Hospital Rejects Birth Plans - page 2
And a related photoshop contest, that I found funny: What do y'all think? I would personally be offended. I feel like this is telling patients, "Because we know it all, it is our way or the highway."... Read More
- 0Nov 29, '09 by BabyCatchrAppalling. I gave birth to my son in 1996 at a hospital in Davis, CA (West of Sacramento) with a midwife. They were very pro Bradley and VBAC. A friend of mine was in labor for 52 hours and delivered a 10 pound baby with his arm alongside his head after pushing for 4 hours. Mom & baby's heartrate was fine the whole way through. Too bad more hospitals can't be like that. However, I have seen completely uneducated parents insist on natural birth when their circumstances clearly dictated some sort of deviation. I'm sure it is exhausting for medical professionals to deal with parents who think they know better than the medical profession.
- 0Dec 1, '09 by PostOpPrincessI wonder why.
I can totally relate to the birth plan.
Nurses laugh at many of those, some even typed up.
But the midwife? the doula?
Have to disagree. I think they are very important to birth.
That's way too medical for me and I wouldn't have my baby there.
The birth plan on the other hand...I love telling my family and friends those get thrown out the window when the baby is in distress.....
- 0Dec 3, '09 by BabyCatchrBut a "baby in distress" is exactly why birth plans are written - not only to prevent distress, but to make sure it is diagnosed accurately. EFMs are notorious for inaccurately showing distress. Sometimes when a doppler is used or mom changes position, the distress suddenly disappears. Interventions are one cause of distress, and occasionally, real distress can be handled without surgery, ie, repositioning of fetal head in the pelvis, mom on left side or other position to get baby off cord, remove (or prevent) epidural which can cause low blood pressure, etc.