Measuring the bump

You might have been wondering what your midwife does and feels when she feels your pregnant belly.

During an antenatal visit, your midwife will ask to feel your pregnant belly. The medical term for this is palpation, often referred to by midwives and obstetricians as an abdominal palpation. The aim of regularly feeling your belly is to monitor the changing size of your uterus and the growth and position of your baby as the pregnancy progresses. Palpation does not hurt your baby because they are surrounded by a cushion of amniotic fluid.

Your midwife will measure your belly from the top of your uterus (womb) to your pubic bone, and the measurement in cm ought to equal the number of weeks that you are pregnant, +/- 2cm. this means that at 34 weeks, it would be fine for your uterus to measure anywhere between 32 and 36cm.

If your bump measures much more or less than what was expected, your midwife might discuss with you whether an ultrasound scan is needed.

The size of your uterus should continue to grow, reaching the base of your sternum by 36+ weeks, and as your baby’s head engages deeply in your pelvis, your uterus will come down a bit lower.

After 36 weeks, your midwife will also be interested to know if your baby’s head has engaged. This is when the largest part of your baby’s head is within your pelvis, so that only a small amount of your baby’s head can be felt outside of your uterus.

Although engagement of your baby’s head does not mean your labour will start any time soon, it is a very good sign that you will birth normally and healthily. Your baby’s head can engage anytime from 1 to 4 weeks before the birth, and if you have had a baby before, it might not engage until labour starts.

Your midwife will also feel the position of the baby, which is important in labour.

The most important thing about having your midwife feel your belly is to have the same midwife do it every time.  We each measure slightly differently, and what is important is the differing results from one care provider, rather than the differing results between care providers. This is where private midwifery care really benefits women and babies.

After about 14 weeks, your midwife may also ask to listen to your baby’s heartbeat, and this is something that most women are excited to hear.

If your midwife listens to your baby’s heartbeat and is concerned by what s/he hears, s/he may discuss with you whether some additional monitoring is needed, and this is usually done by way of CTG, which is a machine that monitors and records every heart beat for 20-30 minutes.

Learn more about private midwifery care and shared care.

Risk assessment in pregnancy and birth

Risk assessment has been around for a long time in maternity care and has become more widely spoken about as midwifery-led services have expanded. Risk assessment is a way of identifying potential problems and minimising risks to the woman and baby. Some form of risk assessment is used in almost every profession and although the actual risk assessment process is not perfect, it’s the best tool we have at present. Risk assessment is used on OH&S, education, food service, health, media, emergency services, law and so on.

In maternity, risk assessment is an incredibly useful tool. The benefit of risk assessment is that it is based on science and evidence. We can state with certainty the risks of certain complications such as pre-eclampsia and this is helpful when preparing women for what to expect and things to be on the look-out for. In this way, risk assessment actually lowers the risk to the woman because she can become more involved in her care and more alert for signs that mean she needs to get help.

The downside of risk assessment is that it does tend to categorise women according to a tick-box system. Although the risk might be there, it might not necessarily eventuate for the woman sitting with us.

How can risk assessment be useful?

Risk assessment can be an incredibly useful tool for both women and midwives in helping to plan care that will meet the woman’s needs safely. Midwives are primary care providers and are responsible for proving care to healthy, low-risk women and babies throughout pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period. So a risk assessment tool helps the midwife and woman to know when a consultation or referral is needed.

Risk assessments can also highlight potential problems that would benefit from early organisation and planning before labour. This might include reviewing the birth plan, reviewing place of birth, engaging other health professionals and putting in place supports so that the woman can cope well after the baby is born.

Risk assessment can also be useful for discussing homebirth with women and their partners. Some women are perfectly suited to homebirth: they’re healthy, their pregnancy is going well and they’re wanting a natural birth. In this case, risk assessment can be used to explain to the woman that she’s safer at home.

Visit my website to learn more about my 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 learn more about my services.

Baby boom highlights obstetricians’ shortage in WA: AMA

Link

A baby boom in Western Australia has highlighted a shortage of doctors trained to deliver them …

WA has a surging population … but the State has the worst ratio of obstetricians and gynaecologists per head of population …

Naturally, as this has been reported by the AMA, the focus is on the lack of obstetricians available to deliver babies. Anyone would think from this article that a baby simply couldn’t arrive into this world without an obstetrician. Sometimes that is the case. However, for the most part, a midwife is all that is needed to ensure the safe arrival of a new baby.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Options for pregnancy care

There are two main decisions to make about your care: one is your place of birth, and the other is your care provider.

Sometimes one decision will force another, for example an obstetrician will only deliver babies in a hospital, and birth centre care will generally mean having midwifery care.

But there are many other combinations:

Private midwife – home birth
Private midwife – hospital birth (public hospital as a private patient; private hospital as a private patient; public hospital as a public patient)
Public hospital care – midwives
Public hospital care – obstetricians
Public hospital care – shared care with a GP

and so on. There is really quite a lot of choice when you think about it.

Ultimately, if continuity is important to you, you will need to look to the private system – either obstetrics or midwifery – to ensure as much as possible that your chosen care provider will actually be there to help you in birthing.

The other thing to consider is that midwives and obstetricians, especially in the private sector – will tend to book out early. Some obstetricians will require you to book an appointment as soon as you find out you are pregnant, and will be fully booked at around 6 weeks. For many private midwives, this is the same. Other times, you my find that you can change from the public system to the private system later in pregnancy and a space will be made available for you.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

About Midwifery

What is a Midwife?

A midwife is a person who, having been regularly admitted to a midwifery educational programme … has successfully completed the prescribed course of studies in midwifery and has acquired the requisite qualifications to be registered and/or legally licensed to practice midwifery.

The midwife is recognised as a responsible and accountable professional who works in partnership with women to give the necessary support, care and advice during pregnancy, labour and the postpartum period, to conduct births on the midwife’s own responsibility and to provide care for the newborn and the infant. This care includes preventive measures, the promotion of normal birth, the detection of complications in mother and child, the accessing of medical or other appropriate assistance and the carrying out of emergency measures …

What is a Private Midwife?

Private midwives are midwives who work in private practice in a self-employed capacity, running their own businesses and seeing private clients.

Why work privately?

In my private practice, I work with a limited number of families each month so that I can be sure of my availability for each woman when she needs me. I am able to tailor the care I provide to each woman, ensuring that it best meets her needs. I can offer flexible appointment times, including on weekends, so that both the woman and her partner are able to attend all appointments. In short, private practice is the best way that I have found to provide the best care and service to my private clients.

What is an Eligible Midwife?

Eligible Midwives meet a registration standard that enables them to provide Medicare-funded care and order diagnostic tests and ultrasounds relating to pregnancy, birth and the newborn period. Medicare benefits enable women to claim some of the cost of private midwifery care, much the same way we do when we see a GP. Melissa Maimann is a medicare-eligible midwife and her services attract a Medicare rebate. An Eligible Midwife meets certain advanced requirements:

At least 3 years of full time experience as a midwife;
Competence to provide pregnancy, birth and postnatal care;
Successful completion of a professional practice review program;
40 hours per year of continuing professional development (20 hours in addition to standard requirements)

How is a midwife different to a doula?

A midwife is the primary care provider for pregnant, birthing and postnatal women.

Both midwives and doulas provide emotional and physical support to women in labour and birth, and work with labouring women to suggest position changes and provide emotional support.

Midwives are registered health professionals with a university degree and they are recognised by legislation. The doula industry is not regulated and formal qualifications are not required. There are no formal standards of practice or registration for doulas.

Midwives are educated in skills such as newborn resuscitation and care of the pregnant, birthing and postnatal woman – including knowledge of how to keep pregnancy and birth normal. Midwives are also educated to know when medical care is necessary, and they can execute emergency measures while waiting for medical care to arrive.

Midwives can offer qualified advice and clinical care, whereas doulas cannot advise or comment on clinical practices and cannot provide clinical care such as listening to the baby’s heart rate, checking blood pressure etc.

While women may engage a doula’s services for additional support, a midwife or obstetrician will always be needed to provide care.

How is a midwife different to an obstetrician?

Obstetricians are doctors who complete extensive specialist training in pregnancy and birth and all areas of gynaecology. Obstetricians are qualified to provide pregnancy and birth care to healthy women, as well as women with risk-associated pregnancies and births. They are able to perform assisted births such as vacuum births, as well as caesareans.

