Reply to Question abotu c section/ epidural

Forum Index » Expectant and Postpartum Moms

Reply to "Question abotu c section/ epidural"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I had an emergency C-section. Early on in the induction we started losing his heartbeat. They did a spinal. 
[/quote]

Was the decrease in heart rate due to the induction?[/quote]

Cord was wrapped around him. They expect the heart rate to go down when you're having a contraction and then go back up, and his didn't recover. We were only an hour into the induction and I was 0 cm dilated and wasn't feeling any contractions yet. The scariest part was that the doctor was very calm about telling me he wanted to do a c-section etc. and then what felt like 15 OR nurses came bursting into the room to take me to the OR. It was terrifying. [/quote]

10 -29% of babies present with nuchal cords at birth. There is no reason whatsoever to c-section bases on nuchal cord. I delivered 2 large babies with nuchal x3 vaginally with no drugs.

This is a great example of fear-based maternal medicine, though. [/quote]

But babies do die from nuchal cords. Mine did (much earlier in pregnancy, not during labor). [b]And if you are an OB who’s had it happen, you are going to be super cautious.[/b] Because possibly unnecessary cs is better than whoops should’ve had a cs stillbirth. [/quote]

I agree this is probably true, but the problem is it lowers the standard of care for women.  My OB having a patient with a complication before me is not a risk factor in my delivery.  And OBs are not likely saying “you have no increased risk factors but I am pushing a surgical birth because of my own insurance/discomfort” because no patient would be comfortable having decisions made for them on that basis.[/quote]

[b]Hogwash. A possibly unnecessary C section will always be a million times better than a possibly dead baby[/b]. If given the choice, most people would rather focus on maximizing risk to themselves and minimizing risks to their baby and moving forward with the C-section—a safe and wonderful surgery we are lucky to have. You do realize the chainsaw was invented to cut the pubic bones of women when babies were stuck inside, right? And that early obstetric tools were basically just devices to dismember an infant so that the mother’s life could be saved? Mother Nature is a cruel when it comes to mothers and babies and you forget this at your own peril. [/quote]

Where did anyone say otherwise?  My point is the possibility of a dead baby is in no way impacted by whether the person delivering him or her has recently had a bad outcome of delivery.  Think about it in terms of any other field of medicine— would you want a really conservative orthopedic surgeon to suggest amputating a leg because a recent patient of his developed sepsis of the leg?

This is one of the things VHC is trying to control for by doing an AAR for every unplanned c-section. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics