternity units should be closed – merged, in effect – so fewer, larger childbirth centres could offer mothers a better service, partly thanks to more specialist staff handling a greater number of deliveries concentrated in the same place.

    It makes little sense for large urban areas to have separate maternity units just a few miles apart, a view confirmed for the speaker by seeing that sort of setup on a recent visit to Leeds and nearby towns.

    Many health professionals support the concept of reorganisation. And the reconfiguration of neonatal care services in 2003, which led to fewer units dealing with sick babies but offering enhanced care, is a potential model to follow, another participant added. But there is a major obstacle to overcome first: … To close your core maternity service is a death trap as an MP. So that will not happen,” …

    … simply creating fewer, but larger, hospital units is not the answer and there needs to be more midwife-led birth centres, either standalone units or situated beside hospitals, in case a mother needs urgent medical attention …

    There was also a strong consensus that the huge proportion of births occurring in hospitals, 94%, is too high. While there was support for moving towards an equal split – 33% at home, 33% in birth centres and 33% in hospital – there was also a recognition that politics, entrenched attitudes and the tightest NHS budget in a generation means that will probably remain just an aspiration for the foreseeable future.

    … In 2007, Maternity Matters promised women in England a choice of birth place, but the reality is that many still do not get that. One participant working on the NHS frontline said pressure on maternity services was so great in some places that midwives who usually help women to have home births are having to work, instead, on labour wards, thus depriving those seeking a home birth of that supposedly guaranteed right.

    Similarly, surveys by the Healthcare Commission and its successor as the NHS regulator for England, the Care Quality Commission, have shown the promise to women of one-to-one care from a midwife during their labour is also not honoured for as many as a quarter of mothers-to-be, who are left alone and find it stressful …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    NC Women Face Charges After Newborn’s Death

    Link

    Two women have been charged with practicing midwifery without a license in North Carolina after a newborn died following an underwater home birth.

    … Charlotte police say the women were at a private home last week assisting with an underwater birth, in which the baby is delivered in a tub of warm water … there were complications with the delivery, and the newborn died after being rushed to a local hospital.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Myths and Truths of Obesity and Pregnancy

    Link

    Ironically, despite excessive caloric intake, many obese women are deficient in vitamins vital to a healthy pregnancy …

    … Many obese women are vitamin deficient …

    Forty percent are deficient in iron, 24 percent in folic acid and 4 percent in B12. This is a concern because certain vitamins, like folic acid, are very important before conception, lowering the risk of cardiac problems and spinal defects in newborns. Other vitamins, such as calcium and iron, are needed throughout pregnancy to help babies grow.

    … vitamin deficiency has to do with the quality of the diet, not the quantity. Obese women tend to stray away from fortified cereals, fruits and vegetables, and eat more processed foods that are high in calories but low in nutritional value.

    “Just like everybody else, women considering pregnancy or currently pregnant should get a healthy mix of fruits and vegetables, lean proteins and good quality carbohydrates. Unfortunately, these are not the foods people lean towards when they overeat,” noted Thornburg. “Women also need to be sure they are taking vitamins containing folic acid before and during pregnancy.”

    … In 2009, the Institute of Medicine revised its recommendations for gestational weight gain for obese women from “at least 15 pounds” to “11-20 pounds.” According to past research, obese women with excessive weight gain during pregnancy have a very high risk of complications, including indicated preterm birth, cesarean delivery, failed labor induction, large-for-gestational-age infants and infants with low blood sugar.

    If a woman starts her pregnancy overweight or obese, not gaining a lot of weight can actually improve the likelihood of a healthy pregnancy …

    … Obese women have increased rates of respiratory complications, and up to 30 percent experience an exacerbation of their asthma during pregnancy, a risk almost one-and-a-half times more than non-obese women.

    … Breastfeeding rates are poor among obese women, with only 80 percent initiating and less than 50 percent continuing beyond six months, even though it is associated with less postpartum weight retention and should be encouraged as it benefits the health of mom and baby.

    … it can be challenging for obese women to breast feed. It often takes longer for their milk to come in and they can have lower production …

    Preconception care and a healthy eating and exercise program before pregnancy, that is maintained during pregnancy, can be helpful.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Balancing The Womb

    Link

    New research hopes to explain premature births and failed inductions of labour. The study by academics at the University of Bristol suggests a new mechanism by which the level of myosin phosphorylation is regulated in the pregnant uterus.

    … phosphorylation of uterus proteins at specific amino acids have a key role in the regulation of uterine activity in labour.

    A remarkable feature of the uterus … is that it remains relatively relaxed for the nine months of pregnancy … and then, during labour, it contracts forcibly and the baby is born. A special type of smooth muscle that grows and stretches during pregnancy to accommodate the fetus and the placenta forms the uterus.

    Hormones such as oxytocin or prostaglandins promote labour, but the biochemical changes that allow the switch from relaxation to contractions to happen are not fully understood. This makes it difficult to predict when a woman is going to deliver. In eight to ten per cent of women delivery occurs too early … On the other hand when labour has to be induced for medical reasons, it is impossible to know whether the induction will be successful or whether it will require an emergency caesarean section …

    … small biopsies of uterine tissue from women who delivered … demonstrated that contractions require both a calcium dependent pathway driven by myosin kinase and a calcium independent pathway that regulates the activity of myosin phosphatase …

    … “This study has increased our understanding of the biochemical changes underlying uterine activity and may help in the design of better drugs to prevent preterm labour or to induce labour successfully at term, benefiting many thousands of women and their babies.” …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    I’m pregnant! What are my next steps?

    If you have just found out you are pregnant, congratulations! You might be feeling a range of emotions: excited, fearful, overwhelmed, happy, anxious … this is all very normal! Many women who contact me feel unsure about what to do next and are anxious to know all their options before making a choice, so I have put together a few tips to make you feel a little more confident.

    Although many women see their GP as their first port of call when they are pregnant, it’s handy to know that women may also see an eligible midwife who can order all the necessary pregnancy tests and any scans that are needed. An eligible midwife can also talk with you about the available options for your pregnancy and birth care, in a relaxed and unhurried setting. An eligible midwife can help you determine your due date and arrange any referrals that you may need. She can book you into a hospital, refer you to an obstetrician if needed, and also provide full pregnancy, birth and postnatal care.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    How do Midwives Work?

    It’s a common question I am asked! When people ask me what I do, I tell them I am a midwife. The next question is usually, “Oh, so you’re a nurse?”. “Not quite”, I reply, “a midwife – I care for women though pregnancy and birth and with their new baby.” Then they really look puzzled. “That’s not what an obstetrician does?” “An obstetrician is a doctor who specialises in caring for women with complicated pregnancies and births. A midwife specialises in caring for women who are having healthy pregnancies and births.” By that stage they’re well and truly confused and I start to wonder what we need to do to promote midwifery as a care option for all women.

    The term midwife means ‘with woman’. Midwives work in partnership with women through pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period. Midwives can provide care to women from the time that the woman discovers she is pregnant, right up until her baby is 6 weeks old. In fact, women who experience a normal, healthy pregnancy and birth may not see a doctor at all! Eligible midwives are able to order all the necessary tests and scans during pregnancy and may refer directly to an obstetrician if their services are necessary.

    Midwives provide education, support, advice and information, as well as doing all the routine checks of mother and baby.

    Midwives advocate measures throughout pregnancy and birth that promote normal birth: that is a birth without interventions. Midwives and are experienced in such things as water birth, active birth, and so on.

    Midwives are also specially educated to know if anything is out of the ordinary, and they can get help from obstetricians. In pregnancy, midwives see women at intervals so that any issues that may present can be dealt with before they cause any major issues.

    Women who are cared for by one midwife from pregnancy through to birth have better outcomes in terms of safety, lower rates of intervention and satisfaction with their experience. Midwives too prefer to work in this way, getting to know each family individually.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Baby’s Weight Affected By Mothers’ Weight Before And During Pregnancy

    Link

    A new study … reveals that both pre-pregnant weight (body mass index, BMI) and weight gain in pregnancy are important predictors of babies’ birthweight. This is important since high birthweight may also predict adult overweight.

    … Results of the study showed that birthweight of the newborn child increased with increasing maternal pre-pregnant BMI, and that offspring birthweight also increased with increasing weight gain of the mother during pregnancy.

    Every increase in one kg of pre-pregnancy BMI increased birthweight with 22.4 g. A subsequent increase in weight gain during pregnancy of 10 kg increased birthweight with 224 g.

    … “Encouraging women to attain a healthy weight before conception and keep a moderate weight gain during pregnancy is important to avoid high or excessive birthweight in offspring,” …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    How Pregnancy Changes a Woman’s Brain

    Link

    … At no other time in a woman’s life does she experience such massive hormonal fluctuations as during pregnancy. Research suggests that the reproductive hormones may ready a woman’s brain for the demands of motherhood — helping her become less rattled by stress and more attuned to her baby’s needs. Although the hypothesis remains untested, Glynn surmises this might be why moms wake up when the baby stirs while dads snore on. Other studies confirm the truth in a common complaint of pregnant women: “Mommy Brain,” or impaired memory before and after birth. “There may be a cost” of these reproduction-related cognitive and emotional changes, says Glynn, “but the benefit is a more sensitive, effective mother.”

    … evidence is accumulating to show that it’s not prenatal adversity on its own — say, maternal malnourishment or depression — that presents risks for a baby. Congruity between life in utero and life on the outside may matter more. A fetus whose mother is malnourished adapts to scarcity and will cope better with a dearth of food once it’s born — but could become obese if it eats normally. Timing is critical too: maternal anxiety early in gestation takes a toll on the baby’s cognitive development; the same high levels of stress hormones late in pregnancy enhance it.

    Just as Mom permanently affects her fetus, new science suggests that the fetus does the same for Mom. Fetal movement, even when the mother is unaware of it, raises her heart rate and her skin conductivity, signals of emotion — and perhaps of pre-natal preparation for mother-child bonding. Fetal cells pass through the placenta into the mother’s bloodstream. “It’s exciting to think about whether those cells are attracted to certain regions in the brain” that may be involved in optimizing maternal behavior …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Heart test that saved baby

    Link

    This test is very simple to perform – any midwife could administer this; it takes very little time, is non-invasive and causes no pain for the baby. It is not (yet) routine in Australian hospitals, although some are performing it.

    … Baby Charlie is the apple of his mother’s eye. A little more than three months ago he was born, seemingly healthy …

    “We were packed ready to go literally on our way out the door” …

    But Charlie still needed two newborn screens. One, the heel prick is mandatory. The baby’s heel is poked, drawing a spot of blood. The sample is then tested to detect rare genetic disorders. The other newborn test is voluntary.

    … It’s called pulse-oximetry. There’s no pain, no poke, just a reading of the oxygen level in a baby’s blood. If a newborn baby’s reading is above 90, it signals a healthy heart. When Charlie got his test, at first no one believed the oxygen levels.

    “… they just kept registering in the 60s. I remember at that point looking at my husband and thinking, there’s something wrong,” Lindsay said.

    The test had picked up a life-threatening defect in Charlie’s heart … “It tells us there could be a problem. And the number one problem we’re looking for is congenital heart disease,” …

    The babies are given the pulse-oximetry test at a day old. It’s a crucial window of time before a baby would show heart defect symptoms, such as breathing or feeding trouble, or blue skin.

    “My big passion comes from babies that do not have this test that show up in our emergency room or clinic, very sick or very ill with serious heart disease that could have could have been detected earlier,” said Dr. Park.

    After his pulse-oximetry test baby Charlie was rushed the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit … at just six days old Charlie had open heart surgery.

    … parents of newborns can ask for the test if a hospital doesn’t routinely offer it.

    … undetected heart defects are the number one cause of infant death from birth defects.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Older mums in new age of parenting

    Link

    Almost a quarter of first-time Australian mothers are giving birth after the age of 35 … almost 6 per cent higher than the figure in 2000 …

    … the number of mothers in the older age bracket would continue to grow for a range of reasons including lifestyle, economic factors and career choices.

    “There’s a really strong tendency for women these days to get established in their careers or job and working for a period of time for their own self-fulfilment but also because of the economic circumstances,” …

    … women now tended to have children over a shorter period – leaving less time between births – because they were older.

    … the average maternal age in 2009 was 30, compared with 29 a decade earlier …

    … older women faced a greater risk of complications during pregnancy including miscarriage, high blood pressure and diabetes …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Obesity epidemic may have roots in 1950s

    Link

    After long days discussing America’s obesity problem, Melinda Sothern has had enough of windowless conference rooms.

    … Sothern, 55, is a woman who practices what she preaches. And one of her messages about obesity is aimed at women like herself: mothers.

    Fat mothers. Thin mothers. And especially mothers-to-be.

    A leading fitness and nutrition expert …, she has a theory that the tide of obesity that has swept the nation in the last two decades had its roots in what young mothers did, or didn’t do, in the postwar, suburban-sprouting 1950s.

    If she’s right — and evidence is stacking up on her side — reproductive-age women may become the central focus of efforts to reverse America’s fat problem.

    The obesity epidemic has multiple causes … Food has changed in the last five decades. Americans have become much more sedentary. But she thinks that obesity rates soared just when they did — in the 1980s — because a generation of young women decades earlier smoked, spurned breast-feeding and restricted their weight during numerous, closely spaced pregnancies.

    “It was the evil ’50s. A perfect recipe for obesity,” …

    Sothern calls her theory “the obesity trinity.” And she thinks the key to getting Americans to slim down lies in studying those lessons from the past. Among her prescriptions for change: Women who are significantly overweight should be discouraged from having babies until they shed some pounds.

    A central part of Sothern’s theory — that obesity starts in the womb — is gaining currency with a growing number of doctors and researchers who say that reversing the epidemic, with its attendant cases of weight-related illnesses such as diabetes, should begin by addressing nutrition in pregnancy and early-life feeding practices.

    … Women in the 1950s and 1960s … were generally advised to restrict weight gain in pregnancy to as little as 10 pounds. Inadequate nutrition in some of these women could easily have programmed their babies to catch up on growth during infancy — and studies suggest such growth spurts increase the risk of later obesity.

    Women smoked with abandon … Smoking during pregnancy is thought to contribute to obesity risk in offspring because nicotine disrupts mechanisms in the body that control appetite, metabolic rate and fat storage.

    By the mid-1970s, breast-feeding in the U.S. had hit an all-time low of 25% … formula-fed babies have a higher risk for obesity than breast-fed babies, perhaps because of metabolic changes or because drinking formula from a bottle is passive and easy and generally done till a bottle is empty.

    And since breast-feeding can prevent ovulation, women using formulas were more apt to experience multiple pregnancies over a shorter period of time. Babies born close together can have inferior nutrition during gestation, which can permanently program their metabolism toward becoming overweight.

    … Over-nourished kids grew up to be over-nourished women, producing large babies. Large babies, just like too-small babies, are at heightened risk of obesity … They are less sensitive to hunger cues and less sensitive to insulin.

    Overweight women are more likely to have diabetes …

    … In 1960, middle-aged men were, on average, about 27 pounds lighter than middle-aged men in 2002, and women were more than 25 pounds lighter.

    In 1963, the average 10-year-old boy weighed 74 pounds and the average 10-year-old girl 77 pounds — compared with 85 pounds and 88 pounds, respectively, in 2002.

    Other changes were afoot in the mid-20th century … a car culture and modern conveniences. The fast-food craze was launched with the first McDonald’s in 1961.

    … “There had to be physiological and metabolic changes in our bodies.”

    … Sothern thinks the obesity trinity tweaked our genetic material to make us prone to pack on pounds.

    … “Significantly overweight women should not have babies. Women should be physically active and have a healthy diet for at least a year before pregnancy,” she says. “I do think we can de-program, but you have to be very aggressive.”

    Women should breast-feed for at least six months after childbirth or — better yet — take one year off from work and breast-feed. They should not smoke.

    And after those babies become toddlers and enter preschool, they should have 60 minutes a day of recess plus a 40-minute physical education class …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Treatment Halves Preterm Birth Rate

    Link

    The risk of preterm birth and neonatal mortality and morbidity declined significantly in asymptomatic women with a … short cervix treated with vaginal progesterone …

    The treatment was associated with a 40% to 50% reduction in the risk of preterm birth, a 43% reduction in total neonatal morbidity and mortality, and a 45% reduction in the frequency of low birth weight.

    … “Our analysis provides compelling evidence that vaginal progesterone prevents preterm birth and reduces neonatal morbidity and mortality in women with a short cervix,” …

    “Importantly, progesterone reduced early preterm birth. These immature babies are at the greatest risk for complications, death, and long-term disability. Progesterone also decreased a fraction of late preterm births, which are the most common preterm deliveries.”

    … Progesterone has a key role in maintenance of pregnancy …

    “Vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of preterm birth <33 weeks of gestation in both women with a single gestation and no previous preterm birth, as well as in women with a single gestation and at least one previous spontaneous preterm birth before 37 weeks of gestation," ...

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Christmas baby rush

    The original title of this article was, “Pregnant mums rush Christmas babies”. This is an interesting title as it’s not really the Mums who rush their babies’ births, but rather the doctors who authorise and perform the inductions. Health practitioners are not required to perform interventions that are not in the best interests of their patients. So perhaps the article should read, “Doctors rush Christmas babies”. That doesn’t sound as good as a headline, does it?

    Link

    MUMS-to-be are having their babies induced so they can be home in time for Christmas.

    Women due around Christmas often asked to be induced early so they could spend the festive day with their other children, obstetrician Dr Samantha Hargreaves said.

    But obstetrician Dr David O’Callaghan said social inductions increased danger for mother and baby by possibly triggering interventions.

    Inductions raised the likelihood of epidurals, forcep and vacuum deliveries, caesarean sections and a slower recovery for the mother.

    “The subsequent longer labour is more stressful on the baby, and the use of forceps is more stressful on the baby,” he said.

    Richmond mum Michelle Godsall had been planning to be induced on Monday because she did not want to risk giving birth on Christmas Day, but she went into labour early yesterday afternoon.

    … She was not aware of any added risks, but understood her labour could be more intense, but she decided it would be worth the extra pain.

    In other words, her care providers did not explain the risks of induction.

    Northcote mum Sara McCluskey, 38, who is booked in for an induction … said women should be able to have babies how they wanted.

    “It’s not a lifestyle choice. I want to be able to spend Christmas with my 2 1/2-year-old daughter, who is just beginning to understand what it’s all about,” Ms McCluskey said.

    If that is not a lifestyle choice, what is?

    Dr Hargreaves said the surge in demand for inductions was a well recognised trend … She induced women only at 38 1/2 weeks or more into their pregnancy to avoid problems, such as being forced into having a caesarean.

    It seems she too has not been informed of the risks, and that some 50% of first time Mums who are induced will actually end up having the caesarean she had hoped an induction would avoid.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Abruption Among Most Likely Causes of Stillbirth

    Link

    The most common causes of stillbirth were obstetric conditions such as abruption and complications of multiple gestation and by placental abnormalities …

    Almost 30% of stillbirths in a large cohort study were due to obstetric conditions, while placental abnormalities accounted for nearly a quarter …

    … having had a previous stillbirth was the strongest risk factor for another one …

    … Both studies were part of the Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network Writing Group, which was convened to assess risk factors for, and causes of, stillbirth in the U.S. Stillbirth was defined as fetal death at 20 weeks’ gestation or later.

    Thus far, there’s been a dearth of information on the condition, which makes it challenging to design prevention strategies …

    … About a third of stillbirths occurred between 20 and 24 weeks’ gestation, and half occurred before 28 weeks …

    The most common cause (29.3%) was an obstetric condition, such as abruption and complications of multiple gestation, or related to the constellation of preterm labor, preterm premature rupture of membranes, and cervical insufficiency.

    Placental abnormalities was the second most common cause (23.6%), followed by fetal genetic structural abnormalities (13.7%), infection (12.9%), umbilical cord abnormalities (10.4%), hypertensive disorders (9.2%), and other maternal medical conditions (7.8%).

    … More intrapartum stillbirths had infectious causes … while antepartum stillbirths had a higher proportion of placental causes … and fetal genetic structural abnormalities …

    … pregnancy history, specifically, having a previous stillbirth, was the strongest risk factor for the condition …

    Other risk factors associated with stillbirth included … Diabetes … Maternal age 40 years or older … Maternal AB blood type … History of drug addiction … Smoking during the three months before pregnancy … Obesity/overweight …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Stress In Early Pregnancy Can Lead To Shorter Pregnancies, More Pre-term Births And Fewer Baby Boys

    Link

    Stress in the second and third months of pregnancy can shorten pregnancies, increase the risk of pre-term births and may affect the ratio of boys to girls being born …

    … women who experienced a severe quake … during their second and third months of pregnancy had shorter pregnancies and were at higher risk of delivering pre-term (before 37 weeks gestation). The pregnancies of women exposed to the earthquake in the second month of pregnancy were on average 0.17 weeks (1.3 days) shorter than those in the unaffected areas of Chile. The pregnancies of those exposed in the third month were 0.27 weeks (1.9 days) shorter. Normally, about six in 100 women had a pre-term birth, but among women exposed to the earthquake in the third month of pregnancy, this rose by 3.4%, meaning more than nine women in 100 delivered their babies early.

    The effect was most pronounced for female births; the probability of pre-term birth increased by 3.8% if exposure to the quake occurred in the third month, and 3.9% if it occurred in the second month. In contrast there was no statistically significant effect seen in male births.

    As the stress of the earthquake had greater effect on pre-term births in girls rather than boys, the researchers had to make adjustments for this when calculating the effect of stress on the sex ratio: the ratio of male to female live births. They found that there was a decline in the sex ratio among those exposed to the earthquake in the third month of gestation of 5.8%.

    … “Generally, there are more male than female live births. The ratio of male to female births is approximately 51:49 … Our findings indicate a 5.8% decline in this proportion, which would translate into a ratio of 45 male births per 100 births, so that there are now more female than male births …

    Previous research has suggested that in times of stress women are more likely to miscarry male foetuses because they grow larger than females and therefore require greater investment of resources by the mother; they may also be less robust than females and may not adapt their development to a stressful environment in the womb. “Our findings on a decreased sex ratio support this hypothesis and suggest that stress may affect the viability of male births,” … “In contrast, among female conceptions, stress exposure appears not to affect the viability of the conception but rather, the length of gestation.”

    … possible mechanisms to explain their findings could involve the placenta, which sets the duration of the pregnancy, and the effect of the stress hormone cortisol on the placenta’s function …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Forceps delivery tied to lower brain injury risk

    Link

    When babies need help coming into the world, forceps may carry less risk of newborn seizures compared with vacuum deliveries or Cesarean section …

    In recent years, forceps have fallen out of favor when it comes to aiding a difficult childbirth. Vacuum devices are more often used, while C-section rates have surged.