All women are cared for by a midwife in labour and midwives provide the bulk of labour care. If the woman’s labour is straight forward, an obstetrician would not routinely be involved in her care. However, if the need arose, the midwife would always enlist the support of an obstetrician to provide guidance about the best path to take.

Midwives are primary care providers for low-risk, healthy women throughout pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period and most women can expect to have a healthy pregnancy. However, if the pregnancy or birth take a different path, obstetricians and midwives work together to provide safe care to the woman and her baby.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Hospital says No to cesarean

Link

A NORTH Coast mum who has been told she can’t deliver her baby by cesarean feels [that the] Hospital is prioritising policy over people.

Sylvia … said she was told by an obstetrician at the hospital she could only have a C-section … in an emergency.

“I just had tears streaming down my face – I couldn’t believe it,” …”I feel so powerless and betrayed by the medical system that my choice has been taken away.”

Ms Leveridge, who is 28 weeks pregnant, wants to avoid the 20-hour labour she experienced before undergoing an emergency cesarean to deliver her first child.

Her first baby was a whopping 4.240kg and Ms Leveridge understands this baby will be just as big.

… under the Towards Normal Birth policy, the state is aiming to reduce the cesarean rate to 20% before 2015.

Ms Leveridge said she was advised the hospital has to reduce the number of cesareans it performs in line with the policy.

… there are risks associated with cesarean section operations … the rights of the both babies and mothers have to be balanced out.

“It’s not just the mum’s choice. It’s also the baby’s choice as to how the delivery transpires. This is something that is often lost in the debate about how babies should be delivered,” …

“My problem is I have big babies and I just feel like I’m on the same treadmill,” Ms Leveridge said.

As I see it, there are four issues here:
1. Fear
2. A previous “big” baby
3. A woman’s sense of control over how she will deliver her baby, aka woman-centered care
4. Safety for mother and baby, and the health practitioner’s duty to recommend the safest course of action

Fear
It is not unusual that this woman would feel so fearful of her upcoming birth: her only experience of labour and birth had been an horrendous 20-hour labour with untold interventions delivered in a model of care that provided limited continuity, and ultimately leading to an emergency caesarean. In my practice, women have only one midwife for the whole pregnancy – baby experience. This model of care has been demonstrated to reduce women’s fear, and also promote normal birth. Around 90% women who birth with me experience a normal birth.

A previous “big” baby
A “big” baby is not necessarily a concern, and nor is it necessarily associated with a caesarean. The important factor here is whether the baby was always destined to be a larger baby that is able to fit through an ample pelvis, or whether the baby was abnormally large perhaps because of poor maternal diet or poorly-controlled gestational diabetes. Many “large” babies are born normally: these are often babies who have been nurtured with good nutrition in a woman whose pelvis is amply able to accommodate a larger baby. The labour and birth is often rapid and the baby is born healthily and safely. The same cannot be said of babies who are abnormally large because of high circulating glucose in the mother’s blood. In my practice, much time is spent with women talking about nutrition; why it is important; motivational tools to remain healthy and fit in pregnancy; and finally assisting them with a healthy eating plan that is flexible and is based on their own unique tastes and needs. The average birth weight is around 3.4Kg.

A woman’s sense of control over how she will deliver her baby, aka woman-centered care

We know from studies that a request for a caesarean is based mostly on a woman’s fear of labour. The woman in this article was quite justified in her fear: her only personal knowledge of birth was an awful labour culminating in a caesarean, and she sees herself staring down that same barrel, since she again feels that she has a big baby. I often find that women will make an initial request, for example for a hospital birth or an epidural, and through their pregnancy care experience, they grow massively in terms of their confidence, knowledge and trust, such that they are saying later in pregnancy, “Actually, maybe I can do this without an epidural. Maybe if I can labour and birth in the water, that will help and I won’t need an epidural.” Or, “I know I’ve been wanting a hospital birth all along, but I’m curious about homebirth and if all’s well, I think I might like to stay home in labour.” The power of continuity of care – where every woman has only one midwife as her midwifery care provider – is often understated in the literature.

Safety for mother and baby, and the health practitioner’s duty to recommend the safest course of action

I’ve sometimes been heard to say that as midwives, we really only have one job, and that is safety. Women engage midwives for their care because they understand that midwives have a unique skill-set that includes knowledge, experience, judgment and compassion. If women possessed this skill-set, they would have no need for midwives. It is the health practitioner’s role to recommend the safest course of action, which in this case is a VBAC. The woman is so caught up in fear from a traumatic previous experience that rationally, she is probably not even able to take any of this in. The woman should be supported, not necessarily to birth vaginally or abdominally, but just supported. Nothing more, nothing less. After working one-on-one with her private midwife, towards the end of her pregnancy, and with a healthily-grown baby, she just might see things differently and agree that a VBAC is the safest course of action for her and also for her baby. To thrust this (VBAC) upon a woman who is driven by an unresolved and justified fear state is unreasonable and shows a lack of compassion. Yes, a VBAC is probably the safest for mother and baby. But fear (and the absence of fear: confidence, calmness, surrender) is the most important driver of birth. Until we work to eliminate fear and instill confidence, we will have high caesarean rates, whether these are chosen by women or recommended by health practitioners.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Gestational diabetes to soar

Link

One in five pregnant women could be diagnosed with gestational diabetes under new criteria …

The number of women with gestational diabetes could increase 50 per cent under guidelines that will call for universal screening of pregnant women and lower the blood glucose level deemed for a positive diagnosis.

The Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society has taken a year and a half preparing to adopt the international criteria, in part because of a fear the health system would be unable to cope.

… In the past, the level of blood glucose needed to qualify a woman as needing treatment for blood glucose was based on her risk of developing diabetes later in life.

But increasing research showing risks to the baby has led to a reassessment of the levels, which will decrease from 5.5mmol/L to 5.1mmol/L …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Cesarean Delivery May Not Be More Protective For Small, Premature Newborns

Link

…delivery by cesarean section may not be protective compared to vaginal deliveries for babies who are small for their gestational age … born more than six weeks before their due date.

“We found that infants delivered vaginally were not at a significantly increased risk for any neonatal complications. In fact, infants delivered by cesarean had significantly higher odds of breathing problems after birth,” … “This indicates that cesarean isn’t superior to vaginal deliveries for this high risk population.”…

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Inducing Labor Better for Big Babies

Link

The study below has made a compelling argument for induction for babies who are thought to be large for their gestational age. The first thing to ascertain before deciding on a course of action, is that the baby is truly larger than expected. All methods of judging a baby’s size in the uterus are prone to error, for example ultrasound has a 15% margin of error. Therefore we need to take this into account when we are advising women of the safest options. Many inductions (and even caesareans) are performed for “big” babies, only to have the induction go pear-shaped and lead to a caesarean … for a 3.5Kg baby. On the other hand, an earlier induction for a genuinely large baby may well prevent a caesarean, forceps birth, perineal trauma (tears, episiotomy) and so on.

Large-for-date babies are more likely to experience neonatal trauma if nature is allowed to take its course than if labor is induced …

Among fetuses estimated sonographically to be above the 95th percentile for weight, adverse events such as shoulder dystocia were three times less likely if labor was induced …

Induction of labor also was associated with a greater likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery …

Previous observational studies have suggested that induction of labor may lower birth weight and decrease the chance for neonatal injury such as shoulder dystocia, brachial plexus injury, and death.

However, studies also found increased rates of cesarean section with induction, and the reliability of fetal weight estimation has been questioned.

… 817 women … were assigned to be induced within three days of enrollment or to expectant management.

They averaged 37 weeks gestation, and fetal weight was estimated at an average of 3,700 grams.

The difference between the groups was approximately nine days additional gestation in the expectant management group along with a 287-g (10 oz.) higher birth weight.

In the expectant management group, 6.6% of neonates experienced shoulder dystocia, compared with 2.2% in the induced group …

Also significant was the difference in vaginal deliveries, which occurred in 58.7% of the induced births and 51.7% of expectant births.

Cesarean section was needed in 28% of the induction group and 31.7% of the expectant group.

Secondary outcomes — including clavicular fracture and brachial plexus injury — were similar between the two groups.

