Re: Uterine Rupture/Question & Answers/Csection

[Guest guest]

that are sue happy regarding malpractice I can understand doctors

wanting to be a little more cautious and having a little higher rate

on c-section to protect the safety of baby and mother so that they

are in essence protecting themselves to have the best possible

outcome which is a healthy baby and a mother to love that baby.

Some people are sue happy I agree. However, having a c-section is not safer for Mom. 1-4 Mothers have complications from infections all the way to pulmonary embolism. Avoiding the first primary c-section leads to better births in the future.

Another question is how many times has the ultrasound machine predicted a baby's weight to be 9+ pounds and the baby comes out a peanut? I've seen it a lot.

My state is in total disaster with medical malpractice insurance. We have Doctors leaving, nurses and dr's striking. It's terrible. However, medical mishaps DO happen everyday. If some of the Dr's would listen to these mom's in the first place they wouldn't be getting sued. Not all of them are bad out there, in fact the majority are not. But we do need reform in this country. Reform of all kinds, not just with capping malpractice awards. Let me give you a little of my case scenario.

36 weeks brought into L & D with excruciating pain. My pain ignored from one resident to another. Nurses are concerned but being ignored also. I'm sent home with gas pain or food poisoning. I stand up as my husband dresses me b/c I can't move in such pain. I pass out, vomit, come to in a chair with Dr. standing over me, what are you going to stay or go because there is nothing we can do for you here! So my husband and nurse help me to the car, ob nurse is feeling horrible and says you are leaving in worst shape than when you got here. Next morning we go back after kick counts provide no movement in 20 minutes. My belly is hard as a rock. The baby has a sinusoidal pattern on efm that everyone is confirming is a great strong heartbeat. Hours later after checking for kidney stones, gallbladder, ++++ D Deimer and being unhooked from the fetal monitor during these studies they go to rehook me to efm and my son no longer has a heartbeat. After confirming this with a 2 second very quick u/s they refuse to do an emergency C to get the baby out and try to resuscitate him saying it's been to long, but they really don't know how long it has been. They tell me I've had a placental abruption. I must deliver baby vaginally as it's much safer. I beg and beg for a c-section. Even with the epidural the pain is unbearable. Something is wrong, I tell my DH I'm going to die. Induction started at 1 p.m. at 10 p.m. after trying to break my bag of water and massive amounts of pit (I'm now tachy and at stroke level) they realize something else is very wrong. Call in Peri who does u/s. OOPS baby is breech, transverse breech. We need an emergency C. Peri gathers family, tells them I'm in really bad shape, have massive internal bleeding (placenta has been blocking birth canal that is why there is no blood). My 6 year old is brought in to say "goodbye". They open me up to find what?? Baby was so induced with pit, being breech he completely blew through the top of my uterus, completely floating in the upper abdominal cavity. My uterus was repaired, 12 units of blood over a 3 day period finally got me out of the hospital only to go to my son's funeral.

Now, I'm just curious...I'm not as sue happy girl but doesn't that sound a wee bit like serious med mal to you? Some of these Dr's need reform too! I'm in the field and have much respect and admiration for anyone in the ob field, but sometimes there are avoidable situations just as there are unavoidable situations.

Thanks for listening and I hope not to offend.

[Guest guest]

I hope that I did not offend anyone with what I said. I did not mean

to if I did. I just was stating an opinion, I am sorry that it went

so horrible for you on this. I am glad that you are able to be here

to day to put in your thoughts. I am not offended and I can

understand some anger and aggrevation at this.

> In a message dated 5/13/2003 10:10:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

> princessc4@h... writes:

>

> > that are sue happy regarding malpractice I can understand doctors

> > wanting to be a little more cautious and having a little higher

rate

> > on c-section to protect the safety of baby and mother so that

they

> > are in essence protecting themselves to have the best possible

> > outcome which is a healthy baby and a mother to love that baby.

> >

>

> Some people are sue happy I agree. However, having a c-section is

not safer

> for Mom. 1-4 Mothers have complications from infections all the

way to

> pulmonary embolism. Avoiding the first primary c-section leads to

better

> births in the future.

>

> Another question is how many times has the ultrasound machine

predicted a

> baby's weight to be 9+ pounds and the baby comes out a peanut?

I've seen it

> a lot.

>

> My state is in total disaster with medical malpractice insurance.

We have

> Doctors leaving, nurses and dr's striking. It's terrible.

However, medical

> mishaps DO happen everyday. If some of the Dr's would listen to

these mom's

> in the first place they wouldn't be getting sued. Not all of them

are bad

> out there, in fact the majority are not. But we do need reform in

this

> country. Reform of all kinds, not just with capping malpractice

awards. Let

> me give you a little of my case scenario.

>

> 36 weeks brought into L & D with excruciating pain. My pain ignored

from one

> resident to another. Nurses are concerned but being ignored also.

I'm sent

> home with gas pain or food poisoning. I stand up as my husband

dresses me

> b/c I can't move in such pain. I pass out, vomit, come to in a

chair with

> Dr. standing over me, what are you going to stay or go because

there is

> nothing we can do for you here! So my husband and nurse help me to

the car,

> ob nurse is feeling horrible and says you are leaving in worst

shape than

> when you got here. Next morning we go back after kick counts

provide no

> movement in 20 minutes. My belly is hard as a rock. The baby has

a

> sinusoidal pattern on efm that everyone is confirming is a great

strong

> heartbeat. Hours later after checking for kidney stones,

gallbladder, ++++ D

> Deimer and being unhooked from the fetal monitor during these

studies they go

> to rehook me to efm and my son no longer has a heartbeat. After

confirming

> this with a 2 second very quick u/s they refuse to do an emergency

C to get

> the baby out and try to resuscitate him saying it's been to long,

but they

> really don't know how long it has been. They tell me I've had a

placental

> abruption. I must deliver baby vaginally as it's much safer. I beg

and beg

> for a c-section. Even with the epidural the pain is unbearable.

Something

> is wrong, I tell my DH I'm going to die. Induction started at 1

p.m. at 10

> p.m. after trying to break my bag of water and massive amounts of

pit (I'm

> now tachy and at stroke level) they realize something else is very

wrong.

> Call in Peri who does u/s. OOPS baby is breech, transverse

breech. We need

> an emergency C. Peri gathers family, tells them I'm in really bad

shape,

> have massive internal bleeding (placenta has been blocking birth

canal that

> is why there is no blood). My 6 year old is brought in to

say " goodbye " .

> They open me up to find what?? Baby was so induced with pit, being

breech he

> completely blew through the top of my uterus, completely floating

in the

> upper abdominal cavity. My uterus was repaired, 12 units of blood

over a 3

> day period finally got me out of the hospital only to go to my

son's funeral.

>

>

> Now, I'm just curious...I'm not as sue happy girl but doesn't that

sound a

> wee bit like serious med mal to you? Some of these Dr's need

reform too!

> I'm in the field and have much respect and admiration for anyone in

the ob

> field, but sometimes there are avoidable situations just as there

are

> unavoidable situations.

>

> Thanks for listening and I hope not to offend.

[Guest guest]

,

1st I want to state that I am truly sorry for your loss I couldn't

imagine what it must be like to lose a child that way.

Thank you.

I do want to state something to the group regarding the issue with

the lady that refused a c-section. I know that statically there are

cases that don't necessarily need c-sections that happen because

either the medical team, primary nurse, and/or ob feels necessary

that a c-section might be needed as of one reason or another. Why

someone would be so adamant about not having one is beyond me due to

the fact that some many things can go harry at that time. I would

much rather see a little bit of an increased c-section rate for the

protection of baby and mother then see less of a rate and more not so

good outcomes.

I agree. What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first birth?

I just had a baby two months ago and with my own

experience I would have opted for a c-section 1st if needed then to

put her in danger of having a bad outcome.

Again, I agree. From my research and asking in the uterine rupture group, I have found that most mothers would lay down their lives to protect their children, even if that meant a "possibly" unnecessary c-section.

Nothing happened like that and I had a vaginal delivery but I

couldn't see someone being so selfish to completely refuse a c-

section without even considering what she is putting her baby through

or how the baby is doing as well as herself depending on the case.

I'm glad you added "depending on the case" because I think some women are being lead into c-sections for no reason, other than the physician's convenience.

Now I am not advocating that unnecassary c-sections are the right

thing but I can certainly understand why they are sometimes done. The

other point on this being that there is human error that can come

into play there is also a lot that is done on computers and machines

when it comes to monitoring a baby and mother while deliverying and

it is another possibility that as much as we hope that the computers

are right and are working properly there can be times when those are

not accurate as well.

Totally agree!

Ok so there is my thought on what has been said recently.

Hoffman

Thanks for offering up your views.

Clorinda

[Guest guest]

,

1st I want to state that I am truly sorry for your loss I couldn't

imagine what it must be like to lose a child that way.

Thank you.

I do want to state something to the group regarding the issue with

the lady that refused a c-section. I know that statically there are

cases that don't necessarily need c-sections that happen because

either the medical team, primary nurse, and/or ob feels necessary

that a c-section might be needed as of one reason or another. Why

someone would be so adamant about not having one is beyond me due to

the fact that some many things can go harry at that time. I would

much rather see a little bit of an increased c-section rate for the

protection of baby and mother then see less of a rate and more not so

good outcomes.

I agree. What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first birth?

I just had a baby two months ago and with my own

experience I would have opted for a c-section 1st if needed then to

put her in danger of having a bad outcome.

Again, I agree. From my research and asking in the uterine rupture group, I have found that most mothers would lay down their lives to protect their children, even if that meant a "possibly" unnecessary c-section.

Nothing happened like that and I had a vaginal delivery but I

couldn't see someone being so selfish to completely refuse a c-

section without even considering what she is putting her baby through

or how the baby is doing as well as herself depending on the case.

I'm glad you added "depending on the case" because I think some women are being lead into c-sections for no reason, other than the physician's convenience.

Now I am not advocating that unnecassary c-sections are the right

thing but I can certainly understand why they are sometimes done. The

other point on this being that there is human error that can come

into play there is also a lot that is done on computers and machines

when it comes to monitoring a baby and mother while deliverying and

it is another possibility that as much as we hope that the computers

are right and are working properly there can be times when those are

not accurate as well.

Totally agree!

Ok so there is my thought on what has been said recently.

Hoffman

Thanks for offering up your views.

Clorinda

[Guest guest]

,

1st I want to state that I am truly sorry for your loss I couldn't

imagine what it must be like to lose a child that way.

Thank you.

I do want to state something to the group regarding the issue with

the lady that refused a c-section. I know that statically there are

cases that don't necessarily need c-sections that happen because

either the medical team, primary nurse, and/or ob feels necessary

that a c-section might be needed as of one reason or another. Why

someone would be so adamant about not having one is beyond me due to

the fact that some many things can go harry at that time. I would

much rather see a little bit of an increased c-section rate for the

protection of baby and mother then see less of a rate and more not so

good outcomes.

I agree. What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first birth?

I just had a baby two months ago and with my own

experience I would have opted for a c-section 1st if needed then to

put her in danger of having a bad outcome.

Again, I agree. From my research and asking in the uterine rupture group, I have found that most mothers would lay down their lives to protect their children, even if that meant a "possibly" unnecessary c-section.

Nothing happened like that and I had a vaginal delivery but I

couldn't see someone being so selfish to completely refuse a c-

section without even considering what she is putting her baby through

or how the baby is doing as well as herself depending on the case.

I'm glad you added "depending on the case" because I think some women are being lead into c-sections for no reason, other than the physician's convenience.

Now I am not advocating that unnecassary c-sections are the right

thing but I can certainly understand why they are sometimes done. The

other point on this being that there is human error that can come

into play there is also a lot that is done on computers and machines

when it comes to monitoring a baby and mother while deliverying and

it is another possibility that as much as we hope that the computers

are right and are working properly there can be times when those are

not accurate as well.

Totally agree!

Ok so there is my thought on what has been said recently.

Hoffman

Thanks for offering up your views.

Clorinda

[Guest guest]

Sometimes there is gross medical negligence. In these cases there should be repercussions. You cannot put a price on the life of a baby. I know one family who wanted no money, they just wanted Dr.X to not be able to practice in the obstetrical field again. EVER. That didnt happen and they settled out of court for a large undisclosed amount of money.

That rarely EVER happens. (doctor's losing their license, that is) That's the problem. Many "bad" doctors go on and on injuring people and all they get is a slap on the hand. And even the results of those disciplinary proceedings are not available to the general public, so how can an average person on the street know to avoid this doctor? Check out the case of this doctor, who committed malpractice on a friend of mine: CBS News | Judging Dr. | March 6, 2001 13:56:48

Medical reform is needed in amny areas. In our hospital if a nurse feels that the Dr is way off base about something she has the right and in some cases I think the responsibility to go over his head and request a different physician evaluate the situation. I know of several nurses who have done that over the past few years. When a lawsuit is filed it usually names everyone from the admitting nurse to the nurse who discharged you plus everyone in between.

Do you know why that happens? Because if you name all the parties in a law suit, you are more likely to get someone to tell the truth about what happened, rather than take the fall themselves. If a nurse is not named in the suit, she can choose to say little about what happened and not suffer any consequences. If you name that nurse in the suit, she is much more likely to tell what really happened, in order to not be punished for something she did not do or had no control over.

The dilemna surrounding medical errors will continue as long as there are Health care facilities....It is just the way it is. All anyone can do is practice the best nursing care possible and document, document ,document! If you dont document your clinical findings and your response to them its as if you did nothing at all...

Beth

This is so totally correct. Document every little thing. But, it's not unknown for records to be changed, lost, etc. when a law suit is threatened.

Clorinda

[Guest guest]

Sometimes there is gross medical negligence. In these cases there should be repercussions. You cannot put a price on the life of a baby. I know one family who wanted no money, they just wanted Dr.X to not be able to practice in the obstetrical field again. EVER. That didnt happen and they settled out of court for a large undisclosed amount of money.

That rarely EVER happens. (doctor's losing their license, that is) That's the problem. Many "bad" doctors go on and on injuring people and all they get is a slap on the hand. And even the results of those disciplinary proceedings are not available to the general public, so how can an average person on the street know to avoid this doctor? Check out the case of this doctor, who committed malpractice on a friend of mine: CBS News | Judging Dr. | March 6, 2001 13:56:48

Medical reform is needed in amny areas. In our hospital if a nurse feels that the Dr is way off base about something she has the right and in some cases I think the responsibility to go over his head and request a different physician evaluate the situation. I know of several nurses who have done that over the past few years. When a lawsuit is filed it usually names everyone from the admitting nurse to the nurse who discharged you plus everyone in between.

Do you know why that happens? Because if you name all the parties in a law suit, you are more likely to get someone to tell the truth about what happened, rather than take the fall themselves. If a nurse is not named in the suit, she can choose to say little about what happened and not suffer any consequences. If you name that nurse in the suit, she is much more likely to tell what really happened, in order to not be punished for something she did not do or had no control over.

The dilemna surrounding medical errors will continue as long as there are Health care facilities....It is just the way it is. All anyone can do is practice the best nursing care possible and document, document ,document! If you dont document your clinical findings and your response to them its as if you did nothing at all...

