I can't say I found it funny either. Personally I am not a massive fun of inductions, but the vast majority of babies who are induced come through unscathed and to suggest early induction = disabled baby is not helpful or sympathetic to women who make that birth choice.
There were some humourous aspects. However, some things were downright offensive.
I was induced (as a baby myself). I was hyperlexic as a child. No reading support needed here - in fact, some teachers used me AS the class reading support. DH was induced. He's now a chartered engineer. So to suggest that induction = academic failure simply isn't true and is hurtful and offensive.
How many babies actully have their eyes gouged out due to scalp monitoring, as suggested? (Little bit sensitive issue for me as I'm still not back to normal after my son took a jab at my eye.)
The worst point is that "hey, we medical people know exactly how crap induction is to a baby, so let's bully women into it." It read, to me, that medical people know inductions damage babies. And yet how much bullying do we women undergo to be induced, take drugs in labour, let people warm up the pokers et cetera?
As for the medical outcomes - didn't most of us have to do a PND questionnaire once we were considered "back to normal"? PND is a recognised medical that can't be diagnosed 5 minutes post-birth, same with PTSD. That's why the immediate outcomes HAVE to be about physical rather than mental health.
Registered User
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks