Feeling a big anxious about induction vs. c-section

I shouldn't be posting, I should really be getting things DONE around here,
but this has been going on in my head the last week.

Initially, when we were given the diagnosis of spina bifida, we were told a
c-section was recommended. It made sense what the doctor said (less chance
of injury to the lesion), and we were planning on doing that.

Well, the next three or physicians said there was no reason I couldn't do a
vaginal birth. I was really ecstatic about that, and they pretty much laid
any anxieties about injury to the site to rest. Or so I thought. This
week, I keep thinking about this. What if I damage my baby more by having a
vaginal birth? Are these other doctors right? How do I KNOW? Obviously,
I'm worrying. Didn't think I'd do that after I made up my mind!

We are also facing an induction now rather than being "allowed" to go into
labor on my own. I really, really dread, fear, despise the idea of an
induction. I'm just afraid that I'll go through the induction, end up with
a c-section, and have a harder recovery than if I go for a c-section in the
first place. We still haven't been scheduled for an induction, so I might
still have a chance to go into labor on my own. That is what I want the
most, but I've all of a sudden got a ton of worries heaping up on me! I'm
sure it's a bit normal, but I figured I'd post here. If I talk about it, I
just end up crying and getting the other people in my life anxious. They
are probably the ones causing that anxiety in a way because some people are
questioning the wisdom of the doctors for allowing me to have a vaginal
birth. My mother keeps sharing stories of people she's talked to who think
a c-section is absolutely warranted. A couple of these are nurses and
chiropracters or people who've had kids with sb (she knows a lot of
people!).

I'm really just trying to work this out in my head. Thanks for listening.



--
Joy

Rose 1-99
Iris 2-01
Spencer 3-03
# 4 Sept 2005

Joybelle wrote:

Initially, when we were given the diagnosis of spina bifida, we were told a
c-section was recommended. It made sense what the doctor said (less chance
of injury to the lesion), and we were planning on doing that.

Well, the next three or [sic] physicians said there was no reason I couldn't
do a
vaginal birth. I was really ecstatic about that, and they pretty much laid
any anxieties about injury to the site to rest. Or so I thought. This
week, I keep thinking about this. What if I damage my baby more by having a
vaginal birth? Are these other doctors right? How do I KNOW? Obviously,
I'm worrying. Didn't think I'd do that after I made up my mind!


I was glad to see that Joybelle's "next three or [sic] physicians said there
was no reason I couldn't do a vaginal birth."

Any research that supports vaginal birthing of babies with spina bifida is
only going to be buttressed by the fact that most statistics about injuries
to babies from vaginal births (like the recent fraudulent Hannah et al.
c-section-in-all-breeches promotion) are derived from vaginal births where
the birth canal was senselessly closed the "extra" up to 30%.

CHIROPRACTORS...

Joybelle also wrote:

My mother keeps sharing stories of people she's talked to who think
a c-section is absolutely warranted. A couple of these are nurses and
chiropracters or people who've had kids with sb (she knows a lot of
people!).


Chiropractors offering advice regarding birthing babies - birthing babies
with or without spina bifida - should be pointing out that obstetricians are
senselessly closing birth canals up to 30% and senselessly KEEPING birth
canals closed the "extra" up to 30% when babies get stuck.

NOTE: Talk to a licensed chiro about this...

I am unlicensed - voluntarily...

See Chiro x-ray fraud (also: Why Dr. Gastaldo is unlicensed -
voluntarily...)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3899

For some reason, the just cited "Chiro x-ray fraud" post lost some letters
in transmission, but it is still legible.

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
Hillsboro, Oregon
USA

Joy,

Disclaimers: I don't know anything about your diagnosis of spina
bifida, and I don't know anything about birthing spina bifida babies.

But...

How and when was the spina bifida diagnosed? Ultrasound? when? Has
the diagnosis been confirmed? Another ultrasound? When? Have you
gotten a second opinion? I think this is too serious a question to
leave up to the judgement of a single care provider. I strongly
recommend a second opinion.

Next, I know little about the dangers about birthing a spina bifida
baby. I would suspect, however that there must be degrees of the
condition, and that is what your caregivers are talking about when
they talk about the safety of vaginal birth versus c-section. It
would help to know just to what degree they have diagnosed the seriousness
of the condition. Yet another reason for a second opinion.

