Hi ladies
As you know I've been arguing my case for a homebirth, and everyone seems to be finding reasons to not have one. Anyway, after having my heart looked at again (I got transferred from general consultant-led antenatal clinic to a combined cardio clinic and was discharged from high-risk care; plus I've been made to see my old cardiologist who has agreed that everything is fine.. The "abnormality" in my heart won't cause any problems, and yes I have tachycardia so my HR is always over 100bpm at resting but it's always been like that so they weren't concerned..) so I was surprised when I had a letter asking me to go back to the consultant-led antenatal clinic for a review. I thought it was an admin error (not being discharged out of the first clinic correctly when I changed) but I went along anyway as my midwife is useless to get an answer out of (practically had to drag "ok" out of her for a homebirth te other week despite having discharge letters from cardio clinic in my hand) so I figured I could ask any questions to these guys, plus get a prescription for some stronger anti-emetics
It felt like an ambush. The consultant (who was lovely, which makes this harder) said that I was back because I was initially having my heart looked at, but when I showed her I'd been discharged she then said "Oh well you want a home birth, and if you want a home birth you HAVE to see a consultant first
Then all of the "as you know there are risks involved.." etc etc.
She started saying that although I'm not considered high-risk anymore, I'm "not low-risk" and because of that she wants me to consider a hospital birth. I kept asking "Why?", and she was saying that because of my tachycardia (it was 111bpm at rest today, which is fairly normal for me) that HR would obviously go up during pushing and that they would transfer me to hospital anyway cause of how high it would be (I've had problems with this before during Physiology practicals at Uni - it would easily hit 180bpm after 5 mins on the exercise bike and I was not allowed to participate in practical investigations.. Yet it's always been normal for me). I said if they looked in my notes they'd see that it was normal for me! She said the midwife would find it hard to judge whether it was actually "normal" or if I was in any danger, and at what point should she say I've been pushing for too long and am putting a strain my heart and need help.. :S If I was struggling, I would say! I was trying to explain to them that I'm not a bloody martyr, if I was getting out of breath or felt like I wasn't coping, I would much rather transfer to hospital rather than take the risk of hurting the baby (same if the baby was showing any signs of distress, I wouldn't argue. But I wan't to TRY). So she said she wants me to come BACK for more monitoring to "see if my heart rate changes" to get a better idea of what my "limit" should be during labour, and how long I should be "allowed" to push or what mr HR should be "allowed" to go to IF a homebirth was to be considered (but similar stuff would be done even if I was to be in hospital anyway, probably so they can pull the baby out before she's ready)
Anyway, I was making it clear that I would be more comfortable (thus making my HR lower!) if I could try at home. I wanted a waterbirth, I don't want to be seperated from my husband, and I don't want to be an unfamiliar environment with unnecessary medical intervention and being against the clock. She then started suggesting I consider the midwife-led unit with a 6-hour discharge after birth where I won't leave the labour ward (thus my husband doesn't leave my side).. I said I won't consider come in unless I can be in the water - so she said that it could be arranged although that won't be in the MLU, but I could still have the 6-hour discharge HOWEVER the criteria is much stricter as me and the baby "can't be continuously monitored" .. I said I don't want that anyway!! She started saying that if I don't match the criteria then I may be allowed to labour in the water but not birth in the water so they can monitor my HR and babys HR during the pushing stage.. I'm petrified of a dry birth though. (And how can they guarantee I can be gone in 6 hours? What if I give birth in the night and there's no doctors to check the baby over before I leave, and the labour ward is busy so they turf me to post-natal??) I said I wouldn't even consider any of the above unless they can guarantee I won't be shoved onto the post-natal ward (unless of course of an emergency which means necessary intervention, like baby getting stuck or EMCS etc) and I can AT LEAST labour in the water (although I'll be fighting for the full water birth) and not to be monitored continuously.
But before that, I will still be fighting for a homebirth and she knows that. Once again, I reminded her that I'm not an idiot or a martyr, and I feel that I'm struggling (not what the HR monitor says, currently it would think I'm doing mild exercise) or if the baby is struggling, then I won't argue about a transfer. But I'm so angry that I've got to go back when I'm 34 weeks - especially if she STILL hasn't got an answer, as I've got to pay for the birth pool at 36 weeks (to be delivered at 37 weeks) or I lose the booking!!
She's told me she's writing to my midwife to tell her that she hasn't OK-ed a homebirth yet But I'm hoing that they'll see at the next appointment that this raised HR is normal, and they'll extend their "regulations" to accomodate that; after all it's been classed as a "natural biological variation" as I have fast atrial conduction, and they can't discriminate against that if I have been discharged from the cardio clinic.
Then she casually said "ooh what are you hiding in there" when checking my tummy and that I'm a "good" size for 30 weeks (FH is 32).. MW always said I was measuring ahead, and the scan I had at 22 weeks said I'd have a fairly big baby. I'm just wondering now if I get the OK for my heart (again!!) whether they'll try to use the potential size of the baby as an excuse?