    … that’s all despite a lack of evidence that vacuum or C-section deliveries are actually safer for newborns compared with forceps …

    … newborns delivered by forceps were 45 percent less likely to suffer a seizure than those born via vacuum pump or C-section.

    On the other hand, babies delivered by C-section were less likely to have one type of bleeding around the brain — known as subdural hemorrhage.

    The risks of any of those complications were low, whatever the type of delivery …

    Forceps have often been labelled riskier for mothers and babies than a vacuum extraction delivery, however this study questions that belief. My experience has been that a forceps delivery, in the hands of a skilled obstetrician, is perfectly safe for the mother and baby. I have found that forceps are more likely than a vacuum to result in a vaginal birth, while more attempted vacuum deliveries “fail” and end up going to caesarean section. Fewer forceps deliveries “fail”. With a vacuum extraction, the baby is essentially pulled out by its scalp, whereas with forceps, the baby is pulled out by the body parts of its face and skull. I think this method is kinder to the baby. The best approach though is to promote unassisted vaginal birth, where the woman pushes her baby out (or breathes her baby out) without any instruments. This is most likely if the woman has had no pain relief in labour, is assisted to birth in an upright position and is supported by a known and supportive midwife.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Simulator to predict chance of caesarean?

    Link

    Traditionally, doctors and midwives have used a technique called pelvimetry to measure the pelvis and try to determine its adequacy for giving birth. But pelvic size is just one factor in how smoothly labor will go, rendering the method largely insufficient.

    Scientists in France have been working to take some of the guesswork out of labor predictions … their newly developed software, called Predibirth, predicts birth outcomes quite accurately.

    The researchers used their software to process magnetic resonance images of 24 pregnant women, capturing the pelvis and fetus, and then simulating 72 possible trajectories the baby’s head might take through the birth canal. The program then uses this data to score the mother’s chances of having a normal (vaginal) birth.

    … Of the 24 women in the study, the 13 who delivered normally all had highly favorable birth outcome scores. Three women who had high-risk scores underwent elective C-sections. Of the five women who underwent emergency C-section, the three with obstructed labor had high-risk scores, and the two who experienced heart rhythm abnormalities had mildly favorable or favorable scores.

    More accurate measurements of labor risks might not only keep C-section rates lower and help identify necessary C-sections before they become emergencies, but these measurements could also better inform those who want to deliver at home whether it is safe to do so.

    I wonder if all of those women had undergone extensive preparation for birth and had sought continuity of midwifery care? Of 24 women, only 13 delivered vaginally. That is only 54%! Private midwifery care generally had rates of normal birth up around 90%.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Rates of C-sections and postpartum posttraumatic stress disorder on the rise

    Link

    The birth of Helen Dunn’s first son didn’t go nearly as smoothly as she had envisioned. Induced two weeks early because of concerns about the baby’s health, the Vancouver clinical counsellor endured 17 hours of painful contractions before her baby went into distress … She had an emergency caesarean section, the whole experience proving to be a traumatic one with terrible, lasting effects.

    “I immediately felt disconnected from him when they showed him to me,” … “I didn’t recognize him. I wasn’t attached to him; in fact, I had an aversion to him. I wanted them to take him away, which is hard to admit. After that it was very difficult for me, it was a long process of panic attacks, which I’ve never experienced before, and full-blown agoraphobia.

    “I didn’t want to tell people how I felt; I felt a tremendous amount of shame about how I felt toward my child, the difficulty I was having bonding with him,” she adds. “I was diagnosed with postpartum depression, but I had no idea about postpartum posttraumatic stress disorder.”

    Looking back now, she can see that those panic attacks were among the condition’s telltale signs … PTSD after childbirth is characterized by two key elements: experiencing or witnessing an event involving actual or threatened danger to oneself or others and a response of intense fear, helplessness, or horror. Symptoms include obsessive thoughts about the birth; feelings of numbness, detachment, or panic; disturbing memories of the birth experience; nightmares; flashbacks; and sadness, fearfulness, anxiety, or irritability.

    … the reported prevalence of postpartum PTSD ranges from 1.5 percent to 6 percent …

    Dunn was even more struck by the effects of her traumatic birth following the delivery of her second son six years later. She laboured for 17 hours again, but this time delivered vaginally with the assistance of a midwife in hospital and went home soon after.

    “I didn’t have any problems,” Dunn says. “He immediately looked familiar to me — he looked like my sister — I felt bonded to him, attached to him.” The stark differences between her two childbirth experiences prompted her to explore other women’s feelings of attachment to their newborns among those who delivered via emergency C-section as well as vaginally in her Master’s thesis. Now she wants to raise awareness among health professionals and the public alike of two pressing issues: postpartum PTSD—in particular signs, early intervention, and effects on maternal-infant attachment—and the high rates of C-sections in this country.

    Although C-sections clearly play a vital role in maternal health and can be life-saving, about 26 percent of deliveries in Canada take place this way, which is nearly double the rate recommended by the World Health Organization.

    Then there is the way postpartum PTSD is so widely misunderstood and overlooked, in Dunn’s view.

    “When I did reach out for help, people would say, ‘You’ve got a healthy baby; what do you have to complain about?’ or ‘This was so long ago; why is it still bothering you?’

    … “When someone says, ‘I don’t want to see my child… I really wish someone would have said to me at that point, ‘Can we help you?’ When I told a nurse I was feeling strange, having panic attacks, she said it was because of the medication. Even one gesture of support or kindness from somebody on the front lines can go a long way to help a woman gain a sense of control of what’s happening to her. I think it could have been handled a lot better in my case. I think I would have benefitted from more support had there been more knowledge around it.”

    Maternal-health expert Michael Klein … says that … women who have emergency C-sections without adequate support or communication from their caregivers suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder far more frequently than those who don’t.

    “What we know about the psychological experiences of women is that women who have a sudden, unexpected, emergency caesarean section without any chance to really adapt to it are the most likely to suffer psychological distress,” … “Posttraumatic stress disorder is much, much, much neglected.”

    … Klein emphasizes that the primary determinant of whether a woman will suffer PTSD after child birth is not the mode of delivery. Rather, it’s how she’s cared for. In other words, the condition can occur in women who have vaginal births, deliveries that require forceps, midwife-assisted labours, and in other situations. The crucial factor throughout is how her care team responds to her needs.

    Other factors come into play as well, such as prior psychological and psychiatric disorders and the woman’s prepregnancy mental state.

    … “We know that women never forget their childbirth experiences,” … “They can be transformative in a positive way or transformative in a negative way. Talk to any 50- or 60-year old woman and she can tell you every minute of their childbirth experience.” …

    Continuity of care – that is, being cared for by one person who is trusted and liked throughout the pregnancy, birth and postnatal period – is vital for minimising the chance of PTSD. Continuity models include private obstetric care, where a woman has all of her pregnancy care with one obstetrician and that same obstetrician is on-call for her birth. Continuity models also include private midwifery care where a woman has the same midwife for all of her pregnancy, birth and postnatal care. Obstetric care can be accessed through eligible midwives who have collaborative arrangements with obstetricians.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Hospital births for healthy women? What does the research say?

    The recent Birthplace Study was the first of its kind to compare outcomes for low-risk, healthy women who gave birth in midwife-led units (both alongside and freestanding), obstetric units and at home. My previous blog post described the findings for first-time Mums birthing at home, but what did the findings say about hospital birth?

    The study is extremely positive and shows that birth is generally very safe for mothers and babies who are low risk and healthy. In fact, the chance of something going very wrong for the baby was so low that the researchers had to combine mortality and morbidity to get any meaningful data. There were so few deaths in the study (38 out of nearly 65,000 births) that they had to combine a host of adverse outcomes in order to come up with any statistically significant results. Therefore the “primary outcome” included baby deaths and serious morbidity (injury / illness) to the baby. Overall, a low risk woman had a 4.3/1,000 risk of having a “primary outcome” (that is, death or serious injury to the baby). For women birthing in hospital, the figure was 4.4/1,000 and was actually lower for babies born at home and in midwifery-led units. Imagine that: the risk to the baby overall was highest in hospital!