Finally, I am *really* suspicious about the induction talk. If they
think that it is safe to birth vaginally rather than by c-section,
what possible advantage could there be to induction? I would ask for
study results that show that induction provides better outcomes. I
would doubt that they can produce them. I might even ask Ericka to
see if she could find any information on vaginally birthing spina bifida
babies.

Wishing you the best,
Larry

Joybelle writes:
: I shouldn't be posting, I should really be getting things DONE around here,
: but this has been going on in my head the last week.

: Initially, when we were given the diagnosis of spina bifida, we were told a
: c-section was recommended. It made sense what the doctor said (less chance
: of injury to the lesion), and we were planning on doing that.

: Well, the next three or physicians said there was no reason I couldn't do a
: vaginal birth. I was really ecstatic about that, and they pretty much laid
: any anxieties about injury to the site to rest. Or so I thought. This
: week, I keep thinking about this. What if I damage my baby more by having a
: vaginal birth? Are these other doctors right? How do I KNOW? Obviously,
: I'm worrying. Didn't think I'd do that after I made up my mind!

: We are also facing an induction now rather than being "allowed" to go into
: labor on my own. I really, really dread, fear, despise the idea of an
: induction. I'm just afraid that I'll go through the induction, end up with
: a c-section, and have a harder recovery than if I go for a c-section in the
: first place. We still haven't been scheduled for an induction, so I might
: still have a chance to go into labor on my own. That is what I want the
: most, but I've all of a sudden got a ton of worries heaping up on me! I'm
: sure it's a bit normal, but I figured I'd post here. If I talk about it, I
: just end up crying and getting the other people in my life anxious. They
: are probably the ones causing that anxiety in a way because some people are
: questioning the wisdom of the doctors for allowing me to have a vaginal
: birth. My mother keeps sharing stories of people she's talked to who think
: a c-section is absolutely warranted. A couple of these are nurses and
: chiropracters or people who've had kids with sb (she knows a lot of
: people!).

: I'm really just trying to work this out in my head. Thanks for listening.
:


: --
: Joy

: Rose 1-99
: Iris 2-01
: Spencer 3-03
: # 4 Sept 2005

wrote in message ...
How and when was the spina bifida diagnosed? Ultrasound? when? Has
the diagnosis been confirmed? Another ultrasound? When? Have you
gotten a second opinion? I think this is too serious a question to
leave up to the judgement of a single care provider. I strongly
recommend a second opinion.

Larry, you haven't been following Joy's pregnancy very closely, but her baby
clearly HAS spina bifida, along with hydrocephalus. Multiple ultrasounds
have confirmed it (I think it was initially diagnosed around mid-pregnancy),
and Joy has seen many specialists throughout her pregnancy. I think it's
pretty safe to say that the degree of spina bifida is well known at this
point. The last thing she needs is to see any more!

Finally, I am *really* suspicious about the induction talk. If they
think that it is safe to birth vaginally rather than by c-section,
what possible advantage could there be to induction? I would ask for
study results that show that induction provides better outcomes. I
would doubt that they can produce them. I might even ask Ericka to
see if she could find any information on vaginally birthing spina bifida
babies.

Yes, this is where I'm confused, too. Given that induction tends to produce
more likelihood of uterine hyperstimulation and thereby produces greater
risk of fetal distress, you'd think inducing would be a bad idea. I'm
suspecting that it has something to do with the hydrocephalus (the longer
the baby stay in, the greater the likelihood of true CPD caused by the
hydrocephalus), but that's only a guess.
--
Be well, Barbara

Circe wrote:

Yes, this is where I'm confused, too. Given that induction tends to produce
more likelihood of uterine hyperstimulation and thereby produces greater
risk of fetal distress, you'd think inducing would be a bad idea. I'm
suspecting that it has something to do with the hydrocephalus (the longer
the baby stay in, the greater the likelihood of true CPD caused by the
hydrocephalus), but that's only a guess.

That's what I'd be wondering. If it's safe to have a
vaginal birth and the issue is possible CPD, then you are
not likely to end up with a crash c-section because of it.
That's likely to be a situation where you have plenty of
time to realize things aren't progressing well and
moving to a c-section if that seems warranted. And really,
you don't have to go to the mat to avoid the c-section if
you don't want to. You can have pretty liberal criteria
for throwing in the towel with the vaginal birth, if that
seems to make sense to you and you want to avoid going into
an emergent c-section already wiped out. If the decision
is elective c-section vs. trying for a vaginal birth, then
you're certainly no worse off if you try for a vaginal birth
and decide that you'll opt for the c-section if things aren't
going swimmingly.
As far as the safety of vaginal birth with spina
bifida, it really seems to get down to precisely where the
lesion is, and how exposed it is, and such. When I looked
at it, it seems like you just really needed to sit down
the the test results and a specialist and make a decision.
It certainly doesn't seem like vaginal birth is a bad
idea per se, but the details really matter in this case.
If I were in that situation, I'd just put my concerns in
front of the specialist and say, "I want a vaginal birth,
but I hear lots of conflicting things and I'm scared.
Convince me that I am not unduly risking my baby by attempting
a vaginal birth." A good specialist should be able to
back up his or her recommendation with some solid facts
that should put your mind at ease.

Best wishes,
Ericka

Pregnant? Please show this post to your chiropractor and call his/her
attentionn to the chiro x-ray fraud mentioned at the end of this post.

Chiro x-ray fraud may be perpetuating obstetric fraud.

(CHIROS: Obstetricians are senselessly closing birth canals up to 30% and
keeping birth canals closed the "extra" up to 30% when babies get stuck - as
they pull with hands, forceps and vacuums - sometimes pulling so hard they
rip spinal nerves out of tiny spinal cords.)




BABIES AND "CPD" - FOR NEW READERS...

Circe wrote:

Yes, this is where I'm confused, too. Given that induction tends to produce
more likelihood of uterine hyperstimulation and thereby produces greater
risk of fetal distress, you'd think inducing would be a bad idea. I'm
suspecting that it has something to do with the hydrocephalus (the longer
the baby stay in, the greater the likelihood of true CPD caused by the
hydrocephalus), but that's only a guess.

New readers,

CPD is the acronym for cephalopelvic disproportion (sometimes called
"fetopelvic disproportion")...

Obstetricians focus exclusively on the CEPHALO part (the baby) and pretend
that they aren't grossly influencing the PELVIC part - routinely closing
mothers' pelves up to 30% and routinely KEEPING birth canals closed the
"extra" up to 30% when babies get stuck.

Barbara's (Circe's) phrase "true CPD caused by the hydrocephalus" is
meaningless when the obstetrician has the mother semisitting or dorsal -
closing the birth canal the "extra" up 30%.

Ericka replied:


That's what I'd be wondering. If it's safe to have a
vaginal birth and the issue is possible CPD, then you are
not likely to end up with a crash c-section because of it.

Again, this is for new readers...

If the issue is "possible CPD" - with obstetricians CAUSING CPD - the
necessity of any c-section - crash or otherwise - is suspect.

That's likely to be a situation where you have plenty of
time to realize things aren't progressing well and
moving to a c-section if that seems warranted. And really,
you don't have to go to the mat to avoid the c-section if
you don't want to. You can have pretty liberal criteria
for throwing in the towel with the vaginal birth, if that
seems to make sense to you and you want to avoid going into
an emergent c-section already wiped out. If the decision
is elective c-section vs. trying for a vaginal birth, then
you're certainly no worse off if you try for a vaginal birth
and decide that you'll opt for the c-section if things aren't
going swimmingly.
As far as the safety of vaginal birth with spina
bifida, it really seems to get down to precisely where the
lesion is, and how exposed it is, and such. When I looked
at it, it seems like you just really needed to sit down
the the test results and a specialist and make a decision.
It certainly doesn't seem like vaginal birth is a bad
idea per se, but the details really matter in this case.
If I were in that situation, I'd just put my concerns in
front of the specialist and say, "I want a vaginal birth,
but I hear lots of conflicting things and I'm scared.
Convince me that I am not unduly risking my baby by attempting
a vaginal birth." A good specialist should be able to
back up his or her recommendation with some solid facts
that should put your mind at ease.

..
Good specialists (and good childbirth educators) would work to stop
obstetricians from closing birth canals the "extra" up to 30% - esp. when
they are worried about CPD - even and especially when they are worried about
"true CPD caused by the hydrocephalus."

Compelling obstetricians to open birth canals the "extra" up to 30% is not
going to prevent all c-sections - but obstetricians have no business closing
birth canals the "extra" up to 30%.




NEW READERS: Please note that obstetricians are LYING to cover-up the
obvious birth crime.

For the Four OB Lies (they are whoppers)...

