Just read this earlier this morning and cried. I had HELLP Syndrome and an emergency c four weeks ago. The doctors at Georgetown recognized 4 days prior that I had slightly elevated labs and slightly elevated BP and may end up in trouble. My BP was never as high as the woman in the article yet the doctors knew when I needed the c section and got my daughter out just before my platelet count dropped close to transfusion level and my liver enzymes went sky high.

I spoke to another NICU mom who had the same symptoms as me but was at another hospital in MD and they sent her to the ER instead of L&D and she was told her intense liver pain (and clear symptom of HELLP Syndrome) was just the baby kicking her ribs and to suck it up and take Tylenol. She suffered for several days before getting the help she needed. It's outrageous.

I was already feeling nervous about prior plans to move out of the region before baby #2 but this article has me terrified to consider another pregnancy at a hospital that may not be as good at recognizing signs of trouble.

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, it's not a focus on infants that's the problem. It's our terrible healthcare system.

There was a huge spike in maternal mortality in Texas after they restricted women's access to healthcare (closing down PP clinics, etc). Scientists have been careful to say the data doesn't prove causation, but gee ...

This is horribly sad. I hope it helps spark a public outcry. Everyone trusts our healthcare system too much, then when the unthinkable happens they think it was just bad luck. If another physician has no option other than to stand by watching his wife die a horrific death, what are the chances for a regular person with no medical background?

ACOG has known about the shameful increase in the rate of maternal death for over 2 years and proposed a solution to it in 2015. It sounds like a pretty damn good start. I wonder if any progress has been made in the past 2 years on this levels of care initiative?

Here it is:
http://www.acog.org/Resources-And-Publications/Obstetric-Care-Consensus-Series/Levels-of-Maternal-Care

Oh, and thank you OP for posting this!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, it's not a focus on infants that's the problem. It's our terrible healthcare system.

I'm not so sure. They put a ton of resources into promoting breastfeeding, which has negligible if any benefits. The protocols developed by Canada to prevent pre-eclampsia wouldn't take that much money; just the organization/political will to do it.

That's what gets me--the solutions are not that expensive. Other countries, and even some states, have developed protocols and toolkits for addressing things like pre-eclampsia and hemorrhaging. We already know a lot of things that work. There's nothing but a lack of will.

Anonymous wrote:Those countries all have better healthcare, usually universally provided by the government, and a much stronger social welfare safety net. We choose higher infant and maternal mortality in this country because we do not want universal healthcare. We could make other choices as a nation if we wanted to.

Bingo. This is really sad, but it is what our country has chosen, and chooses again every time people vote against universal healthcare. "I don't have any obligation to pay for someone else's care" means "It's okay with me if other people die."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, it's not a focus on infants that's the problem. It's our terrible healthcare system.

I'm not so sure. They put a ton of resources into promoting breastfeeding, which has negligible if any benefits. The protocols developed by Canada to prevent pre-eclampsia wouldn't take that much money; just the organization/political will to do it.

I disagree that there are a ton of resources promoting breastfeeding. I'm a new mom struggling with breastfeeding and I'm struggling to get support. The hospital provided minimal service (and before my milk even came in with no follow up) and LCs are expensive. I went to a support group at the hospital but there were too many people there to get any specific guidance. Also, it's really tough to continue breastfeeding with a lack of paid maternity leave. Now Congress wants to get rid of the ACA mandates related to breastfeeding.

Well there's certainly been MUCH more institutional support for breastfeeding compared to maternal health. There's the whole Baby Friendly Hospital accreditation that takes money to organize, political capital to push, and then money and commitment for the hospitals to implement. Resources are also expended on reducing c-sections, which may reduce some morbidity/mortality, but fails to address the main causes of maternal death. And JAHCO's "Perinatal Core Measures" are almost exclusively focused on promoting vaginal birth and breastfeeding, not maternal health. http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/s11.pdf.

This is such an important article, but I'm so glad it didn't come out while I was pregnant. I don't think I could have handled it. It makes my heart ache for the families of those impacted, and angry that our government refuses to do everything in its power to promote maternal health.

The story made me cry. Poor man seeing his wife die, and losing his son.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, it's not a focus on infants that's the problem. It's our terrible healthcare system.

I'm not so sure. They put a ton of resources into promoting breastfeeding, which has negligible if any benefits. The protocols developed by Canada to prevent pre-eclampsia wouldn't take that much money; just the organization/political will to do it.

I disagree that there are a ton of resources promoting breastfeeding. I'm a new mom struggling with breastfeeding and I'm struggling to get support. The hospital provided minimal service (and before my milk even came in with no follow up) and LCs are expensive. I went to a support group at the hospital but there were too many people there to get any specific guidance. Also, it's really tough to continue breastfeeding with a lack of paid maternity leave. Now Congress wants to get rid of the ACA mandates related to breastfeeding.

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, it's not a focus on infants that's the problem. It's our terrible healthcare system.

I'm not so sure. They put a ton of resources into promoting breastfeeding, which has negligible if any benefits. The protocols developed by Canada to prevent pre-eclampsia wouldn't take that much money; just the organization/political will to do it.

Anonymous wrote:Those countries all have better healthcare, usually universally provided by the goverment, and a much stronger social welfare safety net. We choose higher infant and maternal mortality in this country because we do not want universal healthcare. We could make other choices as a nation if we wanted to.

Exactly. Instead, we elect a despotic charlatan and scumbag Republicans to the hill. Family values indeed.

Yeah, it's not a focus on infants that's the problem. It's our terrible healthcare system.

Those countries all have better healthcare, usually universally provided by the goverment, and a much stronger social welfare safety net. We choose higher infant and maternal mortality in this country because we do not want universal healthcare. We could make other choices as a nation if we wanted to.

Wow, that was difficult to read. Medical care of pregnant and post-partum women in the US is a total mess. I had to fight to get my high blood pressure to be taken seriously. So glad I did and everything turned out ok.

New investigation from NPR and Propublica:

http://www.npr.org/2017/05/12/527806002/focus-on-infants-during-childbirth-leaves-u-s-moms-in-danger

https://www.propublica.org/article/die-in-childbirth-maternal-death-rate-health-care-system

"American women are more than three times as likely as Canadian women to die in the maternal period (defined by the Centers for Disease Control as the start of pregnancy to one year after delivery or termination), six times as likely to die as Scandinavians. In every other wealthy country, and many less affluent ones, maternal mortality rates have been falling; in Great Britain, the journal Lancet recently noted, the rate has declined so dramatically that "a man is more likely to die while his partner is pregnant than she is." But in the U.S., maternal deaths increased from 2000 to 2014. In a recent analysis by the CDC Foundation, nearly 60 percent of such deaths are preventable."