shocked by a reply in third tri section.

[Trying4ababy]

Maybe I was fortunate but Madison was 17 days overdue and she was perfectly healthy and I had a quick and easy delivery.

 

[aliss]

I would much rather go overdue, looong overdue, with fetal monitoring than force a baby out. Just because a baby is "cooked" (ie. lungs to full capacity at 37 weeks) does not mean the baby is ready to go out. When a baby is forcibly induced (meaning the mother's body is not favourable or ready), it's pure agony. Pure. Agony. I cannot even begin to describe a 3 day pitocin labour with a baby that was not ready to come out (all 9lb 3oz of him). It's a violent experience. I don't think many women realize that the whole "wait until baby's ready" also means wait until YOU are ready.

 

[SmokyJoe78]

I have read loads of information stating that placenta reaches it's peak at 37 weeks and by 40 patches can be seen on it and it doesn't give as much nutrients.

I was 18 days past EDD with DS and the placenta was absolutely fine! He showed no signs of being 'postdate'... so I guess everyone is different and you just have to try and trust your body, which is hard to do

 

[fides]

So i was just noseing (sp) around in third tri section and a girl was asking when they normally induce. so most people saying 10-14 days and a few earlier for medical reasons. then i came across this:

I'm in the U.S. And my doctor told me to just let him know if and when I wanted to be induced anytime after 39 weeks. He said he really doesn't like babies going over due because the longer they are in there, the bigger they are getting and the more likely they are to need medical intervention such as cesarian etc.


I'm so shocked! I mean seriously! this doctor wants them before they are even full term!?

Please don't all go piling in to comment as i don't want to be the cause of a agruement cause some threads can get nasty (not that i think you guys would do that ) but just wondering what you think.

this makes me angry. if the baby doesn't come early enough for her OB, she'll probably be given pitocin, then she'll need an epidural b/c the contractions will be so hard, and if she's lucky, she'll have a vaginal birth; if not, after a long labor, she'll end up with a c-section for failure to progress or fetal distress. way to go, doc!

 

[JFS]

I'm planning a natural birth at a birth center with a midwife. But I don’t find induction shocking or appalling. In fact, I think the “absolutely no intervention” crowd is often a bit over the top.

Women have been using whatever means available to induce labor for a long, long time. In the old days, help could be far away and difficult to find so a woman might take castor oil and go for a buggy ride over a bumpy road when her mother/sister/friend was available to help. Prayers to the goddess, herbs, acupressure, and other strange concoctions shoved inside an expectant mother have been used since women have been getting pregnant.

I’m not keen on pit and epidurals and c-sections, but I do think we need to be realistic and find balance. And in my opinion there are sometimes reasons, other than the standard medical ones, to opt for induction. For instance if a father is shipping out at 40weeks, the little family would probably be better served by inducing at 39+ than waiting for daddy to see his child for the first time for six months or a year.

But maybe I feel that way because I'm a crazy American.

 

[fides]

I'm planning a natural birth at a birth center with a midwife. But I don’t find induction shocking or appalling. In fact, I think the “absolutely no intervention” crowd is often a bit over the top.

Women have been using whatever means available to induce labor for a long, long time. In the old days, help could be far away and difficult to find so a woman might take castor oil and go for a buggy ride over a bumpy road when her mother/sister/friend was available to help. Prayers to the goddess, herbs, acupressure, and other strange concoctions shoved inside an expectant mother have been used since women have been getting pregnant.

I’m not keen on pit and epidurals and c-sections, but I do think we need to be realistic and find balance. And in my opinion there are sometimes reasons, other than the standard medical ones, to opt for induction. For instance if a father is shipping out at 40weeks, the little family would probably be better served by inducing at 39+ than waiting for daddy to see his child for the first time for six months or a year.

But maybe I feel that way because I'm a crazy American.

I agree that there is a time and place for everything, including medical inductions, and no, i'm not angry b/c there is any induction being spoken of at all - it's the situation that angered me.

A woman is being told by her doctor, whom she most likely trusts and respects as a professional, that he just doesn't like to go past a woman's EDD, then as his reason, he gives her some story about how past-EDD babies are in there just getting bigger and running a higher risk of interventions (which other posters in this thread have already said is not true). The fact is, medically induced labor has its risks, and I think he should be mentioning those risks along with his plug for an induction in the absence of a medical necessity/health emergency/etc.

But then, I'm also just a crazy American, so, yeah... hee hee!

 

[x__amour]

I went overdue but was induced for preeclampsia. I don't like voluntary inductions/cesareans. They can be dangerous. My daughter was overdue and was only a 6 pounder. Just on the news though, here in Colorado there are hospitals refusing voluntary inductions/cesareans before 39 weeks.

 

[miel]

I'm planning a natural birth at a birth center with a midwife. But I don’t find induction shocking or appalling. In fact, I think the “absolutely no intervention” crowd is often a bit over the top.

Women have been using whatever means available to induce labor for a long, long time. In the old days, help could be far away and difficult to find so a woman might take castor oil and go for a buggy ride over a bumpy road when her mother/sister/friend was available to help. Prayers to the goddess, herbs, acupressure, and other strange concoctions shoved inside an expectant mother have been used since women have been getting pregnant.

I’m not keen on pit and epidurals and c-sections, but I do think we need to be realistic and find balance. And in my opinion there are sometimes reasons, other than the standard medical ones, to opt for induction. For instance if a father is shipping out at 40weeks, the little family would probably be better served by inducing at 39+ than waiting for daddy to see his child for the first time for six months or a year.

But maybe I feel that way because I'm a crazy American.

I agree that there is a time and place for everything, including medical inductions, and no, i'm not angry b/c there is any induction being spoken of at all - it's the situation that angered me.

A woman is being told by her doctor, whom she most likely trusts and respects as a professional, that he just doesn't like to go past a woman's EDD, then as his reason, he gives her some story about how past-EDD babies are in there just getting bigger and running a higher risk of interventions (which other posters in this thread have already said is not true). The fact is, medically induced labor has its risks, and I think he should be mentioning those risks along with his plug for an induction in the absence of a medical necessity/health emergency/etc.

But then, I'm also just a crazy American, so, yeah... hee hee!

but maybe he did present to her the cons etc...be careful of what people translate sometimes on their post...

i do i like to think most doctors are good and do know what they doing !! i never felt i was push to do anything against my own Will with my labor and delivery etc...i ask for the Epidural on my own etc...i gave a birth plan and the hospital doctors help me try to stick to it ...

i had a sweep at 38 weeks and i asked for one and i got one ...i had asked for one at 37 weeks and my doctor refused to me ...but at 38 weeks i was really miserable and she took me " the patient as well as the baby " in consideration i appreciated i was being taking care into the equation of giving birth not just the baby...

 

[storm4mozza]

37 weeks is full term here but the docs will leave me till about 42 weeks before inducing me, ill be offered a sweep if baby goes past 40 weeks, which i was when i was pregnant i was offered a sweep at 40 weeks but i went into slow labour before they had a chance

 

[Nikki_d72]

I'm planning a natural birth at a birth center with a midwife. But I don’t find induction shocking or appalling. In fact, I think the “absolutely no intervention” crowd is often a bit over the top.

Women have been using whatever means available to induce labor for a long, long time. In the old days, help could be far away and difficult to find so a woman might take castor oil and go for a buggy ride over a bumpy road when her mother/sister/friend was available to help. Prayers to the goddess, herbs, acupressure, and other strange concoctions shoved inside an expectant mother have been used since women have been getting pregnant.