See Dents in babies' skulls (and SJ Doc)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3897



Please note also...

Unnecessary c-sections were alluded to above but I must mention them again -
along with unnecessary episiotomies...

UNNECESSARY C-SECTIONS/UNNECESSARY EPISIOTOMIES

Obstetricians are slicing vaginas/abdomens en masse (episiotomy/c-section) -
surgically fraudulently inferring they are doing/have done everything
possible to open birth canals - even as they close birth canals the "extra"
up to 30%.

ANOTHER OBVIOUS OBSTETRIC CRIME - American medicine's most frequent surgery
- obviously criminal the way MDs do it...

IMMEDIATE cord clamping...

The obstetric professionn routinely asphyxiates babies and causes them to
breathe with their lungs before they are ready - as it robs babies of up to
50% of their blood volume...

Retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG says this is
happening to EVERY CESAREAN BABY (it also happens with most "cord blood
banking")...

See Cord clamping baby asphyxiation: Pediatrician not cheering so loud
now...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3896

Dr. Morley recommends an obviously illegal TEMPORARY baby asphyxiation
experiment to help obstetricians demonstrate to themselves that they
shouldn't permanently asphyxiate/deny babies umbilical cord oxygen and rob
them of massive amounts of blood:

"[T]he umbilical cord [is] immediately closed between finger and thumb...The
[fetal heart rate/FHR] will decelerate quickly to about 60 bpm...the color
will change from purple-pink (normal at birth) to pallid blue
(vaso-constriction and asphyxia.)...Few midwives or obstetricians will be
able to observe, without interference, a deep, prolonged FHR deceleration on
a non-breathing newborn for a period of 60 seconds.* Common sense will soon
release the finger and thumb."
http://www.cordclamping.com/acog-cp.htm

Again, CPD means cephaloPELVIC disproportion and obstetricians are closing
pelves up to 30% and keeping them closed the "extra" up to 30% when babies
get stuck...

Be careful out there.

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
Hillsboro, Oregon
USA


PS I think the whole chiropractic profession would be supporting me this
work - but the chiro associations and boards are mostly silent - likely
because I am also pointing out CHIRO fraud.

For details regarding the ongoing chiro x-ray fraud/crime - MOST (all?)
boards of chiropractic examiners are silently perpetuating it...

See Chiro x-ray fraud (also: Why Dr. Gastaldo is unlicensed -
voluntarily...)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3899

For some reason, the just cited "Chiro x-ray fraud" post lost some letters
in transmission, but it is still legible.

"Todd Gastaldo" wrote in message
...
Barbara's (Circe's) phrase "true CPD caused by the hydrocephalus" is
meaningless when the obstetrician has the mother semisitting or dorsal -
closing the birth canal the "extra" up 30%.

Todd, I beg to differ. Hydrocephalus *can* result in a head circumference
that will not fit through any pelvis regardless of the mother's position
during pushing. Since Joy has had all of her babies unmedicated and has had
three home births, I know she knows that she can push in any position she
likes. That does not eliminate the possibility that her baby's hydrocephalus
could progress to a point where the head would be too large to deliver
vaginally. Fortunately, it sounds like that is not the case!
--
Be well, Barbara

"Circe" wrote in message
news:gyXXe.24204$sx2.1882@fed1read02...

Larry, you haven't been following Joy's pregnancy very closely, but her
baby
clearly HAS spina bifida, along with hydrocephalus. Multiple ultrasounds
have confirmed it (I think it was initially diagnosed around
mid-pregnancy),
and Joy has seen many specialists throughout her pregnancy. I think it's
pretty safe to say that the degree of spina bifida is well known at this
point. The last thing she needs is to see any more!

Gotta agree.

Finally, I am *really* suspicious about the induction talk. If they
think that it is safe to birth vaginally rather than by c-section,
what possible advantage could there be to induction? I would ask for
study results that show that induction provides better outcomes. I
would doubt that they can produce them. I might even ask Ericka to
see if she could find any information on vaginally birthing spina bifida
babies.

Yes, this is where I'm confused, too. Given that induction tends to
produce
more likelihood of uterine hyperstimulation and thereby produces greater
risk of fetal distress, you'd think inducing would be a bad idea. I'm
suspecting that it has something to do with the hydrocephalus (the longer
the baby stay in, the greater the likelihood of true CPD caused by the
hydrocephalus), but that's only a guess.

