Expecting our Little Brother in November!
Thursday, March 10, 2022
The President's Speech (Not the Movie, the MiddleEast Policy Statement)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle-east-live/2011/may/19/barack-obama-middle-east-speech-live
Thursday, March 3, 2022
Wednesday, March 2, 2022
C-Sections: When to do, When not to do
I was going to add: according to me, but this whole blog is according to me, right?
Obviously there are different comfort levels with both interventions and the lack there-of. I firmly believe that the most important thing in birth is that the Mom is WELL INFORMED and MAKING THE BEST CHOICES FOR HER. This can be different for different women in different situations. I definitely think natural and home birth are under-appreciated on the whole but they are not for everyone!
Anyway, here are my opinions about when a c-section is necessary versus when it is unavoidable (backed up by research which I will fail to attach here but I will provide if asked/needed by someone! Sorry I'm just too lazy). Obviously the majority of c-sections should be in unavoidable cases but that's unfortunately not the case. C-sections are absolutely necessary some of the time and are very important when they are needed!
So, some situations in which a c-section might be considered when it is actually NOT NECESSARY:
-The baby is suspected to be big, or "confirmed to be big" based on ultrasound. Late term ultrasounds are notoriously unreliable measures of the baby's size. They can be as much as 2 lbs off, and this is SO common that it JUST happened to one of my family members--they told her the baby was over 10 lbs and it was really 8 lbs 3 ozs half a week later, meaning it was probably under 8 lbs when they said that.
Even if a baby IS big, women can deliver enormous babies without any issue most of the time (with the right mental preparation). On my home-birth facebook group a Mom delivered a 46 week baby at home--13.5 lbs. My midwife told me when I was pregnant and I didn't get it--she said when labor is happening the Mom's body just changes and things will move out of the way that normally NEVER would. And it's true. Even when James was crowning, it didn't hurt at ALL unless I was having a contraction. Now how is that possible? Not sure! The body just moves.
Therefore, the baby suspected (or confirmed) to be large is never a reason for a c-section.
-Related, the Mom being small is never a reason for a C-section. For all the reasons I said above, even a small Mom (like, under 5 feet with narrow hips), most of the time can deliver even a large baby without a problem. True Cranio-Pelvic Diproportion (baby's head being too big for Mom's hips) is VERY rare--like probably 1/2 of 1 percent of births. Shoulder Dystocia (baby getting stuck in the hips) is both rare and can be worked with safely if it does occur.
Therefore, the Mom being small is never a reason for a C-section.
-Having twins is not reason for a c-section (and should not be reason for a scheduled c-section).
-Having a previous c-section (or several others) is not a reason for a c-section.
-Having your water break more than X hours ago is not a reason for a c-section.
-Having a premature baby may or may not be reason for a c-section.
-Having a breech baby may or may not be reason for a c-section (and should not be reason for a scheduled c-section).
-Having a transverse baby may be reason for a c-section (but should not be reason for a scheduled c-section).
-Having a truly superficial cord insertion is absolutely a reason for a c-section.
Obviously there are different comfort levels with both interventions and the lack there-of. I firmly believe that the most important thing in birth is that the Mom is WELL INFORMED and MAKING THE BEST CHOICES FOR HER. This can be different for different women in different situations. I definitely think natural and home birth are under-appreciated on the whole but they are not for everyone!
Anyway, here are my opinions about when a c-section is necessary versus when it is unavoidable (backed up by research which I will fail to attach here but I will provide if asked/needed by someone! Sorry I'm just too lazy). Obviously the majority of c-sections should be in unavoidable cases but that's unfortunately not the case. C-sections are absolutely necessary some of the time and are very important when they are needed!
So, some situations in which a c-section might be considered when it is actually NOT NECESSARY:
-The baby is suspected to be big, or "confirmed to be big" based on ultrasound. Late term ultrasounds are notoriously unreliable measures of the baby's size. They can be as much as 2 lbs off, and this is SO common that it JUST happened to one of my family members--they told her the baby was over 10 lbs and it was really 8 lbs 3 ozs half a week later, meaning it was probably under 8 lbs when they said that.
Even if a baby IS big, women can deliver enormous babies without any issue most of the time (with the right mental preparation). On my home-birth facebook group a Mom delivered a 46 week baby at home--13.5 lbs. My midwife told me when I was pregnant and I didn't get it--she said when labor is happening the Mom's body just changes and things will move out of the way that normally NEVER would. And it's true. Even when James was crowning, it didn't hurt at ALL unless I was having a contraction. Now how is that possible? Not sure! The body just moves.
Therefore, the baby suspected (or confirmed) to be large is never a reason for a c-section.
-Related, the Mom being small is never a reason for a C-section. For all the reasons I said above, even a small Mom (like, under 5 feet with narrow hips), most of the time can deliver even a large baby without a problem. True Cranio-Pelvic Diproportion (baby's head being too big for Mom's hips) is VERY rare--like probably 1/2 of 1 percent of births. Shoulder Dystocia (baby getting stuck in the hips) is both rare and can be worked with safely if it does occur.
Therefore, the Mom being small is never a reason for a C-section.
-Having twins is not reason for a c-section (and should not be reason for a scheduled c-section).
-Having a previous c-section (or several others) is not a reason for a c-section.
-Having your water break more than X hours ago is not a reason for a c-section.
-Having a premature baby may or may not be reason for a c-section.
-Having a breech baby may or may not be reason for a c-section (and should not be reason for a scheduled c-section).
-Having a transverse baby may be reason for a c-section (but should not be reason for a scheduled c-section).
-Having a truly superficial cord insertion is absolutely a reason for a c-section.
Tuesday, March 1, 2022
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