Beth

This is so totally correct. Document every little thing. But, it's not unknown for records to be changed, lost, etc. when a law suit is threatened.

Clorinda

[Guest guest]

Sometimes there is gross medical negligence. In these cases there should be repercussions. You cannot put a price on the life of a baby. I know one family who wanted no money, they just wanted Dr.X to not be able to practice in the obstetrical field again. EVER. That didnt happen and they settled out of court for a large undisclosed amount of money.

That rarely EVER happens. (doctor's losing their license, that is) That's the problem. Many "bad" doctors go on and on injuring people and all they get is a slap on the hand. And even the results of those disciplinary proceedings are not available to the general public, so how can an average person on the street know to avoid this doctor? Check out the case of this doctor, who committed malpractice on a friend of mine: CBS News | Judging Dr. | March 6, 2001 13:56:48

Medical reform is needed in amny areas. In our hospital if a nurse feels that the Dr is way off base about something she has the right and in some cases I think the responsibility to go over his head and request a different physician evaluate the situation. I know of several nurses who have done that over the past few years. When a lawsuit is filed it usually names everyone from the admitting nurse to the nurse who discharged you plus everyone in between.

Do you know why that happens? Because if you name all the parties in a law suit, you are more likely to get someone to tell the truth about what happened, rather than take the fall themselves. If a nurse is not named in the suit, she can choose to say little about what happened and not suffer any consequences. If you name that nurse in the suit, she is much more likely to tell what really happened, in order to not be punished for something she did not do or had no control over.

The dilemna surrounding medical errors will continue as long as there are Health care facilities....It is just the way it is. All anyone can do is practice the best nursing care possible and document, document ,document! If you dont document your clinical findings and your response to them its as if you did nothing at all...

Beth

This is so totally correct. Document every little thing. But, it's not unknown for records to be changed, lost, etc. when a law suit is threatened.

Clorinda

[Guest guest]

Thank you for your intelligent answer. I guess I didn't state my question clearly enough. What I meant is: What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first time mom based SOLELY on personal desire and not on any medical need? There seems to be a trend toward this more and more.

Clorinda

What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

birth?

Here is my opinion on it:

I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to determine

if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by case

basis.

1) Health of the mother.

2) Health of the baby.

3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small or

fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that wouldn't

be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or there

are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should not be

delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I think

that natural laboring is the best way to go.

I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the question.

[Guest guest]

Thank you for your intelligent answer. I guess I didn't state my question clearly enough. What I meant is: What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first time mom based SOLELY on personal desire and not on any medical need? There seems to be a trend toward this more and more.

Clorinda

What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

birth?

Here is my opinion on it:

I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to determine

if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by case

basis.

1) Health of the mother.

2) Health of the baby.

3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small or

fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that wouldn't

be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or there

are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should not be

delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I think

that natural laboring is the best way to go.

I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the question.

[Guest guest]

Thank you for your intelligent answer. I guess I didn't state my question clearly enough. What I meant is: What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first time mom based SOLELY on personal desire and not on any medical need? There seems to be a trend toward this more and more.

Clorinda

What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

birth?

Here is my opinion on it:

I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to determine

if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by case

basis.

1) Health of the mother.

2) Health of the baby.

3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small or

fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that wouldn't

be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or there

are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should not be

delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I think

that natural laboring is the best way to go.

I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the question.

[Guest guest]

> > I do want to state something to the group regarding the issue

with

> > the lady that refused a c-section. I know that statically there

are

> > cases that don't necessarily need c-sections that happen because

> > either the medical team, primary nurse, and/or ob feels necessary

> > that a c-section might be needed as of one reason or another. Why

> > someone would be so adamant about not having one is beyond me due

to

> > the fact that some many things can go harry at that time. I would

> > much rather see a little bit of an increased c-section rate for

the

> > protection of baby and mother then see less of a rate and more

not so

> > good outcomes.

>

> I agree. What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

birth?

Here is my opinion on it:

I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to determine

if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by case

basis.

1) Health of the mother.

2) Health of the baby.

3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small or

fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that wouldn't

be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or there

are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should not be

delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I think

that natural laboring is the best way to go.

I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the question.

[Guest guest]

> > I do want to state something to the group regarding the issue

with

> > the lady that refused a c-section. I know that statically there

are

> > cases that don't necessarily need c-sections that happen because

> > either the medical team, primary nurse, and/or ob feels necessary

> > that a c-section might be needed as of one reason or another. Why

> > someone would be so adamant about not having one is beyond me due

to

> > the fact that some many things can go harry at that time. I would

> > much rather see a little bit of an increased c-section rate for

the

> > protection of baby and mother then see less of a rate and more

not so

> > good outcomes.

>

> I agree. What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

birth?

Here is my opinion on it:

I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to determine

if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by case

basis.

1) Health of the mother.

2) Health of the baby.

3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small or

fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that wouldn't

be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or there

are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should not be

delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I think

that natural laboring is the best way to go.

I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the question.

[Guest guest]

> > I do want to state something to the group regarding the issue

with

> > the lady that refused a c-section. I know that statically there

are

> > cases that don't necessarily need c-sections that happen because

> > either the medical team, primary nurse, and/or ob feels necessary

> > that a c-section might be needed as of one reason or another. Why

> > someone would be so adamant about not having one is beyond me due

to

> > the fact that some many things can go harry at that time. I would

> > much rather see a little bit of an increased c-section rate for

the

> > protection of baby and mother then see less of a rate and more

not so

> > good outcomes.

>

> I agree. What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

birth?

Here is my opinion on it:

I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to determine

if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by case

basis.

1) Health of the mother.

2) Health of the baby.

3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small or

fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that wouldn't

be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or there

are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should not be

delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I think

that natural laboring is the best way to go.

I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the question.

[Guest guest]

Re: [OBnurses] Uterine Rupture/Question & Answers/Csection

Again, I agree. From my research and asking in the uterine rupture group, I have found that most mothers would lay down their lives to protect their children, even if that meant a "possibly" unnecessary c-section.

I must say that I totally disagree that MOST mothers would "lay down their lives for their baby." I think that SOME mothers would do that...and some really DO do that.

Unfortunately, I have witnessed MOST mothers being concerned solely or primarily with themselves during the birth process. The majority of women make choices that are not really in their babies best interests. I have had some mothers adamantly insist that they do not care the least bit WHAT might be detrimental for their babies, they want what they want NOW. Period. You'd best believe I document everything single thing like that in my narratives. I would say that most mothers put their own interests first, and think of the baby secondarily. I would say that some do not care one whit about their baby. And, I would say that some (the minority) of mothers genuinely care about their baby and put their baby's interests first. That is ALWAYS a beautiful thing to behold.

This has been my experience over the years. Sorry to sound so harsh. I feel the reality is far, far different from the nice, sweet little myth that the media tries to sell us and we would dearly love to be the truth.

Grace Callahan

aka Change Agent

[Guest guest]

Re: [OBnurses] Uterine Rupture/Question & Answers/Csection

Again, I agree. From my research and asking in the uterine rupture group, I have found that most mothers would lay down their lives to protect their children, even if that meant a "possibly" unnecessary c-section.

I must say that I totally disagree that MOST mothers would "lay down their lives for their baby." I think that SOME mothers would do that...and some really DO do that.

Unfortunately, I have witnessed MOST mothers being concerned solely or primarily with themselves during the birth process. The majority of women make choices that are not really in their babies best interests. I have had some mothers adamantly insist that they do not care the least bit WHAT might be detrimental for their babies, they want what they want NOW. Period. You'd best believe I document everything single thing like that in my narratives. I would say that most mothers put their own interests first, and think of the baby secondarily. I would say that some do not care one whit about their baby. And, I would say that some (the minority) of mothers genuinely care about their baby and put their baby's interests first. That is ALWAYS a beautiful thing to behold.