I do think the hydrocephalus may be a bit of a factor (but at this point it
isn't-baby is measuring up consistently 7days behind and the head is
measuring up along with that), but I did have some lowering of my amniotic
fluid index. That's when I was told I wouldn't be allowed to go to 40
weeks. I'm finding that I'm fine with the idea of a vaginal birth if I go
into labor, and I'm fine with a c-section if it's indicated I need one, but
I'm not very fine with the idea of an induction. The AFI did go up last
time, so I have to think that gives me some bargaining room.


--
Joy

Rose 1-99
Iris 2-01
Spencer 3-03
# 4 Sept 2005

Joybelle wrote:

I do think the hydrocephalus may be a bit of a factor (but at this point it
isn't-baby is measuring up consistently 7days behind and the head is
measuring up along with that), but I did have some lowering of my amniotic
fluid index. That's when I was told I wouldn't be allowed to go to 40
weeks. I'm finding that I'm fine with the idea of a vaginal birth if I go
into labor, and I'm fine with a c-section if it's indicated I need one, but
I'm not very fine with the idea of an induction. The AFI did go up last
time, so I have to think that gives me some bargaining room.

With that one, you can also ask for a clear description
of risks vs. benefits. On the one hand, we know that in general,
the tests are less than definitive. If one doesn't look so great,
try another the next day and see if you get a different reading.
Two bad readings are far more indicative of problems than one
bad reading.
I don't think you ever need to schedule an induction
in advance. Either there's evidence that it's necessary *now*,
or there isn't. If there isn't, you can wait and look for
more evidence tomorrow (or next week, or whenever would be
appropriate). So, just take it one day, and one set of
tests at a time and deal with the issue of induction when
you have evidence that you need to get the baby out now.
When/if that happens, *that* is the time to evaluate
the likelihood of success of an induction. What is your
Bishop score then?
If you go step by step, it makes a lot of the
"what ifs" easier to deal with.

Best wishes,
Ericka

"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
...
Joybelle wrote:

I do think the hydrocephalus may be a bit of a factor (but at this point
it
isn't-baby is measuring up consistently 7days behind and the head is
measuring up along with that), but I did have some lowering of my
amniotic
fluid index. That's when I was told I wouldn't be allowed to go to 40
weeks. I'm finding that I'm fine with the idea of a vaginal birth if I
go
into labor, and I'm fine with a c-section if it's indicated I need one,
but
I'm not very fine with the idea of an induction. The AFI did go up last
time, so I have to think that gives me some bargaining room.

With that one, you can also ask for a clear description
of risks vs. benefits. On the one hand, we know that in general,
the tests are less than definitive. If one doesn't look so great,
try another the next day and see if you get a different reading.
Two bad readings are far more indicative of problems than one
bad reading.
I don't think you ever need to schedule an induction
in advance. Either there's evidence that it's necessary *now*,
or there isn't. If there isn't, you can wait and look for
more evidence tomorrow (or next week, or whenever would be
appropriate). So, just take it one day, and one set of
tests at a time and deal with the issue of induction when
you have evidence that you need to get the baby out now.
When/if that happens, *that* is the time to evaluate
the likelihood of success of an induction. What is your
Bishop score then?
If you go step by step, it makes a lot of the
"what ifs" easier to deal with.

Best wishes,
Ericka

I think Ericka may have hit the nail on the head. My guess is that part of
the reason why Joybelle would be not okay with the idea of induction is that
they are usually so random -- throw a dart at the calendar and pick a date,
any date. Why Tuesday instead of Thursday? Why 39w3d instead of 39w6d?

I like the idea of taking it one day, and one test at a time, at least in
regards to induction verses letting your body go into labor on it's own. If
there are persistent and compelling reasons to induce, I don't think the
idea will both you any more, as the reasons will be compelling and
persistent. If there are no compelling reasons, then there really isn't a
reason to start labor artificially, now is there?

Of course that doesn't deal with the whole "should you have a c-section" or
not issue. But again, I agree with Ericka -- talk to your specialists and
keep gathering information. Eventually the decision should become clear.
You should be able to be convinced of the safety of a vaginal birth, or
convinced of the need for a c-section.
--

Jamie
Earth Angels:
Taylor Marlys, 1/3/03 -- My Big Girl, who started preschool, and loved it!
Addison Grace, 9/30/04 -- My Little Walker, who wants nothing more than to
go explore the world!

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