Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GW OBs have a very low c section rate.

and it just occurred to me, that's pretty awesome considering many midwife patients who are higher-risk are transferred there. or maybe those are the same patients really trying to avoid a C- even though they are high risk?

i also wonder what the rate of insurance coverage has to do with the # of C-sections the OBs perform. do you think that the OB population going to GW has crappier insuranc and thus the docs try harder to avoid for finanical reasons?

Excellent questions.
Anyone care to speculate?

Anonymous wrote:GW OBs have a very low c section rate.

and it just occurred to me, that's pretty awesome considering many midwife patients who are higher-risk are transferred there. or maybe those are the same patients really trying to avoid a C- even though they are high risk?

i also wonder what the rate of insurance coverage has to do with the # of C-sections the OBs perform. do you think that the OB population going to GW has crappier insuranc and thus the docs try harder to avoid for finanical reasons?

Look into a doula.

*ready with a c section if necessary

Another vote for GW. I just delivered there, and they were very patient while my baby's heart rate decelerated mutltiple times. There were on top of it, and ready with a c section if. Excess art, but let me try to push him out quickly (he's my second) to avoid the c section. I have no doubt that they would have sliced me open If baby needed it, which I support, but they certainly didn't jump there.

MFA is the name if the OB practice that delivers at. GW. They have office all over for appointments.

Feeling stupid. I went to the GW MFA and there are tons of docs listed for DC/MD and VA I thought they were all in the hospital, which is the group that is the low c-section rate? I am a bit confused as to who the guys that work with GW Midwives are

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need more midwife options in the Washington area hospitals.

We are very lucky to have as many as we do!

+1 to both. Midwifery in hospitals is an excellent care model. I am grateful we have the option here, but we need to advocate for more like this, both in DC and across the country.

Anonymous wrote:We need more midwife options in the Washington area hospitals.

We are very lucky to have as many as we do!

We need more midwife options in the Washington area hospitals.

GW OBs have a very low c section rate.

If you'd actually done any research at all, you'd see that GW MFA is a as-unmedicated-birth-friendly, your-chances-of-a-vaginal-birth-are-as-high-as-they-can-be kind of practice. Seriously, this has been talked about in the last week, and extensively in the recent past.

GW MFA is also very supportive of medicated and unmedicated birth. Go with them.

How far along are you? If it's still early, you have a good chance of getting off the wait list eventually.

I'd recommend Midwives of Medstar at Washington Hospital Center. They're great.

I'd stick with midwives if you want a provider with a low c-sectoin rate.

WHC - look at threads

I want to prevent a csection, so did my research and signed up with GW. They are already full and I am on the waitlist!

I want to deliver in a hospital. What other midwife group or even OB group would you recommend would give me the be best to help me avoid a c-section? Things like, how long do they let you labor, push, etc. If you had complications did they jump to c-section or try something else first? General feel of the practice towards birth? In VA the midwives I've found are part of OB groups so I don't know how they work differently than a practice like GW Midwives.

Thank you all for your help!