Printable View
Decided to write this today after I dropped the kids off at school. I was reading an email from someone seeking birth support under the care of her 'VBAC friendly' ob, who will let women have a trial of labour for 6-8 hours. We really need to redefine VBAC-friendly!
VBAC Sabotage - Is Your Doctor REALLY VBAC Friendly?
Some more I've heard:
- Go to hospital as soon as the labour starts
- Bung in your arm/hand "just in case"
- Epidural "just in case"
Thanks Kelly, this is very informative and timely for me.
There was one point in the article which I was hoping you could give me a bit more info on
'Some labour is so much better for your baby than no labour.'
Are you able to share the benefits etc?
I think for many women considering a VBAC (and definatley myself) one of the biggest fears is that it doesn't eventuate and ends in a CS. It would be good to know that even a failed attempt has benefits for your baby.
Awesome!! I see this so much in threads.
I was going to add those others in too Ren, but I wanted to keep it short and simple, but I can never seem to do that LOL. I may as well whack them in there - even if I just put them in as extras you may hear at the end. I love giving out all this info but I worry about overwhelming people :)
Miss E - a great idea, I will work on that article too now :) Ohhhhhh I have such a massive to-do and to-finish-writing list. Doesn't help when I get on a rant like this one and have to write it or I will explode LOL :)
Gah I couldn't help it. Thanks Ren :p
Oooohh a full article, that sounds fantastic! I was expecting a couple of dot points, but clearly there's a lot more to it than I thought. Looking forward to what will no doubt be a very good read.:
Miss E- a couple of things are that your baby chooses the arrival date with a spontaneous labour, so they are ready to be born. This spontaneous commencement of labour and the progression of labour starts off the flow of hormones that are a huge benefit to mother and baby.
Interesting read, Kelly. Especially as I had just that sort of hospital "treatment". And what a treat it was. However...
Actually, it doesn't. Because you are not allowed to say "no" when someone wants to do something to your body that you are not happy about. You say no and they say tough luck, princess.:
Epidurals result in more operative births, from forceps, to vacuum, to caesarean sections.
A simple, ‘no thanks,’ will suffice.
Once upon a time I believed that too...:
If your baby and your body are well and happy, then you can rightfully refuse any medical procedure being offered to you.
If they do something without your consent, they can be sued.... it has happened before.
They had my husband's consent, so according to my notes they had consent, therefore did nothing wrong. It sucks. When the notes say, with the midwife's writing, "obtained consent" then what good does just SAYING no do when they have written yes?
I dont know the law over there, if they can get consent from either adult, I assume you were saying no to them? So I am not sure if the fault lies with the hospital or not. But hopefully most couples have an agreement between them with the woman's wishes to be protected at all times. I honestly don't know if I could be with a partner who thought he had control or rights over my body.
Sorry Kelly, I'm hijacking a little bit. Examples include I agreed to monitoring for 10 mins, when I asked for the monitor off 15 mins later it was refused and no-one would help me take it off so I could go to the loo. Or I refused an episiotomy when first suggested, so when they did it they didn't tell me and asked DH, who was scared out of his wits and thought it was vital (I have no idea if it was or not). Same with drugs - because I said no, they were offered every half-hour and my refusal noted (this made DH very jittery, as "drugs wouldn't be offered if you didn't need them"). They didn't note that I told them I was aware of drugs and would ask if I wanted them so stop offering! So they had consent, if you want it technically, they just refused to listen to me saying "no" when it didn't suit them.
That is a pretty naive statement. You need to prove it, you need to be able to state who did what (not so easy when you are in labour with multiple people 'treating' you), and you need to have a certain amount of 'injury' before you can even begin court proceedings.:
i am another who had multiple procedures performed AFTER i actively dissented. I used to believe you could refuse treatment too.
Someone successfully sued in Canada I think for an uninformed c/s. She got something like a million dollars.
Perhaps this is part of why the intervention rates are lower when you have a doula? The medical staff probably see them as a "rational" (ie. not the "swept up in the birth" mother and father) witness and are more careful to follow consent.
I'd say so ;) They know they wont get away with so much :)
Or there is a witness to their potential assaults.: