0

New unit a ‘home birth in hospital’

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Aug 17, 2010 in Birth, Midwifery, Normal Birth

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

MONA Vale Hospital’s new birthing unit will simply be a place for expectant mothers to have a home birth inside a hospital – but a long way from emergency care if a complication occurs – according to an obstetrician.

How anyone can consider a hospital birth to be the same as a homebirth is way beyond me! There is a very big difference between the comfort and familiarity of our homes, and a hospital environment.

Dr David Jollow, one of Mona Vale Hospital’s onsite obstetricians, said the new, midwife-run, Mona Vale birthing unit would mean women who suffer a complication during labour will have to be rushed to Manly Hospital instead of being treated by Mona Vale’s onsite obstetricians.

“The new unit is essentially a home birth that happens to be in a hospital,” Dr Jollow said.

“It would actually be safer to have a home birth in Balgowlah or Seaforth, because an ambulance ride to Manly would be quicker.”

It’s interesting that obstetricians oppose free-standing birth centres, yet we have the existence of midwife-run units where obstetricians are not available. Is ther a differnence? Is it merely a differing terminology to be acceptable to some?

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

 
0

Mums speak out about maternity shake-up

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Aug 13, 2010 in Birth, Midwifery

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

LOCAL women have expressed grave concerns about the standard of maternity services on the northern beaches, claiming a doctor-free birthing unit at Mona Vale Hospital is a risk to their health.

With the Health Department and midwives’ groups angrily denying the changes would jeopardie the health of women and their babies, The Manly Daily yesterday spoke to the most important people in the debate – new and expecting mums.

Amee Harland said she would wait for the Mona Vale maternity ward to reopen in full before having a second child there.

“I had a 24-hour labour and then they had to call the doctor because the baby’s heart rate was falling and he was there in five minutes and had to use a surgical vacuum,” she said.

… “You wouldn’t want to drive to Manly (or St Leonards) in the middle of labour …

“I would prefer to go to Mona Vale – it is my home town. Why would I want to go anywhere else? They were so good there.”

Mother-of-three Kellie Finney said low-risk births could also require immediate action.

“If there’s an emergency, the time it takes to get to another hospital would be pretty risky for babies in distress,” she said.

Luckily, research is showing that low risk maternity units are a safe option for women and babies, just as homebirth is a safe option for low risk women and babies. Several low-risk maternity units are in operation: Belmont, Wyong, Ryde just to name a few. The provide a fantastic solution to the issue of maintaining local birthing services.

“I don’t know how long exactly it takes for the baby to stop breathing or have serious medical problems.”

Thankfully, midwives can make such assessements. Transfer policies in place would ensure that women and babies who were at risk would be transferred to an appropriate facility in a timely manner.

“After the baby is born, what happens if the mother is bleeding out of control?’‘

The midwife would administer medications to stop the bleeding, insert a drip and start IV fluids, insert a urinary catheter to drain urine and supervise transfer. It is very rare for a woman to “bleed out of control” and most bleeds are controlled with medications to stop the bleeding.

… if a doctor was needed during the birth, such as to deliver the baby by caesarean, use certain medical instruments or administer an epidural injection, women will be transferred to Manly Hospital or Royal North Shore 45 minutes away.

And the problem is … ?

While mothers at the Mona Vale playgroup praised the role of midwives and welcomed the return of some maternity services to Mona Vale, they said they would not give birth without a doctor present.

You can’t please everyone! The majority of midwifery-led units are over-subsctibed with many women wanting to birth there where they’re assured a known midwife and maximum chances of a natural birth. No-one is being forced to birth at Mona Vale; women who prefer to go to manly or RNSH would be able to go there.

Most mothers said a doctor was called in during their previous births, despite some being in a low-risk category.

That might be a larger reflection on the rates of intervention in obstetric-led births rather than on actual need in a natural labour. Let’s not forget, high risk births would not take place at Mona Vale: no-one with diabetes, high blood pressure, premature, over 42 weeks, bleeding, broken waters for more than a certain period of time, anyone needing an induction or caesarean, twins, breech, anyone planning an epidural and so on.

… Catherine Kane, who is expecting her second child, said she is “not low risk enough’’ to give birth at Mona Vale.
“I wouldn’t be allowed to go to Mona Vale although I’m not high risk, I’m not low risk enough either.’‘

Andrea Whitlock, from Terrey Hills, said she would expect the maternity unit where she gave birth to have a doctor on hand.
“I had a natural delivery but if I didn’t have a doctor there I wouldn’t have been able to do it,’’ she said.

Hmm. I think you did do it! No-one else birthed your baby.

… The model will first be tested at Manly Hospital in October and is scheduled to begin at Mona Vale in December.

