If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
I mentioned a while back that of all the women I know who've had
babies, the only one who didn't receive some kind of medical intervention at birth was the woman who had the baby at home. Everyone else was either induced, augmented, c-sectioned, or forcepsed. I exclude epidurals from the list deliberately (all but the home-birth friend had them). I was curious if there are any statistics in the US on exactly how many natural births occur in hospitals here. My hospital provides stats on percentage inductions, percentage c-sections, etc, but doesn't give percentage non-interventions, so I don't have a realistic idea of how many of their 'patients' get meds to assist with the birth. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
From many of the unmedicated birth stories that I read here, it seems like
there are always nurses in the background watching with admiration, or bringing in other nurses to watch, saying things like, "Wow, we don't see many women go without meds here" -- that type of thing. So it sounds like it's not as common as having an epidural. I think most women about to give birth, the "average" woman, is already planning her epidural, and most of her friends had an epidural. It's just a very very common aspect of childbirth most places. Not saying good or bad, right or wrong, just common. -- Jamie Earth Angels: Taylor Marlys, 1/3/03 -- Little Miss Director, who says, "No Mama, you have to do it THIS way!" Addison Grace, 9/30/04 -- My Little Communicator, who, when asked if she was ready to take a nap, shook her head no and said in Baby Signs, "Night night all done, downstairs." Check out the family! -- www.MyFamily.com, User ID: Clarkguest1, Password: Guest Become a member for free - go to Add Member to set up your own User ID and Password "Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward" wrote in message oups.com... I mentioned a while back that of all the women I know who've had babies, the only one who didn't receive some kind of medical intervention at birth was the woman who had the baby at home. Everyone else was either induced, augmented, c-sectioned, or forcepsed. I exclude epidurals from the list deliberately (all but the home-birth friend had them). I was curious if there are any statistics in the US on exactly how many natural births occur in hospitals here. My hospital provides stats on percentage inductions, percentage c-sections, etc, but doesn't give percentage non-interventions, so I don't have a realistic idea of how many of their 'patients' get meds to assist with the birth. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward wrote:
I mentioned a while back that of all the women I know who've had babies, the only one who didn't receive some kind of medical intervention at birth was the woman who had the baby at home. Everyone else was either induced, augmented, c-sectioned, or forcepsed. I exclude epidurals from the list deliberately (all but the home-birth friend had them). I was curious if there are any statistics in the US on exactly how many natural births occur in hospitals here. My hospital provides stats on percentage inductions, percentage c-sections, etc, but doesn't give percentage non-interventions, so I don't have a realistic idea of how many of their 'patients' get meds to assist with the birth. I doubt it, since people vary a lot in what they consider a "natural" birth. I think nationally, inductions are around 40 percent now. C-sections are, what, 27 percent? Augmentation is, I think, higher than induction, but I'm not sure of the actual number. Instrumental delivery I forget. And then there are considerations of what other interventions are acceptable to you: IV? continuous or intermittent EFM? managed third stage? immediate cord clamping? And, of course, there's also the question of how many women are attempting to *achieve* a natural birth (by whatever your definition is). I think your best bet to figure your odds of success is to ask potential caregivers about each intervention and see a) whether they're fine with your refusing it (or under what circumstances they'd be uncomfortable with avoiding it) and b) how experienced they are with births not using that intervention. If they're not comfortable with your avoiding the intervention or if they rarely do births without that intervention, then that's a red flag. Best wishes, Ericka |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
How about this statistic: how many epidural births end up needing
further intervention (augmentation, induction, c-section, forceps, etc)? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward wrote:
How about this statistic: how many epidural births end up needing further intervention (augmentation, induction, c-section, forceps, etc)? Hard to say. Numbers are all over. Epidurals increase c-section rates in some studies and not in others, but appear to be especially likely to increase c-section rates if you get them early in labor or if you're a first timer. They can also have an indirect effect. Epidurals increase the risk of maternal fever, which can lead to intervention because it's not known if the fever is from the epidural or an infection. Epidurals lessen the likelihood of a good presentation, so they can make labor longer and more difficult which can lead to augmentation, instrumental delivery, or c-section. A few studies found a lower concentration of oxytocin (and other substances) in the blood of women with epidurals, which can lead to longer labor (and thus augmentation or other intervention). One Norwegian study found that half of all nulliparas were augmented, but it was 85 percent of those with epidurals and 39 percent of those without. I don't know how representative that is in the US, but my hunch is that it's at least that bad. Best wishes, Ericka |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
Thanks for that info, Ericka. This seems to correspond to the
anecdotal evidence that I've seen... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
In article ,
Ericka Kammerer wrote: Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward wrote: How about this statistic: how many epidural births end up needing further intervention (augmentation, induction, c-section, forceps, etc)? Hard to say. Numbers are all over. Epidurals increase c-section rates in some studies and not in others, but appear to be especially likely to increase c-section rates if you get them early in labor or if you're a first timer. I wonder if epidurals ever help _avoid_ further interventions? With my first, I had a "walking" epidural at 7 cm. It allowed me about half an hour to rest, something I hadn't been able to do for two days (and nights) beforehand. It wasn't a long rest, but it made all the difference in the world. I was mildly insane by then, after a very stressful (although medically dandy) labor. For me -- let me say that again: for me -- the epidural really helped me get my energy up, and to focus a bit, for the rest of labor and delivery. Of course, maybe if I hadn't had an epidural I would've delivered on the first push. We'll never know. -- Sara accompanied by TK, number two, due in April of 2006 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
I wonder if epidurals ever help _avoid_ further interventions?