I’m not keen on pit and epidurals and c-sections, but I do think we need to be realistic and find balance. And in my opinion there are sometimes reasons, other than the standard medical ones, to opt for induction. For instance if a father is shipping out at 40weeks, the little family would probably be better served by inducing at 39+ than waiting for daddy to see his child for the first time for six months or a year.

But maybe I feel that way because I'm a crazy American.

I agree that there is a time and place for everything, including medical inductions, and no, i'm not angry b/c there is any induction being spoken of at all - it's the situation that angered me.

A woman is being told by her doctor, whom she most likely trusts and respects as a professional, that he just doesn't like to go past a woman's EDD, then as his reason, he gives her some story about how past-EDD babies are in there just getting bigger and running a higher risk of interventions (which other posters in this thread have already said is not true). The fact is, medically induced labor has its risks, and I think he should be mentioning those risks along with his plug for an induction in the absence of a medical necessity/health emergency/etc.

But then, I'm also just a crazy American, so, yeah... hee hee!

but maybe he did present to her the cons etc...be careful of what people translate sometimes on their post...

i do i like to think most doctors are good and do know what they doing !! i never felt i was push to do anything against my own Will with my labor and delivery etc...i ask for the Epidural on my own etc...i gave a birth plan and the hospital doctors help me try to stick to it ...

i had a sweep at 38 weeks and i asked for one and i got one ...i had asked for one at 37 weeks and my doctor refused to me ...but at 38 weeks i was really miserable and she took me " the patient as well as the baby " in consideration i appreciated i was being taking care into the equation of giving birth not just the baby...

Have you watched Rikki Lake's The Business of Being Born? I'd reccommend it. Unfortunately egos and schedules come into it far too often.

 

[lozzy21]

I have read loads of information stating that placenta reaches it's peak at 37 weeks and by 40 patches can be seen on it and it doesn't give as much nutrients.
I don't want an epidural but I do want to be induced if I do go past my due date.
I have spoken to loads of women who have gone over due and it's caused issues.
Worst story was a woman in work and her sisters baby was born sleeping, she'd gone a week and a bit overdue, baby had been fine in checks then one day just died.
PM showed placenta had just failed and she was told it's just one of those things....

Everyone has a different opinion but I wish I could just give birth as soon as baby is healthy and considered full term.

But some babys are ready to be born at 37 weeks, others need a another 5 weeks cooking and we just dont know when that is for each baby. They are more problems from people being induced early than they are for being overdue.

For example

My best friend was induced at 38 weeks after he water started leaking, her daughter spent 3 weeks in special care with breathing problems, she couldn't maintain her temp and needed feeding with a tube for a week or so.

My daughter was born at 35 weeks after my waters started leaking, because she was early they were not going to induce me untill i was 37 weeks but i went into labour naturaly 2 days later. Aside from a little oxygen straight after delivery (thats a different story) she needed no help with her breathing, she could maintain her temperature, she struggled with BF but could feed from a bottle fine. Had she not developed bad jaundice we would have only been in hospital for two days while they gave her antibiotics.

There is a reason why you are given a 5 week window.

 

[madasa]

I'm planning a natural birth at a birth center with a midwife. But I don’t find induction shocking or appalling. In fact, I think the “absolutely no intervention” crowd is often a bit over the top.

Women have been using whatever means available to induce labor for a long, long time. In the old days, help could be far away and difficult to find so a woman might take castor oil and go for a buggy ride over a bumpy road when her mother/sister/friend was available to help. Prayers to the goddess, herbs, acupressure, and other strange concoctions shoved inside an expectant mother have been used since women have been getting pregnant.

I’m not keen on pit and epidurals and c-sections, but I do think we need to be realistic and find balance. And in my opinion there are sometimes reasons, other than the standard medical ones, to opt for induction. For instance if a father is shipping out at 40weeks, the little family would probably be better served by inducing at 39+ than waiting for daddy to see his child for the first time for six months or a year.

But maybe I feel that way because I'm a crazy American.