The Mona Vale maternity unit will also be reduced from 720 births to just 200 a year, with mothers only able to stay four hours after birth …

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , ,

 
1

Doctor-midwife tensions run deep

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Aug 10, 2010 in Birth, Home birth, Midwifery, Obstetrics, VBAC

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

Last week, midwives and clients of Andaluz Waterbirth Center in Portland announced plans to file a federal lawsuit to “cease intimidation and threats against midwives” by the Oregon Health Licensing Agency and Oregon Health & Science University.

Midwives say doctors and nurses at OHSU have filed baseless complaints to the licensing agency meant to thwart competition … The threatened lawsuit spurred a passionate online debate among supporters and critics of home birth.

Conflicts between midwives and doctors run deep. One of the biggest problems: Many physicians deal with midwives only when a laboring mother experiences difficulties during a home birth and requires transport to a hospital, sometime urgently.

“It’s an extremely tension-fraught encounter,” according to Melissa Cheyney, an Oregon State University assistant professor and practicing midwife who studied the interactions of midwives and doctors in Jackson County last year. Nearly every physician interviewed by Cheyney and her graduate student expressed the view that births must take place in a hospital to be “safe.”

Studies including higher-risk pregnancies have found that fetal deaths are more likely in home births. But in low-risk pregnancies, most research shows no significant difference in risk to the baby, while home-birth mothers experience fewer complications. In a study in British Columbia last year, women giving birth at home suffered fewer than half as many serious perineal tears, and about a third less postpartum bleeding.

By choosing a hospital birth, women substantially increase the risk of having a surgical delivery. More than 29 percent of hospital births in Oregon resulted in a cesarean during the years 2006-2008. Less than 4 percent of home births ended with a cesarean in a 2005 study of 5,400 births attended by midwives in the U.S. and Canada.

Women who choose home birth often cite the desire to keep birth free of medical intervention. Heather Hermans … transferred to the care of a midwife because she wanted to try a vaginal delivery rather than schedule a cesarean section, as her obstetrician-gynecologist recommended.

“My ob-gyn didn’t remember me from appointment to appointment,” Hermans said. “I was treated like pregnant cow No. 45.”

Many women will choose midwifery care to receive personalised care where they can develop a relationship with the midwife who will attend their birth.

Hermans experienced complications during labor and took an ambulance to OHSU, where a surgeon delivered her healthy baby boy by emergency C-section. The surgeon filed a complaint about Hermans’ midwife to the state … Roy Haber, an attorney hired by the midwives, said the Oregon Health Licensing Agency withdrew all six investigations after he challenged them.

Conflicts aren’t inevitable. Cheyney is working with midwives in Lane County and a Eugene obstetrician, Dr. Paul Qualtere-Burcher, on guidelines for smoother, more collaborative relations. Qualtere-Burcher and his colleagues have agreed to help midwives get access to laboratory testing and ultrasound screening for their clients. Midwives are referring higher-risk home birth clients to the physicians for assessment and another perspective.

“We’d like them to come in and see us before it becomes a big issue during labor,” Qualtere-Burcher said. “I think it’s been very successful.”

Home birth by the numbers

Planned home births in Oregon last year: 877 out of 47,675 total births, or 1.8 percent.

Risk of baby dying in a midiwife-attended home birth: 1.7 percent versus 0.6 percent in hospitals, based on a 2009 British study including women with breech births, twins, or attempting a vaginal birth after a previous cesarean (VBAC).

I’d be interested to see what these stats are when high risk homebirths are removed from the data set, or to analyse the risk of each “risk factor” in isolation to determine the riskier “high risk” situations, for example, is HBAC less risky than twin homebirth?

Risk of baby dying in a midwife-attended home birth when comparing only low-risk mothers: 0.5 percent versus 0.3 percent in hospitals.

Chances of giving birth without medical intervention: 78 percent with a home-birth midwife versus 54 percent in hospitals, according to the 2009 British study.

A women’s chances of having cesarean section when giving birth in an Oregon hospital, 2006-2008: 29 percent.

Fetal deaths in births attended by licensed midwives in Oregon, 2001-2007: 4 in 2,906 births, about 0.1 percent.

Fetal deaths in births attended by physicians in Oregon, 2001-2007: 1,455 in 274,278 births, about 0.5 percent.

This would account for the fact that midwives mostly manage uncomplicated pregnancies and births, while doctors are referred higher risk women and babies.

Number of home birth midwives who are licensed in Oregon: 64, up from 54 in 2008.

Complaints lodged against licensed midwives, 1999-2007: 40.

Disciplinary actions imposed by the Board of Direct Entry Midwifery, 2000-2004: 12

Midwife guide

Direct Entry Midwife – A general term for practitioners who train directly into midwifery without a nursing or medical background, and attend births outside of hospitals. Oregon law allows direct entry midwives to practice with no licensure.