There were no serious or permanent brachial plexus injuries or deaths.

… The study demonstrated that prevention of macrosomia at birth can lead to safe birth outcomes …

The other aspect that has not been mentioned in this study is the importance of caring for women and providing advice that will help them to grow a baby who is appropriate for their pelvis, to maximise the chance of a normal birth. This is an essential aspect of the care that I provide to women.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Doctor’s preference has strong influence on VBAC

Link

Women who have previously given birth by caesarean are strongly swayed by the opinion of their doctor when it comes to how they should have their second child …

… mothers in this situation are poorly educated on the risks they face with each delivery option.

Despite vaginal births having up to an 80 per cent success rate among those who have had a previous caesarean, most women surveyed decided against having their baby this way.

“Even though most women can achieve a vaginal delivery with trial of labour, less than ten percent of them attempt to do so,”

… 43 per cent of mothers [thought] their doctors preferred the idea of trial of labour went through with it, while only four per cent did when they claimed their physician was in favour of caesarean.

… the vast majority of patients were unaware of the chances of success and danger through vaginal delivery and more than half did not know which delivery method had a faster recovery time …

This raises an interesting discussion around informed consent doe VBAC versus elective repeat caesarean. What did your midwife or obstetrician tell you about caesarean versus VBAC, and were you swayed by their opinion? Did you choose your midwife or doctor based on whether they would support you in a planned VBAC or caesarean?

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

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.

“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.

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.

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.

Doctors driving the increase in caesareans

Link

THE popular belief that caesareans are on the rise because women are too posh to push is incorrect, a new study shows.

University of Queensland researchers surveyed 22,000 Queensland mums …

… 48 per cent of women in private hospitals who had a caesarean did so on the recommendation of their [obstetrician].

Just under 40 per cent of women in public hospitals said the same.

… only 10 per cent said they had wanted to have their baby born that way.

“… the majority of women would prefer to have a vaginal birth,” …

“The increase in caesareans seems to be largely driven by the recommendations of doctors.”

… some women are going into the procedure underprepared.

Only 52 per cent of women … reported making an informed decision to have a planned caesarean …

Interesting research that backs up what midwives have known for a long time: the main driver for increased caesarean rates is not the mother’s choice to deliver by caesarean, but rather the recommendation of her obstetrician, who in most cases will be recommending a caesarean for non-essential reasons. I say this with confidence because upwards of 45% women do not “need” to deliver by caesarean for the sake of their babies or themselves. No-one could be justified in believing that caesarean rates this high are necessary in the majority of women who experience a healthy pregnancy. Private midwifery caesarean rates are well under 10%, with many private midwives having caesarean rates of around 5%.

The lesson is that a woman’s choice of care provider has the greatest impact on her mode of birth.

It is more important that her health issues, her choices and preferences for care, her previous birth experiences and her geographical location.

A woman’s choice of care provider will literally determine whether she undergoes a (possible unnecessary) caesarean or a natural birth. Late pregnancy and labour are not the times to be asking your care provider if their recommendations (for induction or caesarean) are truly necessary: women are simply too vulnerable in that state to make informed decision, and besides, informed decisions take take to research to come to an “informed” decision. When time is of the essence – in late pregnancy and labour – informed decision making almost goes out the window. Ultimately, the best strategy is to interview your potential care providers and peruse their statistics on birth. They say they support natural birth … but what are their stats on natural birth? What % of their patients have a caesarean, induction, epidural? If your care provider is vague and non-committal, that should speak volumes. If their rates are high and you are aiming for a low-intervention birth, it is not too late to identify this and seek a care provider whose philosophy – and outcomes – are more aligned to what you are hoping to achieve.

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.

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.

Midwives Use Rituals To Send Message That Women’s Bodies Know Best

Link

In reaction to what midwives view as the overly medicalized way hospitals deliver babies, they have created birthing rituals to send the message that women’s bodies know best.

The midwife experience uses these rituals to send the message that home birth is about female empowerment, strengthening relationships between family and friends, and facilitating participatory experiences that put mothers in control, with the ultimate goal of safe and healthy deliveries less focused on technological intervention.

These are some of the findings from an Oregon State University researcher and licensed midwife who witnessed more than 400 home births in order to document an extensive list of practices utilized by midwives to express the symbolic difference between home and hospital births.

… “We know, for instance, that midwives have better health outcomes in some areas, such as reduced rates of surgical delivery and labor induction, than hospitals. But I wanted to examine how ritual might play a part in producing these positive health outcomes.”

… evidence shows that hospital births result in about triple the rate of cesarean section for low-risk women compared to midwife-attended home births …

What she found was a network of common practices, messages and beliefs that resulted in midwives constructing woman-centered rituals around pregnancy and birth that were set up in opposition to what they believe are the overly medicalized practices of hospitals.

For instance … midwives conducted many of the same diagnostic procedures as a physician would prenatally, from blood pressure and weight checks to blood testing and fetal heart tone evaluation …

… “Many midwives also downplayed the centrality of monitoring and resuscitation equipment setting them off to the side, or placing them under baby blankets during labor so women would not be reminded of the technology in the room. Mothers and babies were still monitored closely, but the monitoring was not made the central focus.”

The differences aren’t so much in practice … but in performance.

Cheyney also documented the use of common phrases to create birthing mantras. She lists phrases such as “don’t fight it,” “let your body do it,” “open,” and “let it be strong,” as key components … Many mothers … reported feeling strong and capable during their labors, and women who compared their hospital birth to their home birth reported feeling like they were “doing something, rather than just lying there passively waiting.” Midwives also commonly expressed the statement that they were simply “guardians,” and that women have all the tools inside of them to birth their own babies.

… It is Cheyney’s belief that both of these sets of rituals have caused a wide chasm between … hospital births and the 1 percent who choose home births.

“Just as women and their doctors who deliver in the hospital often feel convinced that their birth was the only safe and ‘correct’ way, women and midwives who deliver at home feel strongly that they have the solution,” … “They believe it with every cell in their body because they have lived it.”…

There is definitely something special and unique about homebirth that cannot be summarised in words alone.

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.

Unneeded cesareans are risky and expensive

Link

Cesarean deliveries are over-used … and reducing the number of surgical births would save health-care dollars and protect women’s health. Those are the conclusions of a new white paper issued today by the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative.

… in the last 15 years, the rate of surgical birth has increased from 22 to 32 percent of California deliveries with no measurable benefits for new mothers or their babies.

This is a concern because cesareans aren’t risk-free. After surgical delivery, women experience more pain, infection and hemorrhage than women who give birth vaginally. Women who have had a prior cesarean also have more problems with subsequent pregnancies. The placenta can become deeply implanted in scar tissue from the old incision, causing hemorrhage at the second delivery …

The white paper, which was funded by the California HealthCare Foundation, uncovered striking evidence for over-use of cesarean: Among low-risk women having their first baby, the rate of the surgery varies from nine percent to 51 percent of births based on the mother’s geographic location within California. As a press release about the paper says:

This large variation among California regions and hospitals cannot be explained by medical factors alone and therefore suggests that labor management practices and local attitudes help drive the use of cesareans during labor.

Reasons for the increase also include: physicians’ concerns about medical liability and avoidance of risk, as well as specific labor practices such as the increased reliance on labor induction, early labor admission, lack of patience in labor, and the virtual disappearance of vaginal birth after a prior cesarean …

“Over the last 15 years, cesarean deliveries have become so common that in some hospitals and communities they are considered ‘normal births’ despite the increased risks,” …

The white paper makes several recommendations for how to reduce unnecessary cesareans, including removing perverse financial incentives … encouraging VBACs … improving public education about the risks of cesarean delivery, and implementing statewide quality-improvement activities for better labor practices.

Unfortunately, there is no mention of the role of the midwife in preventing the first caesarean, or in helping a VBAC woman have a successful VBAC.

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.

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.

Natural birth in hospital?

Here are some ideas to birth naturally in hospital:

Read, read, read. Books, websites, any written info from your care provider … read it all. You also need to know the difference between facts presented to you in an honest and unbiased way, and facts that are being filtered through hospital policy. This is where women benefit from having a private midwife by their side.