    Breaking this down further, if we look at first-time Mums separately to second and subsequent time Mums, the figures look different. First time Mums had a 5.3/1,000 chance of a “primary outcome” overall. This rose to 9.3/1,000 for women who planned to birth at home, and fell to 4.5 for women birthing in a midwifery-led unit. It was 5.3/1,000 for first-time mums who birthed in hospital. Again, we see that hospital birth confers some increased risk for first time Mums.

    Now looking at women birthing for the second (or subsequent) time, we find that the overall risk of a “primary outcome” was very low: 3.1/1,000. This was higher in an obstetric (hospital) unit at 3.3/1,000, lower in a midwifery-led unit (2.7/1,000) and lowest for women birthing at home (2.3/1,000). So once again, the study is showing that hospital is not the safest place to birth a baby if you are a low-risk, healthy women.

    If you are having your first baby and are low-risk, the safest place to birth is in a midwifery unit, and if you have birthed before and are low-risk, the safest place to birth is at home.

    Of course, midwifery units have limited capabilities to provide higher levels of care, and as labour and birth are unpredictable, there needs to be robust transfer arrangements in place. Some 10-45% of women transfer in birth. This figure is lowest for women who have birthed before, and highest in first-time Mums. As well as robust transfer arrangements, women – particularly first-time Mums – need to be aware of the chance of transfer and to be comfortable with this possibility. This is best accommodated if the woman can transfer in with her own midwife.

    What were the intervention rates like?

    Not surprisingly, intervention rates were highest in women who planned a hospital birth. 93% women who planned a homebirth had a normal birth, versus only 74% women in the hospital. 11% had a caesarean in the obstetric (hospital) unit, versus a mere 2.8% in women who planned a home birth. 24% women had their labours sped up with a syntocinon drip in the planned hospital birth group, versus only 5% in the women who planned a homebirth. 31% women had an epidural in the planned hospital birth group, versus 8% at home. And of course, episiotomy rates were lowest at home.

    It is clear that being in hospital greatly increases risks for all low risk mothers compared to being at home or in a midwife led unit (either alongside or freestanding).

    It is clear that low-risk women have much to gain by planning a birth with midwives in a birth centre or some other form of midwifery-led care. Planned homebirth does increase the risks to the babies of first-time Mums, with an increase in adverse outcomes for babies from about 0.5% to just under 1%. But what is it about planning a homebirth that increases the risk to the baby? The study used intention to treat analysis, so we are not able to know how many of those adverse outcomes occurred in those who transferred to hospital after a planned homebirth, versus those that happened in the births that actually occurred at home. We do know that the outcomes of homebirth transfers are generally worse than those who had been planned to occur in hospital, and first-time Mums are more likely to transfer. We also know that birth is generally riskier for a first-time Mum than a woman who has birthed before.

    Regardless, the study is extremely positive in supporting the role of primary midwifery care and the excellent outcomes that low-risk women can achieve when they choose a midwife as their care provider. Imagine the benefits as well for high-risk women who receive midwifery care with appropriate and timely obstetric care.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Delayed Cord Clamping

    Link

    Delayed cord clamping refers to the practice of clamping the umbilical cord after it has stopped pulsating. The usual hospital practice is to clamp and cut the cord straight away, however new wisdom (practiced for many years by private midwives) challenged the usual practice.

    Soon after a baby is born, the umbilical cord is clamped. But just how long those minutes should be, in between birth and clamping, is the subject of some controversy.

    New research from Sweden shows that a delay in clamping the cord, by just a few minutes, results in improved iron levels for babies … iron is crucial for healthy development of the brain and central nervous system.

    … For the babies whose clamping was delayed, there were fewer instances of anemia two days after birth. By four months of age they showed a 45 percent higher mean ferritin concentration … and a lower prevalence of iron deficiency than the babies who had been clamped early.

    In the early clamping group, researchers noted that the degree of iron deficiency was moderate, rather than mild. All infants, from both groups, had similar weights and lengths as well as similar levels of hemoglobin.

    Delayed cord clamping permits additional blood, including iron, to reach the neonate. The controversy comes in, however, because … later clamping can have a potential for … maternal hemorrhage …

    In the event of excessive bleeding, the cord could be clamped and cut and Syntocinon administered to stem the bleeding. Delayed cord clamping is my usual practice. I do not generally cut or clamp the cord until after the placenta has been born.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Expecting mothers prefer midwife-led labour

    Link

    Most women should be offered midwife-led care that uses fewer interventions and is just as safe as the consultant-led model, a major study recommends.

    The study, commissioned by the Health Service Executive and conducted by the School of Nursing and Midwifery at Trinity College Dublin, found most women prefer midwife-led units.

    It also discovered the number of babies requiring resuscitation at birth or admission to the special care baby unit was the same for both groups of women.

    Almost six in 10 women in the consultant-led units (57%) had their labours speeded up by either having their waters broken or having oxytocin given intravenously by a drip, compared to only four in 10 women in the midwife-led units.

    The study involved 1,653 women who had babies in the HSE Dublin North-East region from 2004 to 2007 and compared the consultant-led maternity care with a new model of care provided in two integrated midwifery-led units in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda and Cavan General Hospital.

    The two midwife-led units, which have hotel-like private rooms with birthing pools, were opened in response to recommendations made in the Minder Report in 2001 to provide more choice in maternity care in the north-east.

    … fewer women in the midwifery-led unit group chose pain-relieving epidurals in labour.

    Despite having fewer epidurals, 83% of women in the midwife-led units were satisfied with their pain relief compared with 68% of women in the consultant-led unit.

    “When women are supported by one-to-one midwifery care, are encouraged to labour gently at their own pace and have the pain-relieving benefits of relaxing in warm water, they are far better able to tolerate pain and labour more effectively,” …

    The study found that 85% of women attending the midwife-led unit would recommend the care they had received to a friend, compared to 70% having the usual care.

    Although facilities in the midwifery-led units were quite luxurious, the cost of care for each women was €332.80 less than in the usual hospital system.

    A recent KPMG report on maternity care in the greater Dublin region also recommended the introduction of midwifery-led units throughout the country.

    These results have been found in other studies, particularly the claim around pain relief. It is interesting that epidurals don’t equate with a more positive birth experience; rather, a woman who feels well-prepared and who is supported with one-to-one midwifery care in a drug-free birth, will rate her birth as being highly satisfying.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Twin Birth

    I had a difficult delivery with my first baby, including posterior presentation, premature rupture of membranes, meconium staining, stalled labour, 18 hours of Syntocinon, a largely ineffectual epidural, a 4 hour second stage, and forceps delivery. My daughter had severe respiratory distress and was in the NICU for several days. It was a very tough introduction to parenthood and left me quite traumatised, especially the separation from my daughter. My husband and I decided that we would try for a homebirth if we had another baby, in the hope that a calmer environment would assist the birth process. When I fell pregnant again, we found a lovely homebirth midwife.

    I started to show really early. At 8 weeks I was in maternity wear. I thought it was just because it was a second pregnancy, but a 9 week ultrasound showed TWO BABIES. We were completely shocked as there are no twins in my family. Twins of course meant that a homebirth was out of the question.