This has been my experience over the years. Sorry to sound so harsh. I feel the reality is far, far different from the nice, sweet little myth that the media tries to sell us and we would dearly love to be the truth.

Grace Callahan

aka Change Agent

[Guest guest]

Re: [OBnurses] Uterine Rupture/Question & Answers/Csection

Again, I agree. From my research and asking in the uterine rupture group, I have found that most mothers would lay down their lives to protect their children, even if that meant a "possibly" unnecessary c-section.

I must say that I totally disagree that MOST mothers would "lay down their lives for their baby." I think that SOME mothers would do that...and some really DO do that.

Unfortunately, I have witnessed MOST mothers being concerned solely or primarily with themselves during the birth process. The majority of women make choices that are not really in their babies best interests. I have had some mothers adamantly insist that they do not care the least bit WHAT might be detrimental for their babies, they want what they want NOW. Period. You'd best believe I document everything single thing like that in my narratives. I would say that most mothers put their own interests first, and think of the baby secondarily. I would say that some do not care one whit about their baby. And, I would say that some (the minority) of mothers genuinely care about their baby and put their baby's interests first. That is ALWAYS a beautiful thing to behold.

This has been my experience over the years. Sorry to sound so harsh. I feel the reality is far, far different from the nice, sweet little myth that the media tries to sell us and we would dearly love to be the truth.

Grace Callahan

aka Change Agent

[Guest guest]

If you don't have to have a major surgery then why have a c-section.

I don't think that c-sections should be done unless medically

necessary for the mother and/or the baby.

Sorry that I didn't understand your question earlier.

> Thank you for your intelligent answer. I guess I didn't state my

question

> clearly enough. What I meant is: What is your view on scheduling

a

> c-section for a first time mom based SOLELY on personal desire and

not on any

> medical need? There seems to be a trend toward this more and more.

> Clorinda

>

> > What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

> > birth?

> >

> >

> > Here is my opinion on it:

> > I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to

determine

> > if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by

case

> > basis.

> > 1) Health of the mother.

> > 2) Health of the baby.

> > 3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

> > Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small

or

> > fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

> > Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that

wouldn't

> > be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or

there

> > are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should

not be

> > delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I

think

> > that natural laboring is the best way to go.

> >

> > I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the

question.

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

If you don't have to have a major surgery then why have a c-section.

I don't think that c-sections should be done unless medically

necessary for the mother and/or the baby.

Sorry that I didn't understand your question earlier.

> Thank you for your intelligent answer. I guess I didn't state my

question

> clearly enough. What I meant is: What is your view on scheduling

a

> c-section for a first time mom based SOLELY on personal desire and

not on any

> medical need? There seems to be a trend toward this more and more.

> Clorinda

>

> > What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

> > birth?

> >

> >

> > Here is my opinion on it:

> > I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to

determine

> > if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by

case

> > basis.

> > 1) Health of the mother.

> > 2) Health of the baby.

> > 3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

> > Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small

or

> > fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

> > Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that

wouldn't

> > be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or

there

> > are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should

not be

> > delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I

think

> > that natural laboring is the best way to go.

> >

> > I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the

question.

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

If you don't have to have a major surgery then why have a c-section.

I don't think that c-sections should be done unless medically

necessary for the mother and/or the baby.

Sorry that I didn't understand your question earlier.

> Thank you for your intelligent answer. I guess I didn't state my

question

> clearly enough. What I meant is: What is your view on scheduling

a

> c-section for a first time mom based SOLELY on personal desire and

not on any

> medical need? There seems to be a trend toward this more and more.

> Clorinda

>

> > What is your view on scheduling a c-section for a first

> > birth?