For example, “Some risks rise slightly when a woman has high blood pressure. I am uncomfortable with letting your pregnancy continue with high blood pressure because of the risks to the baby and to you if something happens” is an honest and factual statement. You have the right to accept the risks and refuse induction. However, some women hear “I’m going to induce you today because if we don’t do this now, there is a good chance your baby will not make it”. This statement is dishonest, using a woman’s fears and her maternal instinct to encourage her to accept intervention. There is also no discussion of alternative options. Informed consent requires that women are presented with options so that they can make the best decision for them, in their situation.

Be assertive As with most human relationships, a great deal can be resolved with a calm, respectful and firm manner. Know what you want and why you want it. Engage a private midwife to assist you with obtaining relevant and impartial information.

Listen. If you are choosing to use a hospital and an obstetrician for your birth, then you acknowledge that their presence, education and experience have some value. Your wishes are important but be willing to listen even when what’s being said is really not what you want to hear. You must also acknowledge that an obstetrician is trained in all things that go wrong, and they are on the look-out for any sign of things going wrong. Midwives, on the other hand, will promote normalcy and assist your pregnancy and birth to remain normal. These differing philosophies do result in big differences in intervention rates.

Be Flexible. Understand that sometimes things don’t go the way we had planned. There might be some occasions where you’ll be happy to accommodate the hospital policy, and other times when you’ll want to stand your ground.

Ultimately, it is true that the most important aspect of birth is safety and a healthy mother and baby. But that doesn’t mean the other aspects are unimportant, and I firmly believe you can have a great birth – and a safe birth – in any location.

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

Private midwife at public hospital

Our local newspaper wrote an article about the model of care I am able to offer women:

THE owner of Essential Birth Consulting at Bexley, Melissa Maimann, 33, has become the first private midwife in Sydney to be accredited to deliver babies in a public hospital.

She said this was exciting news for expectant mums who want a personalised delivery but might be experiencing a high-risk pregnancy.

Ms Maimann said her model of care was unique in Australia because it included access to a back-up obstetrician.

“I am able to support women with risk-associated pregnancies because obstetric care is available,” she said. “This is a real benefit to women as often those with high-risk pregnancies are limited to obstetric care with little, if any, midwifery input.”

Ms Maimann, who established Essential Birth Consulting five years ago, has helped deliver about 76 babies.

She was profiled in the Leader last December for becoming the first private midwife in St George to receive accreditation to provide Medicare-funded private midwifery services. This has equated to savings of about $2500 a client.

Ms Maimann limits bookings to an average of two births each month to ensure a high quality service for families. She supports natural births, including water birth, and vaginal birth after caesarean, vaginal twin and vaginal breech births.

“We know that continuity of care is the single most important factor for women in the pregnancy and birth care and I am proud to offer it,” she said.

“Women may have care conveniently in their home or in my Bexley clinic.”

There were 295,700 registered births in Australia in 2009, Australian Bureau of Statistics figures showed.

Details: 0400 418 448 or essentialbirthconsulting.com.au

Is caesarean now the ‘normal’ way to give birth, and should we be worried?

Link

There’s no doubt that caesarean sections are an essential procedure that can save the lives of women and babies. But around one in three Australian women will give birth by caesarean section – and that’s not just to save lives.

… The rising caesarean section rate in most of the developed world has not resulted in reduced rates of stillbirth or infant death – quite the contrary.

One Australian study showed that babies were more likely to be admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit if they were born by elective caesarean section than other types of delivery. A previous caesarean section also increases the risk of stillbirth.

In terms of outcomes for women, those who have emergency and elective cesarean sections are less likely to exclusively breastfeed. And there is growing evidence that caesarean operations increase the risk of the mother dying or becoming ill with blood loss, blood clots, abdominal organ injury and the need for a hysterectomy.

It’s important to consider the risks of caesarean births. But rather than just focus on the polarised “vaginal birth vs caesarean birth” debate – which pitches doctors against midwives, and doesn’t help women who are stuck in the middle – we need to focus on the ways we can support all women to have the best outcome from childbirth.

It seems that one of the driving forces behind the rising caesarean section rate is fear … about labour and birth, and from doctors and midwives who are themselves fearful of the birthing process.

… we should be examining why women are fearful of labour and birth and what our health system can do to reduce this fear.

Our health system is generally an unfriendly one for pregnant women and it’s likely that this compounds the fear of birth. It’s common for a pregnant woman receiving care in the public system to see up to 30 different caregivers through pregnancy, labour and birth and the postnatal period.

The opportunity for pregnant women to develop a meaningful relationship with her health care provider, discuss her fears, affirm her needs and develop confidence in labour and birth are minimal.

… One of the disturbing elements of birth in the 21st century is the lack of respect for privacy for labouring women. The entourage of people appearing uninvited into labour rooms in most hospitals is astonishing. Each labour and birth can have a multitude of spectators, including a midwife, obstetrician, registrar, resident, student midwife, medical student and on it goes.

… To address this problem and encourage Australian women to give birth normally, … In NSW, the Towards Normal Birth Policy was released last year and provides 10 steps towards supporting more women to go into labour and ultimately have a normal birth.

The policy recognises that ”… unnecessary interference in the natural process may disturb the expected course and may lead to a cascade of intervention.”

The challenge is to redesign the health system to facilitate women’s confidence and trust in birth. Fundamental changes need to occur to ensure all women are supported during pregnancy and feel confident in their ability to give birth, including:

  • Continuity of caregiver;
  • Increased options for the style of birth, with access to a birthing pool;
  • A positive environment, free of disruptions; and
  • One-to-one midwifery care in labour so women are never left alone or fearful.
  • Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    I’m pregnant. Who should I go to for care? A Midwife or an Obstetrician?

    Private Midwife:

  • Provides autonomous pregnancy, birth and postnatal care for women who are experiencing normal, healthy pregnancies
  • Provides care in consultation with an obstetrician when a woman’s pregnancy has risk factors (eg high blood pressure, prem labour, concern for baby’s growth, gestational diabetes etc)
  • Transfers responsibility for care to an obstetrician if complications emerge and continues to provide care within the midwifery scope of practice
  • Supports women to birth normally with a high rate of natural birth
  • Supports women to breastfeed
  • Provides pregnancy, birth and postnatal care
  • Pregnancy appointments allow time for questions, education and discussion with appointments typically 45-60 minutes in duration
  • Women are highly likely to report satisfaction with their care and experience
  • Private Obstetrician:

  • Provides autonomous care for women regardless of risk factors
  • Receives referrals from midwives for women with risk-associated pregnancies or births
  • Always provides labour and birth care (including caesarean) in collaboration with a midwife
  • Obstetric care on average results in a high degree of intervention such as induction, epidural, caesarean and episiotomy
  • Provides brief in-hospital consultations after the baby is born, followed by a 6-week check
  • Pregnancy appointments are generally no more than 15 minutes in duration
  • Collaborative care: private midwife and private obstetrician

  • Receive autonomous pregnancy, birth and postnatal care from one midwife and one obstetrician regardless of risk factors
  • No transfer of care if risk factors emerge
  • Supports women to birth normally with a high rate of natural birth
  • Supports women to breastfeed
  • Provides pregnancy, birth and postnatal care
  • Pregnancy appointments allow time for questions, education and discussion with appointments typically 45-60 minutes in duration
  • Women are highly likely to report satisfaction with their care and experience
  • Provides autonomous care for women regardless of risk factors
  • Supports women to birth naturally, including with twins, a breech baby or a VBAC
  • Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Choosing the right care provider

    Choosing the right practitioner is a very personal decision and there is no right or wrong choice. 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 understanding all the options available so that you can feel confident to choose the best option for your needs.

    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?
    Do I want public or private care?

    These are questions only you can answer. Other questions are for your care providers, 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 explore birthing 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. Specifically, 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 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.

    Private obstetrician
    Private obstetricians can 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.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Hospital births continuing through our service

    Given the troubled times for midwives attending hospitals in a birth support role – either for planned hospital birth or in a homebirth transfer situation – I have had many calls from current clients and women who are exploring their birthing options, asking if hospital births are still going ahead through this service. I wanted to provide reassurance that yes, my hospital birth service is continuing! I am continuing to take bookings for hospital birth and I am able to attend hospital births in the full capacity of a midwife.