    There followed many long months of argument with various obstetricians about our birth choices. We wanted as little intervention as possible. A standard twin delivery involves syntocinon (which I was very afraid of, after the previous experience), continuous monitoring (which I had hated with my first birth, as I felt chained to the bed) and an epidural prior to the second stage, in case positioning/version or a c-section is necessary to deliver the second twin. In my first birth, the epidural meant I had no pushing urge and seriously compromised my ability to deliver my daughter, hence the very prolonged second stage, so I did not want an epidural this time around, although I was prepared for Synto to be administered between the twins if labour did not re-establish. The hospital also wanted both twins delivered on the bed, which I did not agree with as I had found pushing in that position impossible the first time around. Our views were very challenging to the obstetricians and some were quite aggressive about it, although I must say the head OB was more reasonable and was prepared to admit that my refusal to consent to an epidural would be a “complete contraindication” to giving me one! Throughout this stage our midwife was a pillar of strength and information. She gave us the courage of our convictions and more than once came to the hospital to talk with the obstetricians on our behalf. Even so, the hospital was very unhappy with our birth preferences. It was a stressful time, helped somewhat by a Calmbirth ® course.

    In the end all our arguments ended up being moot. At 33 weeks, I started to feel an ominous itching all over. Tests showed elevated bile salts and poor liver function results. I had obstetric cholestasis. Our midwife and the hospital agreed: the babies would need to be delivered by 37 weeks. And I knew that that early, an induction would almost certainly involve Syntocinon.

    This was really difficult for me to accept. I was terribly afraid of the drug, and knew that Synto would mean continuous monitoring and therefore limit my movement, which I also feared. However, I knew that my fear would make the delivery more difficult and the pain worse. At this point the hospital dropped the bombshell that despite all their delivery rooms having deep birthing baths, I would not be allowed to use those or the shower if I had to have Synto, as they believe this risks pump damage to the Synto pump. Essentially this meant I was walking into a labour that was likely to be more painful, with less pain relief options. It was going to be down to Calmbirth ® alone, if I wanted to avoid drugs (and I did!).

    I did a lot of Calmbirth ® practice from then on. But the Calmbirth ® visualisation exercises presupposed a normal delivery without intervention, and I found it very upsetting to listen to them. I hit on the idea of doing my own visualisations, of a medicalised induction process. After a few of these I was able to work through some of my fears.

    On the day of the induction, we kissed our daughter goodbye at 5am and met our midwife at the hospital. Preliminary checks showed a Bishop score of 5, very promising for 36 weeks. The hospital midwife applied prostaglandin gel and sent us out to freedom. We had a lovely breakfast. I started to have sporadic contractions but nothing serious. We returned to the hospital 6 hours later. My cervix had ripened to 2cm, and the very cheerful OB was able to break the waters for twin 1 (our second daughter) at 3.45pm. No meconium staining! I dared to ask the OB how she was presenting. ANTERIOR, WOOHOO! I was very pleased with that.

    Contractions came rather more strongly after that point, but were still sporadic. The felt very “knifey”, and our midwife explained this was from the prostaglandin gel. We held off on the Synto as long as possible, but at 6.25pm the drip was put up and contractions started in earnest. Continuous monitoring was in place, but via telemetry so I could have moved. Ironically, though, I didn’t feel the need to. I went deep into calm breathing and spent most of the labour sitting beside the bed on a fit ball, sometimes circling my hips but more often just breathing to ride the contractions with my husband stroking my back. Unlike my first labour, I had no real idea of when the next contraction was coming, and ended up doing my calm breathing (in for 4, out for 6) solidly for hours. I wasn’t afraid of the contractions. I could really feel them doing their work, and little twin 1 moving firm and fast down. I was determined to “get out of the way” of labour and with each contraction focused on opening up and not clenching against the pain. Our midwife was convinced things were going quickly and asked us when we thought we would be having the babies. I told her anything before midnight was a sucker bet! She said 11pm.

    At 8.30pm, about 2 hours after I started having regular contractions, the pain was starting to get BIG. The OB did a cervix check – I was 5cm. I was very disheartened by this, but our midwife told me that the first 5cm was the hardest, and the very encouraging OB tried to convince me that it wasn’t all about centimetres and that my cervix felt promisingly thin and stretchy. In hindsight, even in my first labour I dilated from 5 to 10cm in under an hour, so I should have known what was coming – but I didn’t!

    Throughout this time I was not making any noise. The hospital’s midwife didn’t seem to think I was in established labour, and threatened to up the Synto dose to make the contractions “strong and regular”, even though they were already sufficient to dilate my cervix 3cm in under 2 hours. I managed to insist “no. more. Synto!” She reserved judgement, but it might have been the adrenaline kick I needed, as by 9.15pm I was having enormous contractions every 2-3 minutes. I could feel them as a giant swelling band of pain stretching around my whole belly and stretching lower. At this point I started vocalising “ah, ah, ah” throughout contractions, to help me ride the pain and stop me clenching down. I remember saying “if this isn’t transition, I’m in trouble!” I didn’t believe it could be transition, though – not so early, not when my first birth had taken almost 3 days. Our midwife said she thought we would have babies by 10pm, and I didn’t believe her.

    I needed to get off the fit ball and change position, and asked if I could get on all fours, although the idea of moving seemed impossible to imagine. The hospital midwife set up a crash mat and a nice beanbag for me to lean on. I leaned forward and within one contraction of moving had started making some amazing noises. Unlike my “ah ah ahs” they were completely involuntary. And then I could feel twin 1 crowning. I did not believe it had happened so quickly, and cried out “what’s happening?” Everyone still makes fun of me for this. She was born in only a couple of pushes at 9.25pm, and our midwife had to tell the hospital midwife to put her gloves on to catch her. Our beautiful daughter, with a lovely round head, pink skin and a great big yell! There is a photo of me still on all fours, with a blissed-out grin. I could not believe how easy and quick it had been. I got to hold her straight away, but contractions started up again quite quickly, and she went to her daddy for some skin to skin time.

    At this point the obstetricians arrived – a registrar and resident. I wanted to stay on the floor, but the registrar managed to persuade me up on the bed to check twin 2′s position, as we knew he was breech. Contractions started up again within minutes and were really agonising now, as I had lost my Calmbirth focus and as the position (twin 2′s spine to mine) had that sort of posterior feeling to it. But within seconds I was again feeling the inexorable urge to push. The OB flicked twin 2′s feet out as he was in a squatting position, the midwife and OB flexed twin 2′s head by pushing on my stomach and with a few mighty pushes he was out too, at 9.39pm. Our son! He was handed to me but unlike J, had a bit of trouble breathing, and spent some time in the special care nursery. He was back to us almost before we knew it. I must say he had a very breech-looking head, which looked like a mighty frown, but he’s ever so handsome and cheerful now.

    J weighed in at 2.98kg (I was really ticked off she could not stretch to the extra 20gm), and P weighed 3.06kg, excellent weights for 36 weekers, let alone twins!

    After twin 2 was out, I lost all patience for the pain – rather a pity as the Synto kept getting ramped up to deliver the placentas and then to deal with my uterus which did not want to shrink back down. I ended up with a Synto drip all night. I tell people this birth was meant to help me deal with my fear of Synto once and for all.

    Both babies had beautiful breastfeeds within an hour or two of birth, which sadly was not an omen of things to come for twin 1, but it was lovely.


    Anyway, that was our birth. Twins born without any pain relief (not even hot water) or really any intervention other than the induction drugs, with 4 hours of contractions total and only about 2 of those active labour. It wasn’t the birth I had wanted but it was a wonderful experience and very healing after my first daughter’s birth. I am so proud of myself, and look back on the birth with amazed gratitude all the time.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Doctors claim homebirth risks ignored

    Link

    WA doctors have attacked a new policy for State Government-funded homebirths, saying it sidesteps serious concerns about the increased risk of newborn deaths.

    The draft document says women have a right to choose a home delivery at taxpayers’ expense provided they are at low risk of complications and give their consent.

    But women with risk factors such as a previous caesarean, obesity or a history of blood loss in childbirth should be excluded from publicly funded homebirths.