/rantover
As you know I've been arguing my case for a homebirth, and everyone seems to be finding reasons to not have one. Anyway, after having my heart looked at again (I got transferred from general consultant-led antenatal clinic to a combined cardio clinic and was discharged from high-risk care; plus I've been made to see my old cardiologist who has agreed that everything is fine.. The "abnormality" in my heart won't cause any problems, and yes I have tachycardia so my HR is always over 100bpm at resting but it's always been like that so they weren't concerned..) so I was surprised when I had a letter asking me to go back to the consultant-led antenatal clinic for a review. I thought it was an admin error (not being discharged out of the first clinic correctly when I changed) but I went along anyway as my midwife is useless to get an answer out of (practically had to drag "ok" out of her for a homebirth te other week despite having discharge letters from cardio clinic in my hand) so I figured I could ask any questions to these guys, plus get a prescription for some stronger anti-emetics
It felt like an ambush. The consultant (who was lovely, which makes this harder) said that I was back because I was initially having my heart looked at, but when I showed her I'd been discharged she then said "Oh well you want a home birth, and if you want a home birth you HAVE to see a consultant first
Then all of the "as you know there are risks involved.." etc etc. She started saying that although I'm not considered high-risk anymore, I'm "not low-risk" and because of that she wants me to consider a hospital birth. I kept asking "Why?", and she was saying that because of my tachycardia (it was 111bpm at rest today, which is fairly normal for me) that HR would obviously go up during pushing and that they would transfer me to hospital anyway cause of how high it would be (I've had problems with this before during Physiology practicals at Uni - it would easily hit 180bpm after 5 mins on the exercise bike and I was not allowed to participate in practical investigations.. Yet it's always been normal for me). I said if they looked in my notes they'd see that it was normal for me! She said the midwife would find it hard to judge whether it was actually "normal" or if I was in any danger, and at what point should she say I've been pushing for too long and am putting a strain my heart and need help.. :S If I was struggling, I would say! I was trying to explain to them that I'm not a bloody martyr, if I was getting out of breath or felt like I wasn't coping, I would much rather transfer to hospital rather than take the risk of hurting the baby (same if the baby was showing any signs of distress, I wouldn't argue. But I wan't to TRY). So she said she wants me to come BACK for more monitoring to "see if my heart rate changes" to get a better idea of what my "limit" should be during labour, and how long I should be "allowed" to push or what mr HR should be "allowed" to go to IF a homebirth was to be considered (but similar stuff would be done even if I was to be in hospital anyway, probably so they can pull the baby out before she's ready)
Anyway, I was making it clear that I would be more comfortable (thus making my HR lower!) if I could try at home. I wanted a waterbirth, I don't want to be seperated from my husband, and I don't want to be an unfamiliar environment with unnecessary medical intervention and being against the clock. She then started suggesting I consider the midwife-led unit with a 6-hour discharge after birth where I won't leave the labour ward (thus my husband doesn't leave my side).. I said I won't consider come in unless I can be in the water - so she said that it could be arranged although that won't be in the MLU, but I could still have the 6-hour discharge HOWEVER the criteria is much stricter as me and the baby "can't be continuously monitored" .. I said I don't want that anyway!! She started saying that if I don't match the criteria then I may be allowed to labour in the water but not birth in the water so they can monitor my HR and babys HR during the pushing stage.. I'm petrified of a dry birth though. (And how can they guarantee I can be gone in 6 hours? What if I give birth in the night and there's no doctors to check the baby over before I leave, and the labour ward is busy so they turf me to post-natal??) I said I wouldn't even consider any of the above unless they can guarantee I won't be shoved onto the post-natal ward (unless of course of an emergency which means necessary intervention, like baby getting stuck or EMCS etc) and I can AT LEAST labour in the water (although I'll be fighting for the full water birth) and not to be monitored continuously.
But before that, I will still be fighting for a homebirth and she knows that. Once again, I reminded her that I'm not an idiot or a martyr, and I feel that I'm struggling (not what the HR monitor says, currently it would think I'm doing mild exercise) or if the baby is struggling, then I won't argue about a transfer. But I'm so angry that I've got to go back when I'm 34 weeks - especially if she STILL hasn't got an answer, as I've got to pay for the birth pool at 36 weeks (to be delivered at 37 weeks) or I lose the booking!!
She's told me she's writing to my midwife to tell her that she hasn't OK-ed a homebirth yet But I'm hoing that they'll see at the next appointment that this raised HR is normal, and they'll extend their "regulations" to accomodate that; after all it's been classed as a "natural biological variation" as I have fast atrial conduction, and they can't discriminate against that if I have been discharged from the cardio clinic.Then she casually said "ooh what are you hiding in there" when checking my tummy and that I'm a "good" size for 30 weeks (FH is 32).. MW always said I was measuring ahead, and the scan I had at 22 weeks said I'd have a fairly big baby. I'm just wondering now if I get the OK for my heart (again!!) whether they'll try to use the potential size of the baby as an excuse?
/rantover
Still doesn't make it any less frustrating though, especially as the pressure really starts from 36wks when you're most vulnerable.