    Owing to an ongoing collaborative agreement and hospital arrangements, hospital births are continuing. Women book with me early in their pregnancy and have all of their care with me. Women also see an obstetrician twice in their pregnancy. Birthing takes place in a hospital setting complete with waterbirthing. We support VBAC, twin and breech births. It is an all-risk model too, so women don’t need to be “low risk” to benefit from continuity of midwifery and obstetric care. It also means that there is no “transfer” if a woman’s pregnancy becomes high risk: she can still receive the same wonderful care and support from her chosen midwife and obstetrician.

    Hospital staff are not routinely involved in the care of women who book through our service and we have gone to great lengths to create a birth centre feel to the birthing rooms. Rooms are quiet, warm and peaceful and we have a variety of tools available to support natural, active birthing such as floor mats, bath, shower and birth balls and of course many women also choose to bring personal items from home.

    After the baby is born, we support early discharge with many women choosing to go home four hours after the birth. Of course women may stay longer if they wish. I visit daily for the first week, twice in the second week and then weekly until discharge at 6 weeks.

    Should there be any issues along the way, we have ready access to a specialist obstetrician who is known to the woman from pregnancy.

    So the short answer is YES! I am able to continue to attend hospital births and am receiving many calls about the popular model of care.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Caesarean section? Vaginal birth? Your choice!

    Visit my website to explore homebirth and hospital birth.

    Much has been said and written about an article in The Age this weekend. The article is about a randomised study that will compare the outcomes of 500 women who choose a caesarean and 500 women who choose a vaginal birth. The study will explore psychological and physical outcomes for the women and their babies, including depression and breastfeeding rates. It will only compare vaginal births with caesareans for healthy women with uncomplicated pregnancies.

    The study has created much debate, including issues of ethics (beneficence, autonomy, non-maleficence) and professional duty of care. I wonder if part of the “answer” will not be answered by this study, since the study only addresses outcomes from the first pregnancy, but most women do not have one child, they have two, on average. It’s reasonable to assume that a woman who has an elective caesarean for her first baby, will go onto have an elective caesarean for her second baby.

    In the current maternity system in NSW, a woman who chooses a vaginal birth for her first baby has the following outcomes:

  • only 52% women having their first baby will have a normal birth
  • 33% will be induced
  • 23% will have forceps or vacuum
  • 25% will have a caesarean – and of these women, only 12% will have a vaginal birth in their subsequent pregnancy.
  • In other words, only 75% of first time mums who elect to have a vaginal birth will actually have one.

    In contrast, a first time Mum who chooses a vaginal birth with a private midwife has about a 95% chance of having a vaginal birth.

    The real question isn’t the outcomes of a first-time Mum’s pregnancy when she chooses a vaginal birth or a caesarean, but rather, what happens for the average woman who has two children, who has elected a caesarean with her first versus a vaginal birth with her first baby. In other words, how about we compare the outcomes of women who have two caesareans, with women who elect to have a vaginal birth the first time around, 75% of whom will birth vaginally, and 25% of whom will have a caesarean.

    Such a study would address the issue of second caesarean risks. Serious maternal morbidity (eg placenta praevia, placenta accreta, uterine rupture, need for hysterectomy and blood transfusion) increases progressively with increasing number of cesarean sections a woman has. The first caesarean is generally very safe but increasing numbers of caesareans are perhaps not so safe.

    A further issue with the study is that it does not suggest any method or support for the women who elect to birth vaginally. Will they be supported with one-to-one midwifery care, as this is known to increase vaginal birth rates? Will they include homebirthing women who are highly motivated to birth normally and without interventions? Or will it be standard obstetric / hospital-based births with high rates of intervention that are already known to result in reduced breastfeeding rates and a dissatisfaction with the birthing experience? I will wait to read the results.

    Doctor backs call for reform of maternity care in Greater Manchester

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    A top Greater Manchester doctor has backed a national call for reform of maternity care.

    Dr Michael Maresh, clinical lead for the Greater Manchester Maternity Network, spoke out after a major report recommended a reorganisation of services.

    The Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology called for more midwifery-led units to be set up so women with low-risk pregnancies could be in the sole care of midwives.

    It also calls for the number of consultant units be reduced so that senior clinicians are available around the clock.

    … “The fact is that there are too many maternity units which means senior doctors’ availability is spread too thinly – reorganisation to provide fewer, specialist units is the only sensible solution.

    “… we are in the process of reducing the number of maternity units and ensuring that the new model of care concentrates the expertise of doctors and midwives on eight, better staffed and safer sites.

    “By providing a co-located midwife led facility at each of the remaining units, we are able to offer improved choice to the majority of women who experience an uncomplicated birth.”

    With good referral systems and collaboration, a model such as this would work very well. The majority of women are healthy and have normal pregnancies and births, if they are given the right support, information and care. The midwifery model of care is a safe and satisfying model of care for healthy women.

    Melissa Maimann & Andrew Pesce: Collaborating for success

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    ALTHOUGH only a handful of collaborative arrangements have been signed between obstetricians and midwives since national maternity reforms were introduced in November, calls for a policy rethink are premature and counterproductive.

    In fact, the reforms provide an exciting opportunity for collaborative maternity care that is safe, locally responsive and woman-centred.

    A variety of private maternity care models are possible and we are confident these will build on Australia’s strong record of safety and quality in maternity care. They will also meet the needs of women who want the familiarity and the comfort of knowing the obstetrician and midwife who will be with them through their pregnancy, birth and new parenting experience …

    Obstetricians may be concerned that the new arrangements mean they will not be directly involved in patient care until something goes wrong, while some midwives fear that the arrangements will be used to control midwifery practice, adversely impact on childbirth choices and promote anticompetitive restriction of trade.

    We believe we are the first private obstetrician-midwife team in Australia to have successfully negotiated a formal collaborative arrangement and we are very happy with how it has progressed since our first discussions.

    The first woman under our joint care gave birth in March this year and we have several others booked through to January 2012.

    We share a similar philosophical approach to maternity care and have agreed practice guidelines that we believe to be safe, evidence-based and woman-centred …

    … Women appreciate the continuity of care, and the assurance that an obstetrician they have met will be involved if medical assistance is required. Feedback from women so far has been outstanding. The main criticism has been that this model of care is not available in other hospitals.

    One of the reasons why there are currently so few collaborative arrangements has been the time taken by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency to endorse eligible midwives and by public maternity units to credential midwives in private practice.

    … Our agreed guidelines are explained to patients before they engage our services and childbirth choices are not restricted. In fact, choices are enhanced as the midwife is able to attend births in the full capacity of a midwife in hospital.

    Importantly, our model of care does not dictate “transfer” of care, merely a shift in the balance of obstetric and midwifery care because we recognise that every pregnant woman needs her own obstetrician and midwife. We support midwife care during waterbirth, vaginal birth after caesarean section, physiological birth positioning and physiological third stage.

    Change is often difficult as we all tend to be creatures of habit. This change brings with it many opportunities for obstetricians and midwives in private practice to work together in ways that are beneficial to both and, importantly, to the women in their care.

    … The maternity reforms will succeed if we remember that midwives and obstetricians are in it for the same reason — to provide safe care that meets the needs of our patients, within a respectful, professional environment.

    Dr Andrew Pesce is an obstetrician practising in Sydney and immediate past president of the AMA. Ms Melissa Maimann is a midwife in private practice based in Sydney.

    Home birth has pros and cons

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Link

    The number of at-home births is small but growing as pregnant women weigh the idea of a drug-free and surgery-free birth in a familiar setting versus the risk of harm to the baby in case of complications.

    When most pregnant women go into labor, they pack their bags for the hospital. When Lara Carlos felt the contractions in November 2008, she set up a birthing tub in her bedroom.

    For the next several hours, Carlos alternated between padding around her home and squatting and pushing in the tub. Her midwife poured water down her back and dabbed her forehead with cold towels. When the baby (they chose the name Vincent) arrived at 1:21 a.m., he spent his first few hours cuddling with his parents in their bed.

    Carlos … is one of a small but growing number of women who are choosing to deliver their babies at home. Her first son, Ivan, had been delivered in a hospital, and she says she found labor at home a dramatic improvement.

    “In the hospital, there were seven medical students in the room when I was pushing my son out,” she said. “At home, it was a very quiet, slow experience, and the water helped me to relax.”

    Though home births account for only about 1% of all births each year … they increased by 20% from 2004 to 2008 … The practice is most popular among well-educated mothers who favor natural childbirth without the drugs or surgeries a hospital might use.

    … The increase has reenergized the fierce debate over the safety of at-home delivery. The practice is officially frowned on by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists … because the absence of emergency medical equipment and specialists accustomed to dealing with complications means that problems during labor could cost the baby’s life.

    “All the existing scientific evidence, as well as state and national statistics, make it ultra-clear that home birth increases the risk of death,” …

    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists does acknowledge that home births are associated with fewer medical interventions than hospital births … 61% of women who had vaginal delivery received an epidural in 2008, the year the report studied. And a 2006 national survey of women’s childbearing experiences showed that 55% were given Pitocin to speed labor.

    “There’s no doubt that once you end up in a hospital, you end up with more interventions — that’s what drives some families away,” … home birth is reasonable as long as women have few risk factors …, have an emergency backup plan and understand the risks involved.

    Women also turn to home birth in order to avoid caesarean sections, which have become more common as obstetricians became increasingly reluctant to take chances at the slightest sign of fetal distress …

    What’s more, many hospitals do not allow women who have previously had a caesarean to attempt a vaginal birth because of the risk of uterine rupture, even though a 2010 National Institutes of Health advisory panel concluded that the risk of uterine rupture during a vaginal birth after one caesarean was just 1% and that more women should be offered the choice. Women wishing to have a VBAC (vaginal birth after caesarean) may have no option but to do so on their own turf.

    Sarah … had two caesareans but chose a home birth for her third pregnancy, successfully delivering a baby girl in January 2010.

    “We had visited numerous hospitals, and the first time I mentioned a VBAC, I was just shut down completely,” Bolson says. Doctors refused to consider it because of the chance of rupture, she recalls, and one said he couldn’t risk having his medical malpractice insurance skyrocket.

    She eventually found a certified professional midwife who was willing to help her deliver at home, with a backup plan of transfer to a nearby hospital. Though initially worried about complications, “after I was able to release the fear, I was free to birth without any inhibition.”

    Many home-birth moms also say they object to other aspects of hospital births, such as having to lie in a bed, abstain from food during labor and be monitored by an army of nurses.

    “I believe in the intuitive power of the human body,” said Mayim Bialik, an actress and natural-birth advocate who has given birth at home. “I believe in having as much privacy as possible, in being able to move freely, to eat when I want, drink when I want, and to be surrounded by the sounds and smells of what is familiar to me.”

    “Other mammals go off on their own to labor,” adds Dr. Stuart Fischbein, a Los Angeles-based obstetrician who has been delivering exclusively in homes since 2010. “When a patient goes to a hospital, she gets told to lay flat on her back strapped down with monitors with constant interruptions from hospital personnel — does that sound conducive to having a normal labor?”

    Arrangements for a home birth go something like this: Early in the pregnancy a woman finds either a … midwife … The midwife provides some or all of the woman’s prenatal care and is on call as the woman approaches her due date …

    During labor, many women use water tubs because they find the water soothing and pain-relieving; others choose to just move about their homes as they see fit. The midwife monitors the fetus’ heart tones with a Doppler device, and most also bring equipment such as oxygen tanks, anti-hemmorhagic medication, local anesthetic and suturing supplies in case of tearing or bleeding. If an emergency arises that the midwife can’t manage, home-birth moms are advised to transfer immediately to a hospital.

    The core of the home-birth debate lies with the safety of the baby — and here, opinions and the data are sharply divided. A 2005 study of 5,418 births in the U.S. and Canada during 2000 … found that the neonatal death rates of at-home births were comparable to those of births in hospitals.

    But a July 2010 analysis published in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology examined the outcomes of 12 home-and-hospital-birth studies and found that babies born at home die at two to three times the rate of those born in hospitals …

    … the distance to the nearest emergency room can sometimes mean the difference between life and death. “Saying, ‘trust birth’ is like saying ‘trust the weather,’” she says, referring to a slogan occasionally used in natural-birth groups.

    Just as vocal online communities have sprung up to promote home birth, so too have others populated by women whose home-birth attempts turned into tragedies … Liz Paparella’s fourth child was stillborn on her living room couch because her midwife failed to take Paparella to the hospital when she began bleeding during labor.

    “I never thought it was more dangerous to have a baby at home than at the hospital,” says Paparella, who had given birth successfully at home two times previously. “In birth, the risk can change from low to high in a matter of minutes.”

    … A clear answer to the safety question is hard to find because nearly every home-birth study has some flaw that is flagged by one side of the debate or the other as invalidating the results. Given this uncertainty, Ouzounian cautions women to research, prepare and choose wisely.

    Home births, he says, should be considered only by those who have a well-trained midwife and are experiencing no complications with their pregnancy …

    “Under the right circumstances, with the right patient selection and with a … midwife attending, the overall maternal complication rates with home births are comparable” to those of a hospital birth …

    But he also advises women not to think about birth in black-or-white terms: There are many ways to make delivery more “natural” even if it takes place in the hospital …

    Fischbein says that doctors could be more accommodating to their patients by providing them with information about all of their birth options — at home and in the hospital — and stand ready to serve as backups for those who wish to labor at home with a midwife.

    “There’s room in this world for low-risk home birthing and for hospital birthing,” he says. “We really should support each individual woman’s right to choose how to deliver her baby.”

    Lack of collaboration stalls maternity reform

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Midwives urge government to relook at legislation.

    The government’s maternity reforms are “doomed to fail” as a result of obstetricians refusing to enter into collaborative arrangements with midwives.

    … “We always feared that these arrangements would be more about control than collaboration,” … only … three [collaborative agreements have been signed] …

    “Midwives are asking obstetricians in writing and calling up to 10 times to organise collaboration. Some get no response, some a polite no and others a very rude no,” …

    “We did expect that this would be the case. When you put one competing professional group over another group competing for the same market share, the group in control isn’t going to do something that threatens their sizeable share. I can understand that they are threatened.”

    It is true that there are only one or two obstetricians who have signed collaborative agreements with midwives, and only one that I know of whose agreement covers labour and birth care. This is disappointing because the models of care that are possible with collaborative agreements between private obstetricians and private midwives are so beneficial for women.

    Vacuum device used during labor; boy, now 11, suffers seizure and developmental problems

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Daniel Bautista-Lorenzo suffers from seizures, developmental delays and chronic headaches.

    Now the 11-year-old boy … claims doctors … caused his injuries by using a risky birthing procedure …

    … Alma Lorenzo went to the hospital for a near-term delivery … and gave birth to her son at 10:55 a.m. the next day …

    “… there were no complications or indications that necessitated the use of a vacuum device,” … “However, McCoy instructed Freed to remove Bautista from the birth canal by performing a vacuum delivery procedure. Freed told McCoy that he had not performed this type of delivery before and he was uncomfortable with the procedure.”

    After the delivery, the newborn “exhibited the symptoms of apparent seizures, left sided blinking of the left eye, and involuntary movement of the left arm,” …

    … a physician “assessed a right frontocerebral hemorrhagic infarction with a subdural hemorrhage,” … Doctors transferred the infant … where he exhibited seizures …

    “… pediatric neurologists came to the consensus that the contusions resulting in the subdural hematoma and bleed in Bautista’s brain were secondary to and caused by the trauma of the vacuum deliver …”

    … neither Freed nor McCoy informed the boy’s Spanish-speaking parents of the risks of and alternatives to a vacuum delivery. Neither doctor obtained written, oral or informed consent from the parents to perform the procedure …

    Vacuum extractors are helpful for some labours and they do save lives. The issue is around the risk / benefit of the procedure, where the doctor ought to be sure that the benefits of the procedure outweigh the risks. This is the same with any procedure, medication, recommendation etc. All interventions carry risks, so the onus is on the treating doctor to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks. For a woman experiencing a normal labour, a ventouse carries more risks than a normal birth.

    Arizona hospitals taking stricter stance on scheduled births

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Arizona hospitals are taking a stricter stance on doctors and mothers who want to deliver babies before full term.

    Banner Health is the latest to join a growing number of hospitals that are informing doctors and expectant mothers that they will no longer schedule deliveries before 39 weeks of pregnancy unless there is a medical reason to do so.