    … Australian Medical Association WA said the policy fudged serious concerns raised by former members of the committee, who found the risk of death in babies born at home was almost four times higher and called for funded homebirth to be banned.

    “Not only is the taxpayer entitled to think public monies are going to things that are evidence-based, if the evidence suggests it’s more dangerous they should have even greater concerns.” …

    The WA homebirth policy is a very considered and thorough document that supports low-risk homebirth for women who are attended by experienced midwives with a back-up hospital booking and obstetric consultation. Unfortunately the doctors quoted in the above article seem to have mixed their research. Studies clearly demonstrate that low-risk homebirth is at least as safe as hospital birth, and with fewer interventions for mothers in labour. It is high risk homebirth that is associated with excess perinatal mortality and this is not supported under the WA policy, or any other publicly-funded homebirth programs.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    New study on risk factors for gestational diabetes

    Link

    … One type of diabetes, gestational diabetes (GDM), is first diagnosed during pregnancy. It can cause complications to the mother and fetus during pregnancy and can develop into type 2 diabetes following pregnancy. A new study … reported that age and body mass index (BMI) are significant risk factors in whether a woman will develop GDM. Furthermore, those factors are particularly relevant in Black African and South Asian women. Early detection is essential for the effective treatment of GDM. Known risk factors include BMI, advanced maternal age, previous GDM, delivery of a large infant, family history of diabetes, and race. … despite knowledge of these risk factors, few studies have looked at how they interact to influence GDM risk; therefore, they conducted a retrospective study of associations between GDM and maternal age, BMI, and race, as well as how the factors interact with one another. The study compared 1,688 women who developed GDM between 1988 and 2000 with 172,632 women who did not …

    … The researchers found an association between greater maternal age and risk of GDM and between increasing BMI and risk of GDM; however, the effects varied greatly between women of different races. The baseline comparison group was white Europeans aged 20 to 24 years. White European women aged 30 to 34 years had twice the risk of developing GDM; furthermore, those 40 years of age and older had a four-fold increase in risk. Increasing age was associated with a much larger increase in risk among black African women. Compared to baseline women, those aged 25 to 29 years had 3.40 times greater risk, those aged 35 to 39 years had a 13.67 times greater risk, and those aged 40 years and older had a 59.20 times greater risk of developing GDM.

    Compared with white Europeans with normal BMIs, black Africans and South Asians were more likely to develop GDM regardless of BMI. The authors concluded: “Advancing maternal age and BMI are more important risk factors for GDM in South Asian and Black African women than in White European or Black Caribbean women.”

    This study contributes valuable information for the detection of gestational diabetes. Much work has been done in this area on the past two years and testing recommendations are in the process of being changed.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Evolution Offers Clues to Leading Cause of Death During Childbirth

    Link

    Unusual features of the human placenta may be the underlying cause of postpartum hemorrhage …

    … postpartum hemorrhage accounts for nearly 35 percent … of the 358,000 worldwide annual maternal deaths during childbirth.

    Despite its prevalence, the causes of postpartum hemorrhage are unknown … While common in humans, postpartum hemorrhage is rare in other mammals …

    … Previous studies on postpartum hemorrhage have focused on how it can be treated and on recognizing its associated risk factors …

    In humans, the invasiveness of the placenta into the uterine wall and the subsequent takeover of maternal blood vessels appear to be greater than in nonhumans … This suggests a link between placental invasiveness early in pregnancy and blood loss at delivery, when the placenta separates from the uterine wall.

    Research by Abrams and Rutherford suggests that hormones produced by trophoblasts — cells formed during the first stage of pregnancy that provide nutrients to the embryo and develop into a large part of the placenta, and that guide the interaction with the uterus — may provide an early predictor of risk.

    “Biomarkers of postpartum hemorrhage that could be used early in pregnancy would allow women to make informed decisions about their choice of birthing site and medical care based on their risk,” Abrams said. This biomarker hypothesis has not yet been studied.

    … In a normal birth, the placenta begins to separate from the uterine wall before delivery. Bleeding at the site is normally stopped by the constriction of blood vessels due to the contraction and retraction of uterine muscles …

    There are two major risk factors for postpartum hemorrhage … The leading factor is uterine contractions that are too weak to stop bleeding. The cause of this is unclear …

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Foley Catheter is as Good as Gel for Inducing Labour

    Link

    New research as found that the use of a Foley catheter appears to be as effective as prostaglandin gel, but with fewer side effects. These were the findings of a randomised trial. The Foley catheter is used to inflate a balloon behind the cervix that simulates the pressure of a baby’s head to make the cervix dilate, likely by stimulating endogenous prostaglandins.

    Caesarean section rates were similar in both groups, however more caesareans were performed for failure to progress in the foley catheter group, than the prostaglandin group. +Operative delivery due to fetal distress was less common with the Foley catheter than with prostaglandins.

    The Foley catheter group was also more likely to be augmented with Syntocinon, though this was common in both groups and is a general feature of induction.

    Why is this research important?
    Women who have had a previous caesarean but require induction are often forced into a corner because many care providers are reluctant to induce labour on women who have had a previous caesarean for fear of the scar separating. This often leads to a reluctant decision to have an elective repeat caesarean. However, if women have the option of a foley’s catheter induction, this provides a safer alternative to prostaglandin induction with fewer complications.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Turbulent times

    A lot has been happening in the world of homebirth and midwifery. Many will have read the articles about homebirth, freebirth, midwives and maternity care that are appearing in our papers on a daily basis.

    I have not posted for a couple of weeks now, for three main reasons: one I have been really busy with my practice which has not been this busy for about two years. Second, I attended the Australian College of Midwives National Conference – the ACM worked really hard to deliver an excellent conference that was appreciated by all. I had the fantastic opportunity to meet midwives from around Australia and share ideas, discuss practice and talk birthy things. I was pleased that the conference was in Sydney, because as those of you who know me will know, in my non-midwifery life I rescue and care for injured and orphaned native birds, and so I was able to make a trip home most days of the conference to feed everyone at home. They were hungry but they all survived! I digress. The third reason for not posting was that the recent issues have made me re-assess things like responsibility, accountability, safety, choice, control, autonomy, beneficence, informed decision-making and many other issues. I have no answers to report. Just lots of reflection.

    Midwifery and maternity care are going through turbulent times and as professionals and organisations, I feel that we have done a major disservice to women that they feel safer birthing at home – with or without a registered midwife – in the presence of risk factors – because they so strongly believe that the hospital system will not enable them to birth in the manner of their choosing. It is a sad reflection on the health system and the professionals who work within it. Women who cannot access midwifery care because they are planning a VBAC. Women who are told that if they insist on birthing vaginally with twins, they must accept continuous monitoring, induction, epidural and birth in stirrups for twin two. Women whose only option is to birth in a hospital that is two hours from their home. We have all heard the stories.

    My biggest disappointment is the lack of midwife admitting rights. We are one year into the maternity reforms on November 1 this year. We have eligible midwives with Medicare provider numbers, ordering tests and working with doctors to provide safe care to women and babies – yet we cannot access hospitals to provide this care. I well understand that there are a lot of hurdles to be overcome with midwife admitting rights, and life has taught me that nothing in life is impossible.

    The release of the homebirth position statement – which I fully support as an evidence-based and safe way to provide care – combined with the lack of midwife admitting rights, is disastrous for women and midwives. Higher risk women are forced into a position of birthing in hospital without their midwife if the midwife complies with the position statement but has no admitting rights – otr else freebirthing, potentially with disastrous consequences. Overnight, this change occurred and women are fuming.