Certified Professional Midwife — Direct entry midwives certified by the North American Registry of Midwives, which requires written and practical examinations and practical experience attending 40 births.

Licensed Direct Entry Midwife — Direct entry midwives who obtain a license in Oregon are authorized to use some prescription drugs and medical devices. They must pass a national examination, demonstrate experience in attending births, and complete continuing education every three years. They are licensed by the Oregon Board Direct Entry Midwifery and subject to disciplinary actions if they violate professional standards.

Certified Nurse Midwife – Registered nurses who go on to complete an accredited nurse-midwifery program. Oregon requires certified nurse midwives to obtain a Masters degree. CNMs are the only midwives that practice in hospitals. They are licensed by the Oregon State Board of Nursing.

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

 
2

Home birth—proceed with caution

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Aug 9, 2010 in Home birth

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

The increased demand to give birth outside hospital has increased the rate of home delivery. In the Netherlands, a third of women now have home births. In the UK, 3% of total births occur at home, while in the USA home delivery accounts for 1% of births or 25 000 deliveries per year.

In Australia, 0.6% babies are born at home. This rate has increased in past years.

Home birth rates have been increasing in the USA partly because of the increasing proportion of births by caesarean delivery … because doctors and hospitals opt not to do a vaginal birth after a caesarean to avoid liability lawsuits …

Although home birth seems to be safe for low-risk mothers and, when compared with hospital delivery, is associated with a shorter recovery time and fewer lacerations, post-partum haemorrhages, retained placentae and infections, the evidence is contradictory for outcomes of newborn babies delivered at home … The problem arises when planned home births become hospital births when complications arise, and this can then lead to an underestimation of the risk and overestimation of the benefit of home births. Data from the Netherlands, for example, suggest that up to 40% of nulliparous women who start labour at home are transferred to the hospital. Most studies also rely on different midwifery models for home delivery, which are not generalisable.

Professional organisations … have issued contradictory policy statements regarding home deliveries. The Department of Health of South Australia has a detailed policy for home birth among women with low-risk, singleton term pregnancies, while the UK’s Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives jointly support home birth in women with uncomplicated pregnancies. By contrast, ACOG does not support home birth, citing safety concerns and the lack of rigorous scientific evidence. Choosing to deliver a baby at home, states ACOG, is to show preference for the process of giving birth over the goal of having a healthy baby.

A recent meta-analysis … provides the strongest evidence so far that home birth can, after all, be harmful to newborn babies. The research incorporated 12 studies and 500 000 births from several industrialised nations … The data show that planned home births to healthy and low-risk mothers compared with planned hospital births in the same group of women doubled the risk of neonatal deaths (0·2% vs 0·09%). And when infants with congenital defects were excluded, the risk of neonatal mortality tripled. The main attributable factors for the increase in mortality were the occurrence of breathing difficulties and failed attempts at resuscitation—two factors associated with poor midwife training and a lack of access to hospital equipment. In the USA, for example, only a third of home births are accompanied by a certified midwife.

Analysing the outcomes of these studies, what we can learn from this meta-analysis is that homebirth is safe for low risk, healthy women, whereas high risk homebirth translates to mroe complications for mothers and babies.

Women have the right to choose how and where to give birth, but they do not have the right to put their baby at risk. There are competing interests that need to be weighed carefully. Hospital delivery should be the preferred method of delivery for high-risk pregnancies … Home delivery is an option for mothers with uncomplicated pregnancies, provided they are advised of the risks involved, have one-to-one midwife care (that includes good resuscitation skills and accreditation by a local regulatory body), and live in a location that allows quick access to obstetric care.

The situation in Australia is that fetuses do not have any rights until they’re born and breathing, therefore, the woman’s preferences are supported in pregnancy. An ethical stance would hold that the duty of care to the fetus increases as it reaches term.

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , , , ,

 
0

Midwives attack new ‘veto’

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Jul 31, 2010 in Midwifery

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

MIDWIVES are aggrieved about new rules that might curb their access to Medicare rebates and prescribing rights …

Last year Ms Roxon announced that from November this year midwives would for the first time be able to use the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and Medicare rebates for their clients.

At the time, Ms Roxon said the historic move would boost a midwife’s ability to work independently and increase options for pregnant women …

But in a long-awaited change to the legislation … midwives will now have to work collaboratively with a doctor, who must endorse their practice before their clients can access financial benefits.