    Hospitals are citing medical research that shows even the last few weeks of a full-term pregnancy are critical for a newborn’s development. Babies who are born at 39 or 40 weeks are more likely to have improved brain, lung and eye development as well as lower risk of death compared with babies born earlier.

    The change marks a cultural shift for Phoenix-area obstetricians and expectant mothers who have grown accustomed to planning births due to schedules, convenience, family visits or other non-medical reasons.

    … Banner Health will stop scheduling elective C-sections or inducing births for pre-term babies beginning July 18. Banner’s decision will impact 19 hospitals …

    … convenience births represent 20 to 30 percent of all deliveries at some Valley hospitals.

    … 42 percent of babies born … last year were delivered before 39 weeks. Those deliveries covered the spectrum of births, including medically necessary births and natural births that occurred before full term. It included elective C-sections or early inductions of labor, although hospital representatives said they did not have reliable data on the number of such early, elective births.

    The rate of Caesarean births climbed steadily over the past decade … In Arizona, 26.2 percent of all births were by C-section in 2007, up from 16.1 percent in 1996 …

    … [the] reaction has been mixed among doctors and patients. Some doctors have said they’ve successfully induced labor or performed C-sections before 39 weeks and saw no reason to change.

    … doctors have become more receptive to the policy after they reviewed medical data and told their patients about the new hospital policies. It also has emboldened doctors pressured by patients who want to schedule a birth.

    “They changed their culture and basically moved forward and informed patients this is policy now,” …

    Banner Health cited nearly two dozen medical reasons that would prompt an early delivery. Some common medical reasons could include high blood pressure, kidney disease, pre-eclampsia or placenta previa, a condition in which the placenta is too close to the cervix.

    Organizations such as the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecology, Joint Commission and March of Dimes have advocated that the medical community adhere to the 39-week standard.

    … those final weeks can be critical for a newborn’s development. Full-term babies are less likely to have hearing, vision, feeding or birth-weight problems. Those final weeks of a pregnancy also give the lungs, eyes and brain enough time to fully develop.

    Babies born early are more likely to spend time in a neonatal intensive-care unit …

    Judgment errors rank among top reasons for lawsuits against obstetricians

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Errors in clinical judgment, miscommunication and technical mistakes are the three top reasons cited for medical liability cases against obstetricians …

    … Clinical judgment error was cited in 77% of the cases. Miscommunication was mentioned in 36% of the cases, and technical error was noted 26% of the time. Other reasons listed were inadequate documentation, administrative failures and ineffective supervision …

    The three most common allegations within claims were:

    Delayed treatment of fetal distress.
    Improper execution of vaginal delivery.
    Improper management of pregnancy.

    … liability in these cases rarely stems from a single act by one health professional but usually is the result of a series of missteps by a medical team …

    “Obstetrics has some unique vulnerabilities, most often involving situations in which a sequence of errors or oversights cascade into a crisis that can put mother and baby in jeopardy,” … “It is absolutely paramount that [obstetric] practices understand how these missteps unfold, and then focus on education and training initiatives designed specifically to help clinicians avert those mistakes.”

    … The big factors in success are team training and improved communication,” …

    … maternity is significantly safer than it was 50 years ago. Still, claims that go forward result in higher than average legal costs for the profession …

    The rate of obstetric lawsuits is less than one case per 1,000 births. But the average payment for a medical liability case is about $947,000, more than twice that of other specialties.

    Maternity Reforms: Good news for expanded birthing options

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Maternity reforms came into effect in November 2010 which gave women access to Medicare benefits for private midwifery care for the very first time. In addition, eligible midwives were to be able to order relevant tests and ultrasounds through Medicare. Medicare benefits are available to clients of eligible midwives for pregnancy and postnatal care, however there is no benefit for birth care at home.

    So, 6-odd months on, how are things looking for maternity care and what possibilities await us?

    Well, for a start, we had around 200 private midwives in Australia. 6-odd months into the reforms and we have at least 30-40 eligible midwives. Some of those 200 midwives have ceased private practice, leaving about 100 in private practice. So 30-40 eligible midwives represents a 30%-40% update of the maternity reforms by the current private practice workforce in just 6 months. That is phenomenal. As well as this, private practice has become a more attractive option to employed midwives now that private practice is medicare-funded and indemnified. So in months and years to come, we will have more midwives in private practice, and less in the hospital employed system. This is not a concern as the hospitals would not need their own staff: women will bring their midwife with them to the hospital when they come in to birth their babies. From the hospitals’ perspective, this is excellent news: they may benefit from significant cost savings in terms of recruitment, retention, staff education, pay-roll, rostering, management and so on.

    What about for women? Well, it is well-known that women benefit from exclusive one-to-one midwifery care through pregnancy, labour, birth and the postnatal period. When women are cared for exclusively by one midwife, we know that they experience lower rates of interventions without compromising safety, and they experience higher rates of satisfaction with their birth and new parenting experience. When women choose a Eligible midwife, they can access significant medicare benefits that do reduce the cost by quite a lot. Depending on the number of pregnancy and postnatal consultations a woman has, the benefits range from say $1,000 – $2,500.

    However, in order for eligible midwives to provide medicare-rebatable services, midwifery care needs to be delivered within a collaborative arrangement. And this does open the possibility for private midwives and private obstetricians to work together in collaborative practice. The huge benefit to the woman is that she has midwifery care right the way through, from early pregnancy to 6 weeks after her baby arrives, with the reassurance of having a known obstetrician who is available is needed. Women meet the obstetrician twice in pregnancy, and the obstetrician is available for labour and birth if his care is needed, and in this way, women can benefit from the ultimate in continuity of carer. This model of care is now available for the very first time in Australia history, and we are very pleased to be able to offer it to women. So far it is a very popular option! More to come.

    Women, docs misinformed about childbirth tools

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    A trio of studies … shows many women and doctors are ignorant about the adverse effects associated with caesarean sections, and many mistakenly believe vaginal births are more dangerous.

    … when it comes to decisions like whether they should have a natural childbirth, first-time moms follow their health-care provider’s lead.

    While listening to your doctor seems like the best idea, most women choose obstetricians over midwives, and obstetricians are more likely to opt for C-sections …

    Women who saw midwives were a bit more knowledgeable about their options …

    … “But regardless of the type of care providers they attended, even late in pregnancy, many women reported uncertainty about benefits and risks of common procedures used at childbirth. This is worrisome because a lack of knowledge affects their ability to engage in informed discussions with their caregivers.”

    A second study … shows younger obstetricians are more likely to recommend a C-section than a natural birth because they believe a C-section is less likely to cause sexual issues or urinary incontinence.

    But a number of recent studies show C-sections pose health risks for mothers and children.

    A New England Journal of Medicine study from 2009 says repeat C-sections double the risk of complications for newborns, including neonatal death.

    A 2007 study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal said C-sections increase a mother’s risk of cardiac arrest, infections and hemorrhage requiring hysterotomy.

    The third study shows family practitioners who deliver babies are much less likely to fear vaginal birth, and are more likely to opt for natural birth themselves or for their partners …

    Choose your care provider carefully! Interview several midwives or doctors before choosing one. Ask questions about the things that are important to you. For example, if you want a normal birth, ask your potential care provider what % of the births they attend are by caesarean. If you want a waterbirth – ask your care provider if they attend water births.

    Re-thinking Maternity Care Systems

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    … fewer than 30 per cent of women approaching their first birth attend prenatal classes, and books and the Internet are their primary sources for information about birth.

    Women attending obstetricians were more favourable to the use of birth technology and were less appreciative of women’s roles in their own delivery. In contrast, women attending midwives reported less favourable views toward the use of technology and were more supportive of the importance of women’s roles …

    Even late in pregnancy, questions about epidural analgesia, Caesarean section and episiotomy solicited the most “I don’t know” responses from women who took the survey. But women attending midwives appeared more knowledgeable on these issues.

    “Our findings suggest that obstetricians, midwives and family physicians are caring for different populations of women, with different attitudes and expectations towards childbirth,” … “But regardless of the type of care providers they attended … many women reported uncertainty about benefits and risks of common procedures used at childbirth. This is worrisome because a lack of knowledge affects their ability to engage in informed discussions with their caregivers.”

    A second study, published last month in the journal Birth, compared the attitudes toward birth technology and women’s role in their childbirth between the younger generation of obstetricians and their predecessors.