    It is impossible to believe, but an eligible midwife who crosses all the “T”s and dots all the “I”s will suffer incredibly in terms of restriction of clientele, however if she were to remove her name from the register – something that I understand is very easy to do – she may do just as she pleases with no accountability, regulation or practice standards. Midwives are placed in the untenable situation of a dwindling practice, or unregistering and having a flourishing practice. Until admitting rights are in place, midwives will have no place to birth with their higher-risk clients. This situation does not see the Government supporting midwives or women. It is creating a disaster.

    The various politics of homebirth and midwifery has created an enormous rift between midwives. It seems that there are the bunch who have elected to become eligible, forge ahead with collaborative arrangements, push for admitting rights and accept the increased regulation that is upon us as our profession matures. The other group opposes the increased regulation and restriction of choice, supports midwife- (or non-midwife)-attended homebirth for any woman who wants it and really wants things to just go back to how they used to be, before insurance became mandatory. Many midwives sit comfortable in the middle of this debate. It is sad to watch such division and animosity amongst midwives. We seem to lack a capacity of saying, “We don’t share each other’s vision and we have made different choices, but we are midwives and we will support each other”. As one midwife said to me, “We are each doing the best we can for the women we care for and we’re making the best of a rotten situation”.

    I know 2012 will be better than 2011. Who knows? Maybe it’ll be an historic year where for the very first time, women will birth on their own terms, with their chosen midwife, at home or in hospital. I wonder how many women will insist on homebirth in spite of significant risks, if they are able to birth in hospital with their own midwife and in the manner of their choosing.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Responsibility in birth: Who owns it?

    Who is really responsible for intervention that happens in our births? Is it us or our health professionals? Or is it both?

    In this blog post, I’m referring to situations where unnecessary intervention has taken place. Of course there’s a place for intervention in some labours and this post does not address interventions that are truly necessary. However that’s defined!

    Some women argue that birth – and what happens in birth – is their responsibility and they take charge of all decisions and also take responsibility for the outcome of those decisions – good or bad. Women in this category would never dream of blaming their care provider for a bad outcome because the decision was theirs alone and they made a fully informed decision that they were comfortable with. When things go well, they attribute that great outcome to their good preparation and decision making.

    Other women will outsource decision making to a health professional such as a midwife or a doctor. “They’re the experts”. In life, we outsource all sorts of decisions, so it’s not surprising that women may choose to do this for pregnancy and birth.

    When things go according to plan – a woman has the birth she was hoping for, the baby is healthy, breastfeeding goes really well – there’s no issue at all. When things don’t go as planned, issues of responsibility (and sometimes blame) come up.

    Over the years, I’ve sat back and observed women’s reactions when things don’t go well.

    I think there are two parts to things not going well. One is the woman’s responsibility for her decisions and the other is the health professional’s conduct.

    I’ve observed that when things don’t go to plan, very few women take responsibility for the choices they made that might have led them down a path that they never planned to walk. Eg women who might really want a natural birth who choose a hospital with a very high caesarean, episiotomy, epidural and induction rate. “It won’t happen to me” and then it does.

    Some go right back to the same care provider and place of birth – it’s what they know and what they’re comfortable with – even though the outcome is not what they really want. Should they complain about their [caesarean / epidural / induction / forceps / episiotomy] and say they’re not responsible: their care provider is? I think not – choosing the right care provider and place of birth is each woman’s responsibility. If the hospital / health professional has a 50% caesarean rate – yep, that applies to you too.

    Some people argue that women can never take full responsibility for their births because the information that’s relevant to them is hidden, disguised, not available until it’s too late and so on. In these cases, some argue that the woman could not have possibly got the information that would have assisted them to make a choice for their birth that is more aligned to what they’re trying to achieve. But if this is the case, how do we account for women who do magically find information, make decisions that are compatible with their needs, and experience the birth they had wanted? What sets these women apart from other women? Determination? A strong sense of self-efficacy? Confidence? Having options?

    Information is all around us. We can talk to care providers, hospital midwives, friends / family, google relevant articles and information, talk to private midwives and obstetricians and so on … there’s lots of information out there, even in rural / remote areas, thanks to the WWW. In NSW, hospital statistics are publicly available. Is there any excuse for not knowing your hospital’s caesarean rate if you live in NSW?

    When we buy a car, we know we have many choices. Not just the make of the car, also auto / manual, number of doors, convenience features, comfort features, safety features and so on. If we only go to Toyota and buy a car that’s not suited to our needs – and this becomes apparent a couple of weeks later – is this Toyota’s fault? Maybe, but only if Toyota falsely advertised the car’s features, because we’re responsible for the choices we make. Likewise, if we choose hospital X without exploring other hospitals, or settle on Dr Y or Midwife Z without interviewing others who might be better suited to our needs – is it the doctor’s / hospital’s / midwife’s fault if the birth has more intervention than the woman had hoped for?

    In all industries, it is the responsibility of the consumer to first work out what they want, and next to set about finding a service / product that meets their needs. Is birth any different? It is true that we cannot control birth, but if we want a drug-free birth and we know from the outset that our care provider only attends epiduralised births, is this a compatible choice?

    Now, the other side of this whole argument is the issue of conduct. While I firmly believe – and know – that information is out there, freely available, and that women are most definitely responsible for choosing the right care provider and place of birth for their needs, I also appreciate that health professionals are responsible for their conduct.

    Negligence says that a health professional owes a duty of care to the patient, the duty of care is breached, the patient suffered harm, and the harm is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the breach of duty of care.

    If this happens, then of course the health professional is to blame and the patient ought to raise this as an issue so that it can be addressed either legally or within the profession. Drug errors, incorrect surgical technique, performing the wrong operation, failing to gain consent, working while under the influence of drugs or alcohol – these are all serious issues that ought to be reported.

    So, in summing up, I think that responsibility for birth is a complex issue. While women are most certainly responsible for choosing the right care provider and place of birth (amongst other decisions), health professionals are responsible for how they practice their profession.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Decision-making: Heart and Head

    Through my practice, I have a lot of women coming to me who are experiencing conflict with regards to the choices they have made for their pregnancy and birth. Typically, they find (sometimes quite late in their pregnancy) that perhaps the choice they made right back at the start of their pregnancy, no longer works for the, or the choice that they made was perhaps not as well informed as they thought it was. Some women find it hard to take the attitude of interviewing potential care providers before pregnancy (or very early in pregnancy) and then choosing the midwife or obstetrician who is best able to meet their needs. The end result can often be a woman who chooses an obstetrician with the goal of a natural birth, only to discover that their doctor will only “deliver” their baby if they’re on their back in bed with an epidural in place. Or that induction is performed by 40 weeks, or that all women have their waters broken and all first time Mums have an episiotomy or so on. And sometimes, the more reading a woman does, the more she realises that this is not what she wants.

    I often ask the question, “What was it that made you decide on this particular care provider?”

    And the responses are generally very interesting.

    • My GP referred me
    • My mother / sister / friend / neighbour used this midwife and she said she’s wonderful
    • Well, when I got pregnant I went to my GP. She asked me if I have private health insurance and I said yes, so she wrote a referral to Dr XX.

    I ask these women if they considered any other options. “What options?” comes the response.

    I’m amazed that with the marvels of modern technology, internet etc, women don’t know they have other options. We have options with all sorts of things in life, and we don’t shy away from discovering them either! It seems to be to be an interesting handing-over of responsibility when it comes to pregnancy and birth, and I’m curious why it happens with pregnancy and birth, but not in other aspects of life. Do we buy a particular computer – that can’t meet our needs – because it was recommended and we didn’t know there were other computers on the market? Do we buy a large house when we need a small house because it was recommended by the real estate agent?

    In most other situations where choices are involved, people will engage in a process of assessing options.

    We might list all the possible options and then assess each option across a range of qualities.

    We ask questions.

    We consider what it is that we really want, and then match it to what’s available, seeking the most compatible choice.

    But sadly, this does not happen with pregnancy and birth. Perhaps it should?

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.