The requirement for collaboration was always planned to be in place, but the detail of collaboration requires that a midwife has a written agreement with an obstetrician to access medicare benefits. This is problematic: more than one obstetrician must sign an agreement because no obstetrician provides 24/7 cover, so there’d need to be at least 2 obstetricians signing the agreement. What happens if one obstetrician leaves the local area? Is sick? Goes on leave? In these situations, the collaborative agreement is very vulnerable. Not only the agreement, but the midwife’s ability to provide ongoing care to her private clients.

After eight months of debate between doctors and midwives, government records show that Ms Roxon signed a determination on the matter two weeks ago, when Parliament was out of session.

Doctors’ groups who say home birth is unsafe are believed to have lobbied the government for the changes.

Yesterday, midwives and home-birth advocates accused Ms Roxon of trying to hide what will be an unpopular decision with midwives and mothers.

Australian College of Midwives president Hannah Dahlen said the change would effectively give doctors the ability to veto their access to Medicare and the PBS.

While midwives working inside hospitals would not be disadvantaged, she said private midwives would find it difficult to find a doctor to endorse them, especially if the doctor did not support home birth.

In fact, doctors have refused to sign agreements with any midwife who attends homebirths. Is this collaboration or control?

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , , , ,

 
0

Collaborative Arrangements Will Provide Better Care For Patients, Autralia

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Jul 30, 2010 in Birth, Midwifery

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

The AMA welcomes the Government’s introduction of new regulations that require midwives … to collaborate with medical practitioners in order to provide Medicare-funded services to patients or prescribe them medications under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS).

AMA President, Dr Andrew Pesce, said today that the new arrangements would provide a safer higher standard of care for patients.

… “There is now a requirement for midwives … to establish collaborative arrangements with a medical practitioner in order for the service to attract a Medicare patient rebate or PBS benefit.

And that’s the problem: midwives are required to establish collaborative agreements, but obstetricians do not have to collaborate with the midwife. And there are fears that if the midwife does not work according to the obstetrician’s protocols, the agreement will be revoked. this does nothing to establish midwifery as a profession in its on right.

… “Evidence shows that patients enjoy better health outcomes when they receive coordinated, continuous, and comprehensive care that is delivered by appropriately trained health professionals,” Dr Pesce said.

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , , , ,

 
0

Midwife scheme endorsed

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Jul 29, 2010 in Birth, Midwifery

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

THE NORTHERN beaches health service will proceed with plans for a midwife-only maternity scheme at Mona Vale Hospital …

The new scheme will see the majority of northern beaches births take place at Manly Hospital, where a combined obstetric maternity service will operate, with about 200 births a year scheduled for Mona Vale, where midwives will now manage them all.

… the new “midwifery group practice model” was unanimously endorsed …

But Mona Vale obstetrician Dr Chester Kent said the hospital had no representatives on the council and that none of its maternity staff supported the decision.

“It seems there is nobody being included in the decision-making process who really represents the interest of local women,” he said.

Another hospital worker, who did not want to be named, said they were only told about the changes at a meeting on Tuesday and that neither Manly or Mona Vale staff supported the decision, which they found “very distressing”.

Pittwater State Liberal MP Rob Stokes said operating a midwifery group practice model at Mona Vale was not a bad idea, but it should not be used as a replacement for obstetric services.

… “It’s not good enough to put a delivering mother into an ambulance and take them down to Manly, or the North Shore.”

Northern Sydney Central Coast Health chief executive Matthew Daly, who was present at Monday night’s clinical council meeting, said improved health outcomes for mothers and babies had influenced its decision to endorse a “united obstetric service” at Manly.

It’s wonderful to see midwifery-led services expand. We have midwifery-led services in private midwifery practice, Ryde Hospital, Belmont and Wyong, to name a few. They’re a great way to maintain midwifery services and are proving very popular with women and families.

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , ,

 
3

Who controls childbirth: women or doctors?

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Jul 15, 2010 in Birth, Caesarean, Home birth, Midwifery, Normal Birth, Obstetrics, VBAC

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

That I am pregnant again is an act of either incredible optimism or mind-blowing amnesia. As the sonogram technician squirts jelly over my abdomen for my 20-week checkup, I think it’s the latter. Watching this baby, who the tech tells me is a boy, I am not caught up in visions of his future; I’m caught up in visions of mine. All of a sudden, I know with a certainty I haven’t allowed myself to confront before: Somehow, I am going to have to deliver this baby.
Obviously, you say. But my first birth was traumatic, and although my son and I emerged fine, I lost a year seeking treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder and all the depression, fear and anger it brings. I imitated mothers who seemed normal to me, cooing and tickling my son. In truth, I was a zombie, obsessing about how I had ever let what happened happen.