in the case when they lower blood pressures, a clear yes in my 2nd, I wonder what would have happened if I hadn't have got the epidural when I did, I wasn't just loosing the ability to control things, I was way past that point, but I was trying, I'd make it through half to 2/3rds of the contraction and then just be way out of control, that out of controlness was doing me harm, my blood pressure and heart rate were doing wierd things, as was the babies, so epidural brought those things back undercontrol, once my obs were normal, hers became normal too. Why I was completely unable to control things I do not know it was very different from my first when I was out of control, requested an epidural, then got things back under control and stayed that way for over an hour, it was potentially the amounts of pethidine in my system that meant when labour started I just could not get it sorted, however hard I tried. Had I not got the epidural, we were both at risk, I don't know what they would have done, but nothing would not have been an option, it wasn't a case of it just being unpleasant (which it was) as they kept saying to me, you need to control this, you need to breath, for the babies sake (and they weren't just using that as a technique, they were bleeping the doctor too) Anne |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
Anonymama wrote: In article , Ericka Kammerer wrote: Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward wrote: How about this statistic: how many epidural births end up needing further intervention (augmentation, induction, c-section, forceps, etc)? Hard to say. Numbers are all over. Epidurals increase c-section rates in some studies and not in others, but appear to be especially likely to increase c-section rates if you get them early in labor or if you're a first timer. I wonder if epidurals ever help _avoid_ further interventions? With my first, I had a "walking" epidural at 7 cm. It allowed me about half an hour to rest, something I hadn't been able to do for two days (and nights) beforehand. It wasn't a long rest, but it made all the difference in the world. I was mildly insane by then, after a very stressful (although medically dandy) labor. For me -- let me say that again: for me -- the epidural really helped me get my energy up, and to focus a bit, for the rest of labor and delivery. I sometimes wonder if I'd had an epidural and able to rest, if my first woundnt have ended up a c-section. Of course, maybe if I hadn't had an epidural I would've delivered on the first push. We'll never know. My second (an unmedicated VBAC) had a 3++ hour pushings stage. Hate to think how long it would have been if I had an epidural! Mary W. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Managed VS natural births
My second (an unmedicated VBAC) had a 3++ hour pushings stage. Hate to
think how long it would have been if I had an epidural! malposition? I had a 2+ hr pushing stage with my 2nd and lots of people said ooh, she was bigger than your first, true, she was almost 3 pounds bigger, but the issue was she was posterior and stayed that way, she could have been a 4lber and still taken a while to get out. I did have an epidural, but it didn't seem to hinder me, I was squatting at times! Anne |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AL: Court issues history-making decision in child custody case | Dusty | Child Support | 1 | August 3rd 05 01:07 AM |
Autism, Mercury and the California Numbers | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 52 | July 20th 05 08:04 AM |
Attn RNs: Ongoing Obstetric Rape of Birth | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | October 30th 04 12:19 AM |
Sad story | Plissken | Pregnancy | 181 | July 20th 04 12:14 AM |
Midwives & Home birth vs. an OB & hospital ? | LSU Grad of '89 | Pregnancy | 54 | October 12th 03 09:26 PM |