    Klein and colleagues surveyed 800 Canadian obstetricians who include birth delivery in their practice. Out of 549 respondents, 81 per cent of those 40 years or younger were women (vs. 40 per cent over 40 years of age) …

    … younger obstetricians were significantly more likely to favour the use of routine epidural analgesia and were more concerned about the perceived adverse effects of vaginal birth …

    … the younger generation sees Cesarean section as a solution to many labour and birth problems, and incorrectly sees C-section as safer for both mothers and babies … younger obstetricians are more likely to choose C-section for themselves or their partners, and are less likely to believe women missed out on an important experience by having a C-section.

    … “This study shows it’s generation, not gender, that affects obstetricians’ views about procedures like C-sections,” … “this could present a challenge to efforts to decrease C-section rates in both U.S. and Canada.” As well … up to a third of obstetricians were not evidence-based in their views. This creates concern about informed decision-making, especially for women who are uncertain about procedures that might be used in birth.

    … 75 per cent [of obstetricians] thought home birth was more dangerous than hospital birth … even though home birth by regulated midwives has been shown to be safe in Canada.

    … “These three studies taken together show us that educational leaders and provincial policy-makers need to seriously examine the educational models and experiences that appear to teach the non-evidence-based view that vaginal childbirth is primarily a dangerous activity,” … ” … we need more midwives … while obstetricians in training will need to have more experience with normal birth, and in the future, restrict their role to that of consultants to midwives … In this way they can maximize the appropriateness of their surgical training.

    “This means rethinking the design of the entire Canadian maternity care system. Finally, if women are to be empowered with the information that they need to dialogue with their providers, new forms of accurate information transfer will need to be developed.”

    Mums-to-be urged to stress less

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Mums-to-be shouldn’t worry unnecessarily about potential risks during their pregnancy, with Perth researchers suggesting that over-inflated perceptions of risk could be causing more harm than the risks themselves.

    … overestimating risk in pregnancy can lead to higher stress levels in pregnant women which in turn can have a negative impact on the unborn child’s future physical and mental health.

    … while obstetric care in Australia has come a long way, risk in pregnancy has not been eliminated altogether and the baseline risk for birth defects is estimated at up to 5% regardless of risk exposure.

    … “Pregnant women are inundated with do’s and don’ts during pregnancy, and along with this is an expectation that a healthy baby will be assured if a woman does everything right.”

    “This can lead to a heightened sense of awareness of risks, and to a feeling of personal blame if something goes wrong. This can all result in women over-estimating the risks involved with pregnancy, particularly exposures during pregnancy.”

    There are a number of factors that may influence the development of an over-estimation of risk … The Thalidomide disaster of the early 1960s and the suffering that it caused also diminished the public trust in the safety of medication during pregnancy.

    Dr Robinson said higher stress during pregnancy can also lead to increased stress for the mother postnatally.

    “A stressful pregnancy is linked to an increased risk for postnatal depression. What we are concerned about is that the stress caused by over-estimating risks present during pregnancy may be causing more damage than the feared risks themselves,” …

    “To promote accurate and sensible risk assessment, it is important to develop a relationship of trust between the patient and the person providing obstetric care, be it an obstetrician, midwife, GP or other professional involved in the perinatal period.”

    Dr Robinson said it would also be useful to support women who are anxious or worried about risks during pregnancy through increased antenatal education, and through available psychological services within maternity hospitals and the community.

    Is ‘tribal’ obstetric culture endangering mothers and babies?

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    How we are born, who supports mothers and the quality of the care provided during birth are vital to good public health and personal well being. But all is not well in modern birthing in spite of the advances of modern medicine.

    In the United Kingdom, health policies aim to keep childbirth normal or natural and dynamic …

    In Australia, a national Review of Maternity Services (MSR) in 2009-10 generated heated public debate. It spawned critiques of the medical control of birth and the self-interest of privately practising obstetricians.

    Its outcomes remain hotly contested, particularly over women’s access midwives and home birthing.

    Much health policy now promotes strategies to improve quality and safety as being critical to good patient-centred care.

    But the Maternity Services Review overlooked some problems in the culture of obstetrics.

    … It is their philosophy and practices that have shaped the system of modern hospitalized childbirth care.

    The obstetric profession … is accountable for making sure neither practitioners nor the systems of care cause harm to women and their babies.

    … several public inquiries … showed that harm was not just being caused but was covered up.

    … painful details of serious harm done by doctors to women in maternity units, including unnecessary hysterectomies, assault, and even genital mutilation.

    … Most worrying were the common patterns of denial: stories of damage to women were mostly not reported by colleagues out of professional or “tribal” loyalty.

    Until the cases became public, they were seen just as “mistakes” or medical “misdemeanours”, or as caused by individual “bad apples” in the profession.

    Even many anaesthetists, pathologists and midwives colluded in keeping silent about women’s tragedies.

    … Individual, institutional and systemic problems are interwoven. Viewing childbirth care as a field full of power though allows us also to see how it can be reformed.

    Encouragingly, the public inquiries point to changing times: women as health care consumers used the press to agitate for these inquiries and have lobbied for wider reform.

    Midwives have also been speaking up about problems in the system.

    Some obstetricians, too, are committed to the reform of professional practice …

    But we need to go even further.

    Obstetric undergraduate and postgraduate education also needs reform. More critical reflection on the profession’s gendered and racialized power is necessary, and greater awareness of public health and social issues.

    Professional bodies … should also be expected … to develop mechanisms for critical self-examination of attitudes toward women.

    Similarly, doctors need to engage seriously with midwives’ concerns about policies pushing “inter-professional collaboration”.

    Too often, these seem to be on medical terms and experienced as continued domination rather than an equal, respectful relationship.

    High quality obstetric care remains essential for women with complex medical problems … It should be effectively supported by public funds but obstetricians are accountable for how they use them.

    … “Birth is not an illness”. Quality and safety in maternity care should not be equated with providing obstetric care.

    Women deserve real choice and autonomy in childbirth. Improving care requires more than good hospital incident-reporting systems and support for staff to report medical errors. These are valuable but not enough.

    Cultural change in maternity care institutions and health professions, and in the broader society’s views of childbirth care, is essential if we are to keep mothers and babies safe from harm.

    C-section not best option for breech birth

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Physicians should no longer automatically opt to perform a cesarean section in the case of a breech birth, according to new guidelines by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada.

    Released yesterday, the guidelines are a response to new evidence that shows many women are safely able to vaginally deliver babies who enter the birth canal with the buttocks or feet first …

    … Since 2000, C-sections have been the preferred method of delivery in breech births. Studies suggested that breached births were associated with an increased rate of complication when performed vaginally.

    As a result, many medical schools have stopped training their physicians in breech vaginal delivery.

    The problem now, according to Dr. Lalonde, is that there is a serious shortage of doctors to teach and perform these deliveries.

    With the release of the new guidelines, the SOGC will launch a nationwide training program to ensure that doctors will be adequately prepared to offer vaginal breech births .

    The new approach was prompted by a reassessment of earlier trials. It now appears that there is no difference in complication rates between vaginal and cesarean section deliveries in the case of breech births.

    … Ms. Guy started the group after the birth of her second child in the fall of 2006. Although she had given birth to her first child at home with a midwife, Ms. Guy delivered her daughter in the hospital because of the baby’s breech position.

    “I was cornered into an unneeded and unwanted C-section because the obstetrician that I had didn’t have the experience to catch her,” said Ms. Guy.

    The aim of the coalition is to ensure that women know what their options are when it comes to breech birth. Ms. Guy believes that many women don’t realize that vaginal breech births are even possible.

    … The new decision to offer vaginal breech birth aligns with the SOGC promotion of normal childbirth – spontaneous labour, followed by a delivery that is not assisted by forceps, vacuum or cesarean section. In December of 2008, the society release a policy statement that included its recommendation for a development of national practice guidelines on normal childbirth.

    “The safest way to deliver has always been the natural way,” …

    … The SOGC believes that if a woman is well-prepared during pregnancy, she has the innate ability to deliver vaginally …

    In NSW, we have the Towards Normal Birth Policy which also promotes normal birth, waterbirth, vaginal breech birth, vaginal twin birth and VBACs. The policy directive recommends one-to-one midwifery care for all women having their first baby, twins, breech or VBAC. It’s a very encouraging policy.