What happened is this: In my 39th week, I am induced because of high blood pressure. At the hospital, I am given Pitocin, a synthetic form of the labor-inducing hormone oxytocin, and Cervidil, a vaginal insert used to dilate the cervix. Within two hours, my contractions are one minute apart. I had lasted as long as I could without an epidural because I had read that they sometimes slow dilation. That’s the last thing I need: I’m at a pathetic 2 centimeters. My doctor comes up with a solution for the pain: a syringe full of a narcotic called Stadol.

“I have a history of anxiety,” I tell the nurse who has brought in the syringe, as I always warn any medical professional who wants to give me drugs. “Is this drug OK for me?” “It sure is,” she says.

It is not. Within 10 seconds, I begin hallucinating. For five hours, I hallucinate that I’m on a swing that’s soaring too high, that houses are flying at my face. My husband has fallen asleep on the cot next to me, and I’m convinced that if awakened, he will turn into a monster — literally. I’m aware this notion is irrational, that these images are hallucinations. But they are terrifying. I buzz the nurse. “Sometimes that happens,” she says …

By noon the next day, 24 hours after I had arrived, I am only 3 centimeters dilated. The new nurse, a nice lady, tells me the induction isn’t working. “Your blood pressure isn’t even high anymore,” she says. “Tell the doctor you want to go home.”

When my OB comes in, I say, “I’d like to stop this induction, if that’s possible. I’m worn out. I hallucinated all night … I just don’t think this is working out.”

“OK,” he says. “Let me examine you. If you’re still not dilating, we’ll talk about going home.”

My previous dilation exams had been quick and painless, if not entirely pleasant. This one takes a long time. Suddenly, it hurts. “What are you doing?” I scream. “Why does it hurt?”

No answer.

“He’s not examining me,” I scream at my husband. “He’s doing something!” My husband grips my hand, frozen, unsure.

I scream to the nurse, the nice one who had suggested I go home. “What is he doing?” She doesn’t answer me, either. I writhe under the doctor’s grasp. The pain is excruciating.

The first sound I hear is the doctor’s directive to the nurse, in a low voice: “Get me the hook.”

I know the hook is for breaking my water, to speed my delivery by force. I scream, “Get off of me!” He looks up at me, as if annoyed that the specimen is talking. I imagine him thinking of the cadavers he worked on in medical school, how they didn’t scream, how they let him do whatever he wanted.

“You’re not going anywhere,” he says. He breaks my water and leaves. The nurse never looks me in the eye again.

Eleven more futile hours of labor later, I am exhausted and terrified when the doctor comes in and claps his hands together. “Time for a C-section,” he says. I consider not signing the consent form, ripping off these tubes and monitors, and running. But the epidural I’d finally gotten won’t allow me to stand up.

It’s nearly midnight when I hear a cry. My first emotion is surprise; I had almost forgotten I was there to have a baby.

I was desperate to find someone who could tell me what had happened to me was normal. To say, “You hallucinated? Oh, me, too.” Or “My doctor broke my water when I wasn’t looking. Isn’t that the worst?” Nothing …

Now, I’d never loved my doctor … I’d found him patronizing — “Normal!” he’d shout at me, when I asked a question — I thought his assuredness might be a good antidote to my anxiousness. It seemed to work, until it didn’t.

… I also didn’t have a birth plan … Sure, I had a plan for the birth: Have a baby using whatever breathing method I’d learned in the hospital’s birth-preparedness class, maybe get an epidural. But I didn’t have the piece of paper that so many of my friends have brought to the hospital with them … in my opinion, the very act of creating such a contract was to ignore what labor is: something unpredictable that you are in no way qualified to dictate.

… people who hear my story ask … Did I consider a home birth? A midwife instead of an obstetrician? … The answer is no. I am not holistically minded. My philosophy was simple: Everyone I know has been born. It can’t be that complicated.

The women who ask me about my preparations for my first son’s birth — who imply with these questions that I could have prevented what happened to me if I’d been more diligent — are part of an informal movement of women who are trying to “take back” their birth — take it back from the hospital, the insurers and anyone else who thinks he can call the shots.

But hospitals aren’t so interested in giving women back their birth … stipulations dealing with labor and delivery (“I want only one medical professional in the room at a time”) garner barely a glance. University OB/GYN in Provo, Utah, even has a sign that reads, “…we will not participate in: a ‘Birth Contract’, a Doulah [sic] Assisted, or a Bradley Method delivery. For those patients who are interested in such methods, please notify the nurse so we may arrange transfer of your care.”

… This question of whether I could have prevented my trauma has lingered in my mind since that day; now that I am pregnant again, it has become deafening. I have a chance to do it all over. Would I benefit from thinking more holistically? Should I bother taking back my birth?

