Eating during labor

[Anonymous]

"Many people are misreading the sister OB's concern. The ob/gyn is concerned about you vomiting for your comfort she is concerned that you will vomit on her! I have a friend who is an ob/gyn and never allows eating because someone threw up on her. "

Typo, it should read rge ob/gyn is NOT concerned about you vomiting for your comfort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"I spoke with my sister, who is an OB, about this just last night. Some women vomit during labor (about 7 cm is when this generally starts), so the no eating rule is for that purpose."

Many people are misreading the sister OB's concern. The ob/gyn is concerned about you vomiting for your comfort she is concerned that you will vomit on her! I have a friend who is an ob/gyn and never allows eating because someone threw up on her.

This might be one of the most horrifying things I've read. Part of being a doctor is putting up with bodily fluids. I should be weak with hunger, and perhaps need additional interventions because of this, on the off-chance that the doctor might get dirty otherwise? Too bad for the doctor.

This thread is doing a good job of reminding me why I'm planning a homebirth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Many people are misreading the sister OB's concern. The ob/gyn is concerned about you vomiting for your comfort she is concerned that you will vomit on her! I have a friend who is an ob/gyn and never allows eating because someone threw up on her. "

Typo, it should read rge ob/gyn is NOT concerned about you vomiting for your comfort.

This poor OB has been so vilified based on third-hand information. You have absolutely no idea what her concern is. Her sister asked her for information and the information has been presented totally decontextualized. Again YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HER CONCERN IS. Stop putting words in her mouth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This poor OB has been so vilified based on third-hand information. You have absolutely no idea what her concern is. Her sister asked her for information and the information has been presented totally decontextualized. Again YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HER CONCERN IS. Stop putting words in her mouth.

we do know that the OB's concern isn't grounded in science. so there's that.

and i think we can guess that you're no english professor. you can't vilify an unknown person because without an identity there can be no injury to reputation or esteem. and the comments aren't decontextualized. people have ascribed reasons to the OB's no-eating rule, whereas the OB's sister reported no reasons. the comments are perfectly in context, just perhaps inaccurate. you sort of undermine your case by overstating it with inappropriate words like "vilify" and "decontextualize." just something to think about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This poor OB has been so vilified based on third-hand information. You have absolutely no idea what her concern is. Her sister asked her for information and the information has been presented totally decontextualized. Again YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HER CONCERN IS. Stop putting words in her mouth.

we do know that the OB's concern isn't grounded in science. so there's that.

Actually, we don't even know if the PP's sister-the-OB is even concerned or agrees with the policy. It sounds like the original PP asked her sister-the-ob "why do hospitals have this policy?". Sister-the-OB said "it's because women often vomit in later stages of active labor." That's it. PP didn't say whether sister-the-OB agreed with the policy, was concerned about vomiting, claimed it was based on science, or anything else. She just gave an answer as to why the policy often exists. Period. Yet, many posters seem to be attacking/vilifying/slamming sister-the-OB for sharing a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This poor OB has been so vilified based on third-hand information. You have absolutely no idea what her concern is. Her sister asked her for information and the information has been presented totally decontextualized. Again YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HER CONCERN IS. Stop putting words in her mouth.

we do know that the OB's concern isn't grounded in science. so there's that.

and i think we can guess that you're no english professor. you can't vilify an unknown person because without an identity there can be no injury to reputation or esteem. and the comments aren't decontextualized. people have ascribed reasons to the OB's no-eating rule, whereas the OB's sister reported no reasons. the comments are perfectly in context, just perhaps inaccurate. you sort of undermine your case by overstating it with inappropriate words like "vilify" and "decontextualize." just something to think about.

WTF? Are you confusing "vilify" and slander? Who said anything about a tort suit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


WTF? Are you confusing "vilify" and slander? Who said anything about a tort suit?

vilify: to utter slanderous and abusive statements against; to lower in estimation or reputation.

dictionary. you should get one.

and by using "WTF" are you just solidifying the case against you being an english professor? or even really having a firm grasp on the english language? having to resort to profanity, even in acronym form, is the surest sign of a weak mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


WTF? Are you confusing "vilify" and slander? Who said anything about a tort suit?

vilify: to utter slanderous and abusive statements against; to lower in estimation or reputation.

dictionary. you should get one.

and by using "WTF" are you just solidifying the case against you being an english professor? or even really having a firm grasp on the english language? having to resort to profanity, even in acronym form, is the surest sign of a weak mind.

Not the PP you're picking on, but since I'm in a cranky, 3rd trimester, hormonal mood today let me just point out that the surest sign of a weak mind is going completely off topic to criticize a complete stranger's word choice. Did you understand what she was trying to get across by using the word vilify? Then why critique it or her? Give it a rest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


WTF? Are you confusing "vilify" and slander? Who said anything about a tort suit?

vilify: to utter slanderous and abusive statements against; to lower in estimation or reputation.

dictionary. you should get one.

and by using "WTF" are you just solidifying the case against you being an english professor? or even really having a firm grasp on the english language? having to resort to profanity, even in acronym form, is the surest sign of a weak mind.

you: absurd

[Anonymous]

Wow, it's amazing how some threads just spin out of control.

I think everyone needs to go have some sex, followed by a nice meal!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


WTF? Are you confusing "vilify" and slander? Who said anything about a tort suit?

vilify: to utter slanderous and abusive statements against; to lower in estimation or reputation.

dictionary. you should get one.

and by using "WTF" are you just solidifying the case against you being an english professor? or even really having a firm grasp on the english language? having to resort to profanity, even in acronym form, is the surest sign of a weak mind.

you: absurd

You: irrelevant to the original question and purpose of this thread. Can you stop?

[Anonymous]

agree that it depends on the provider. i had a midwife at WHC and she was all about bringing whatever I needed to get to the other side! granted, she and i knew that my ideal was no drugs and low-intervention birth but we were all aware that that plan would change if the circumstances warranted it and there was never a question about whether or not they could deliver the baby safely if I had just had a snack. that said, i was in the hospital for all of 40 minutes before my oh-so-patient son joined us so there was no time for snacking - barely time to pack the car though i will say my chipotle chicken tacos I had at 10 pm the night before carried me through beautfiully! Good luck and trust your gut. Think of it this way, we'd never do a strenuous activity (climbing a mountain, running a triathalon, etc) without energy reinforcments - why should this be any different?