> >

> >

> > Here is my opinion on it:

> > I think that it would have to depend on the a few things to

determine

> > if a c-section would need to be done on a 1st birth on a case by

case

> > basis.

> > 1) Health of the mother.

> > 2) Health of the baby.

> > 3) Wether or not both could withstand the whole labor experience.

> > Sometimes there are those mother's that are so week that or small

or

> > fragile that can't handle the stress that labor puts on the body.

> > Sometimes the baby due to either size or health issue that

wouldn't

> > be able to withstand the stress of the labor or delivery. Or

there

> > are those that are in the wrong position (breeched) and should

not be

> > delivery vaginally if they can not be turned. Other then that I

think

> > that natural laboring is the best way to go.

> >

> > I hope that I was able to make it clear enough to answer the

question.

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

,

I must say that I totally disagree that MOST mothers would "lay down their lives for their baby." I think that SOME mothers would do that...and some really DO do that.

Unfortunately, I have witnessed MOST mothers being concerned solely or primarily with themselves during the birth process. The majority of women make choices that are not really in their babies best interests. I have had some mothers adamantly insist that they do not care the least bit WHAT might be detrimental for their babies, they want what they want NOW. Period.

I am totally shocked by this! This can't be true, can it? I would be interested to hear from other OB nurses about this. Do the rest of you find this to be true?

Clorinda

This has been my experience over the years. Sorry to sound so harsh. I feel the reality is far, far different from the nice, sweet little myth that the media tries to sell us and we would dearly love to be the truth.

Grace Callahan

aka Change Agent

[Guest guest]

,

I must say that I totally disagree that MOST mothers would "lay down their lives for their baby." I think that SOME mothers would do that...and some really DO do that.

Unfortunately, I have witnessed MOST mothers being concerned solely or primarily with themselves during the birth process. The majority of women make choices that are not really in their babies best interests. I have had some mothers adamantly insist that they do not care the least bit WHAT might be detrimental for their babies, they want what they want NOW. Period.

I am totally shocked by this! This can't be true, can it? I would be interested to hear from other OB nurses about this. Do the rest of you find this to be true?

Clorinda

This has been my experience over the years. Sorry to sound so harsh. I feel the reality is far, far different from the nice, sweet little myth that the media tries to sell us and we would dearly love to be the truth.

Grace Callahan

aka Change Agent

[Guest guest]

,

Thank you. That answer is more what I expected. LOL

Clorinda

If you don't have to have a major surgery then why have a c-section.

I don't think that c-sections should be done unless medically

necessary for the mother and/or the baby.

Sorry that I didn't understand your question earlier.

[Guest guest]

Beth,

I am somewhat surprised by your answer. Previously you have said that a woman should do what the physician recommends. I believe you said something to the effect, "If she doesn't want to take the physician's recommendation, then she should birth at home." Now you are saying it's the mother's choice how to deliver and "you can do it any way you want to." Can you please clarify where you stand? Thank you.

Clorinda

If a mom "wants" to have a c/section for her first delivery then that is as much her choice as having a baby in a big tub of water. When you are paying for your own delivery and making an informed choice then I feel you can do it any way you want to.People have elective surgeries every day and no one thinks a thing about it. Cesarean sections should be no different.

JMO.

Beth

[Guest guest]

Beth,

I am somewhat surprised by your answer. Previously you have said that a woman should do what the physician recommends. I believe you said something to the effect, "If she doesn't want to take the physician's recommendation, then she should birth at home." Now you are saying it's the mother's choice how to deliver and "you can do it any way you want to." Can you please clarify where you stand? Thank you.

Clorinda

If a mom "wants" to have a c/section for her first delivery then that is as much her choice as having a baby in a big tub of water. When you are paying for your own delivery and making an informed choice then I feel you can do it any way you want to.People have elective surgeries every day and no one thinks a thing about it. Cesarean sections should be no different.

JMO.

Beth