During my pregnancies, friends gave me two books; their spines are still barely cracked. The first is called “Ina May’s Guide to Childbirth.” … The other book is “Your Best Birth” by Ricki Lake and Abby Epstein; it’s an offshoot of their 2008 documentary, “The Business of Being Born.” Their urgent message is that women who want to deliver vaginally can do so if no one intervenes. Instead, doctors and hospitals are doing all they can to “help” the laboring woman along … and failing. Inductions like mine, epidurals given early in labor, continuous fetal-heart monitoring — all of them have been associated with a higher risk for cesarean section. The result is an epidemic — 32 percent of U.S. births were C-sections at last count, the highest rate in our history. Individual surgeries may be medically necessary, but as a matter of public health, the best outcomes for mothers and babies come with a rate of no more than 15 percent, according to the World Health Organization.

Sam … was five months pregnant when watching “The Business of Being Born” convinced her that hospitals could be dangerous and a home birth would be more meaningful. She and her husband found a midwife … and spent the rest of the pregnancy preparing.

After 24 hours of labor, Sam’s contractions were two or three minutes apart, yet when her midwife examined her, she was only 3 centimeters dilated. The midwife gently told her that she was nowhere close to delivering, despite her contractions, exhaustion and pain. Sam asked to be taken to the hospital.

The change of scenery did her good. “At that point, I had been in labor for 40 hours,” she says. “I entered the relaxed zone. The epidural took the edge off … It was a sacred space.”

After her son’s delivery, Sam passed out, having lost 50 percent of her blood volume in a postpartum hemorrhage. Needless to say, she was relieved that she was in a place where blood transfusions were readily available … she believes she will want midwife care at a hospital next time.

… Bialik’s first birth didn’t go the way she wanted. After three days of labor at home, she stalled at 9 centimeters, one short of the goal. Her midwife suggested they go to the hospital, where after a natural childbirth, Bialik’s son spent four days in the neonatal intensive-care unit. “My son was born with a low temperature and low blood sugar, which isn’t unusual in light of the fact that I had gestational diabetes,” she explains. “I understand doctors need to err on the side of caution, but there was nothing wrong with my child. All of our plans for bed sharing, nursing on demand, bathing him — gone.”

The experience was scarring. “I felt a sense of failure that I had to call my parents from the hospital,” Bialik continues. “Yes, I know vaginal birth in the hospital is the next best thing to a home birth.” …

I point out that natural childbirth in the hospital — her “failure” — was my best-case scenario. But I also understand when she says, “Everyone is allowed her own sense of loss.” She realized her vision when her second son was born at home.

The second time around
I don’t consider myself a candidate for a home birth. The risk of uterine rupture from an attempt at vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) makes it unthinkable … I’m also not really interested in a home birth … But I’m also not interested in another C-section …

So I’d like to attempt a VBAC, but I know that it doesn’t always succeed. I have a new doctor — the 10th I interviewed following my son’s birth — at a new hospital, and he has agreed to help me try. But my primary goal is more modest: not to be retraumatized. Even now, my heart pounds at the sight of hospital receiving blankets, the antiseptic smell of the maternity ward.

The common thread in Bialik’s and Sam’s stories that impressed me was how supported and safe they felt with their midwife …

In an e-mail Bialik sends after our meeting, she goes back to my idea that some women weren’t meant to have babies the holistic way. “There are those among us who believe that if the baby can’t survive a home labor, it is OK for it to pass peacefully,” she writes. “I do not subscribe to this, but I know that some feel that … if a baby cannot make it through birth, it is not favored evolutionarily.”

I think about my appendectomy, back in 2003. Had I not made it to the hospital in time, I would be dead. What would it be like to refuse medical intervention? I’d call my family, say my good-byes. “I’m sorry,” I’d say. “But I’m not evolutionarily favored. It’s time for me to go.”

This attitude, that everything was better back when there were no doctors, seems strange to me. C-sections, although certainly done too often, can save lives. Orthodox Jews still say the same prayer after childbirth that those who have been in near-death experiences say — and with good reason. A birth that leaves mother and child healthy may be commonplace, but it’s also a miracle every time.

As the weeks pass and my belly grows, I can’t stop thinking about Sam. Her pregnancy was a sacred time, and she had truly looked forward to labor. Is that what I should try for — a meaningful birth, as well as an untraumatic one? At what point had people like Sam and me learned to feel entitled to a meaningful birth?

“I think that birth should be a beautiful experience,” says obstetrician Kimberly D. Gregory, M.D. She’s the vice chair of women’s health care quality and performance improvement at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in L.A. “It should be exactly the way you want it, and doctors should intervene only to preserve the health or life of you or your baby.”

Naturally, one would assume that Dr. Gregory advocates birth plans. When I ask her this, she laughs. “We always say, ‘If you show up with a birth plan, just get the C-section room ready,’” she says. “You get everything on that list that you don’t want. It’s like a self-fulfilling prophecy.” Dr. Gregory led an unpublished study that compared women who took traditional hospital birth classes with those who employed Bradley-like training and a birth plan. The birth-plan group trended toward a higher C-section rate and more interventions. “There’s a certain personality type that tends to be more anxious. Maybe the anxiety hormones themselves put them at risk,” Dr. Gregory theorizes. “It seems that being open and honest and choosing the right doctor is probably a better option than writing everything down. Walking in with this list appears to set up an antagonistic relationship.” …

… In the past three weeks, I’ve had the same dream. I’m in a field (I believe at Ina May Gaskin’s Farm), and women in braids are dancing around me as my baby is born, painlessly, joyously. As I reach down, I notice my C-section scar is gone.

I wake up upset. Am I truly under the impression, subconscious though it may be, that taking back this birth will undo the damage of the last one?

“I don’t understand this phrase ‘take back your birth,’” nurse-midwife Pam England, creator of “Birthing From Within,” … tells me. “Who took it? What would a woman tell herself it meant about her if she failed to meet the criteria she made up for ‘taking back’ her birth? I am concerned that this phrase, meant to generate action and a feeling of empowerment, may actually be generated by or feeding the victim part of her.”

England is right: Having a childbirth that I deem successful this time will not change what I haven’t overcome from the first. I try to find a way to make what my doctor and nurses did to me OK, but my mind rebels. I feel loss — no, theft — of an opportunity for me to have a baby the way so many other women do: a carefree pregnancy, a labor that could still go any way.

Maybe I’m not so different from the women I spoke with, after all. Bialik had a successful natural childbirth but felt like a failure because it was in the hospital. Women who had a C-section also used words like failure. Perhaps part of the problem is that our generation of women is so ambitious, so driven, that we don’t know how to do anything without quantifying it as a success or failure.

According to Dr. Gregory, women are now requesting a C-section for their first birth, even without indication. “A lot of people are uncomfortable with the unknown,” she says. Plenty of people are wary of C-sections by choice, from holistic moms to obstetricians. But isn’t this, too, taking back your birth? Refusing to be out of control seems to me the epitome of taking it back. You don’t have to have an unattended birth in the woods to be considered a real woman.

Deciding that you can’t control the uncontrollable — and committing to that decision when you are, in fact, out of control — is also taking back your birth. It’s what your grandmothers did. It’s what their grandmothers did.

With this, I realize that I have already taken back my birth, but not as part of any movement. I have stopped judging women who take extra precautions as defensive and started to understand that everyone has to find her way.

I don’t know how this story ends. I’m still not convinced my body was made to deliver vaginally. But here’s what I do know: I will insist on kindness. I will insist on care. And I hope I will be open to being treated kindly. It’s harder than it seems.

I have another hope, too. I hope there will be a moment when … I will look down at my baby — whether he is handed to me on my belly or from behind a curtain as my body is sewn shut — and I will remember what I’ve known from the beginning, when I looked down at that plus sign and we were alone together for the first time. Before these questions wrapped around my neck, choking me for answers. I will know that I am his mother and he is my son. And maybe, in that moment, I will be ready to say that the only success and failure is the outcome of the birth, that we are healthy …

I’m concerned that birth is defined in terms of success and failure, and that after this author’s journey, she has determined that health is the only important factor. In this day and age, it is entirely possible to have a safe VBAC – a safe birth experience as well as a satisfying one. The vast majority of women who choose VBAC will be successful provided that they choose the right care provider.

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 
6

Why do women choose an Obstetrician instead of a midwife for their birth even though the pregnancy is uncomplicated and they desire a natural birth?

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Jul 7, 2010 in Birth, Midwifery, Normal Birth, Obstetrics

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

A question I have often wondered.

Through my practice, I have a lot of women coming to be because although they have chosen an obstetrician, they really want a natural birth and it has recently occurred to them that their obstetrician will only “deliver” their baby if they’re on their back in bed / do an episiotomy / induce by 41 weeks / insist on continuous monitoring etc, and this is not what they want.

I often ask the question, “What was it that made you decide to have an obstetrician?” or, “What was it that made you decide on this particular obstetrician?”

And the responses are generally very interesting.

• My GP referred me
• My mother / sister / friend / neighbour used this doctor and she said he’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, that women don’t know they have other options. It seems to be to be an interesting handing-over of responsibility and I’m curious why it happens with pregnancy and birth, but not in any other aspect 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 might seek the recommendations (note: plural, not singular) from significant others.

We ask questions.

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

But sadly, this does not happen with pregnancy and birth. Countless women come to see me, having chosen an obstetrician, but really desiring a natural birth that the obstetrician states openly he will not have a part in. There might be a birth centre in their local area, private midwives who could attend them, or even a public hospital caseload midwifery program. Sadly, these options were not explored by the family.

The next question, then, is why, having chosen a care provider who is truly not suited to our needs, do we stay with that care provider?

I always applaud women who make the courageous change. Many women who come to me describing their “predicament” will re-appraise their options and make choices that are aligned to their preferences. Others will remain with their original decision but will ask me to attend them throughout their pregnancy and birth in attempt to act as an intermediary between them and their obstetrician. I don’t consider this to be the most advantageous position, either for the woman, the obstetrician or myself. However, surprisingly, it seems to work well and all the births I have attended in this capacity have occurred on the woman’s terms. I am in awe of those women for having the courage of their convictions to remain with an ill-suited care provider and find the resources that will help them to still have their birth on their terms. They come away elated, feeling they have truly achieved the best of both worlds: an obstetrician they know for if something “goes wrong” and a private midwife who is an expert on natural birth.

Ideally, women will see a midwife for a pre-conception consultation where birth options can be discussed. Some women will ultimately benefit from – or desire – an obstetrician for their pregnancy and birth and this should not be denied to those women. However, a large majority of women simply want a “natural birth” and assistance to avoid tearing and a long labour. They want a healthy baby, a satisfying experience and they really want continuity of care. These women need to know – even before they become pregnant – the options that are open to them. It’s never too early to meet with private midwives and choose the one who is suited to your needs.

Ultimately, if the maternity reforms work to women’s advantage and if obstetricians and midwives are able to put The Birth Wars aside, women ought to be able to have continuity of midwifery and obstetric care: one midwife and one obstetrician who provide the woman’s care so that she benefits from a natural birth expert and an expert in things that “go wrong”. Place of birth could be home, birth centre or hospital and waterbirth would be a supported option.

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , , , , ,

 
0

Focus on waterbirth

Posted by Melissa Maimann on Jul 2, 2010 in Birth, Caesarean

Interested in home birth, hospital birth or private midwifery care? Questions or comments? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

Link

NSW’s runaway caesarean birth rate is set to be reined in by one-third under an ambitious five-year plan to normalise the process of giving birth and reduce unnecessary intervention in public hospitals.

The proportion of surgical births should be reduced to 20 per cent by 2015, from 30 per cent now, and first-time mothers would be attended by the same midwife throughout labour.

The option of labouring in water, although not necessarily water birth, would be offered universally under the mandatory policy.

It’s a wonderful idea to introduce policies around use of water in labour, but not necessarily waterbirth. Most units don’t permit labouring in water, either due to lack of baths / pools or because the policies do not support it. Waterbirth challenges some doctors and even some midwives; promoting the use of water in labour is a fantastic starting point and from that, let’s hope waterbirth becomes more of a standard option in delivery suites. This move also complements the re-intruduction of private midwives back into hospital delivery suites with visiting rights.

The policy, the first of its type in Australia, is modelled on a 2005 British one credited with starting to reverse that country’s escalating caesarean rate.

The Minister for Health, Carmel Tebbutt, said the directive was ”designed to support women to have a birth that is as free as possible from invasive medical intervention, while also recognising that labour occurs across a wide spectrum … The safety of mother and child are, of course, paramount.”

The president of the Australian College of Midwives, Hannah Dahlen, said: ”For the last 15 to 20 years [birth interventions] have just gone up and up and up. At some point we have to start coming down again. The policy says, ‘Let’s stop, let’s regroup and try to get a balance.’ ”

She emphasised it would remain ”the safest option for some women to have a caesarean section, and women should not feel lesser because they had to have an intervention”.

Only about 13 per cent of women now achieved a vaginal birth after a caesarean, while up to 80 per cent could do so if properly supported. The NSW targets specify a 30 per cent rate by 2012 and 50 per cent by 2015.

”It all depends on how women are supported and how the facility as a whole supports it,” said Associate Professor Dahlen, a member of the committee that drew up the plan.

It always interests mt that VBAC rates vary so much. 80-90% with private midwives and as low as 1% with private obstetricians. Yes, it’s defintely about the level of support that a woman receives.

Ted Weaver, the president of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, applauded the NSW policy to have a single midwife attend first-time mothers, but said this would require a shake-up of workplace rules.

Dr Weaver said the appropriate caesarean rate was about 25 per cent of all births, because the current generation of women represented ”an older population, a fatter population, and a lot of first-time mothers”, Factors which raised their risk.

Michael Chapman, professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at St George Hospital, said the policy would require more senior doctors, who had the expertise to continue with a vaginal birth when manageable complications arose …

Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Top Pregnancy and Childbirth Blog
Medical Billing and Coding Certification

Copyright © 2010 Private Midwife: Homebirth & Hospital Birth All rights reserved. Theme by Laptop Geek.