The father might be "better off", in the short term, because he is THERE when the baby is born. The mother may also feel better off in the short term because he is there to give her support. I get that. But the baby is no better off. It's now thought that when the lungs are fully developed they release a hormone that starts labour.

If my husband was leaving at 40 weeks, I would mentally prepare for that and have a different support person to help me during labour, birth & post partum. Either a mother, sister or friend, or a doula. TO ME, the presence of the father does not outweigh my health and my baby's health.

Induction is not benign. There are risks. Increased risk of severe pain, increased risk of needing pain medication (which have their own risks!), increased risk of a section (again, with its own risks!) increased risk of a newborn who is compromised, needing resus and/or needing time in specal care and in the long term, with an increased chance of health problems....

If you feel that those risks are worth it to have the father present, then I'm not one to tell another which risks are OK to take.... You have to do what's right for you and your situation. Those risks are too much for me, personally. And my main concern is that many women (in teh US and elsewhere) are being led to believe that induction is benign.... Or even being pressured into having one. That's wrong. If people make an informed decision to be induced, that is one thing, but often that does not happen. Induction is OFFERED at 40 weeks - or earlier - and the risks are not made clear. That is what I have a problem with.

It's not the MOTHERS in the US that are crazy. Its the system, the doctors who know damn well what the risks are and do it anyway... because it's ALLLLL about $$$

 

[miel]

My obgyn is not all about money ..she works around the clock days and nights ...she made personal phone call at my house when i had to fight against a blood infection and stayed at the hospital after the birth to make sure i was ok at home when i was back...

i just wanted to said it is not because you saw a " document on tV that reflect some of the system here " and i do agree we need improvement specially insurance wise ...that ALL the doctors wants to put $$$ in their pocket either ...

 

[Nikki_d72]

Miel, it's not just the documentary, but many, many posts on this forum that lead us to these conclusions. It's also not neccessarily the OB's themselves that are about money, but the pressures of the hospital system force them to be like this, as the hospitals are run as businesses. There is just far too many women putting blind faith in a system they falsely believe is solely there to protect them, where far too often the needs of the woman and baby are below financial gains for the hospital and/or avoidance of litigation. it's not just in the US either, it happens throughout the "developed world" but as the US is privatised healthcare, it is probably the country where this is most endemic.

 

[madasa]

My obgyn is not all about money ..she works around the clock days and nights ...she made personal phone call at my house when i had to fight against a blood infection and stayed at the hospital after the birth to make sure i was ok at home when i was back...

i just wanted to said it is not because you saw a " document on tV that reflect some of the system here " and i do agree we need improvement specially insurance wise ...that ALL the doctors wants to put $$$ in their pocket either ...

miel, YES there are some great docs and some rubbish ones! But the national stats for things like sections are very telling. Interventions are over used and (generally speaking) birth *IS* a business. Not talking about ONE ob, or one hospital or even one town.... that is a nationwide trend. Of course there will be some wonderful OBs working within that system, and their patients are very lucky to have them!

 

[NaturalMomma]

I have read loads of information stating that placenta reaches it's peak at 37 weeks and by 40 patches can be seen on it and it doesn't give as much nutrients.I don't want an epidural but I do want to be induced if I do go past my due date.
I have spoken to loads of women who have gone over due and it's caused issues.
Worst story was a woman in work and her sisters baby was born sleeping, she'd gone a week and a bit overdue, baby had been fine in checks then one day just died.
PM showed placenta had just failed and she was told it's just one of those things....

Everyone has a different opinion but I wish I could just give birth as soon as baby is healthy and considered full term.

That's actually not true. The placenta doesn't reach a "peak". The placenta will still deliver nutrients while it's attatched to the uterine linning. Now, sometimes your baby can be fully ready to come out, but your body doesn't recieve the signals and so you don't start labor and the placenta starts deteriating because the placenta and baby are over ready now. But it doesn't stop delivering it's full potential of nutrients at 37 weeks.

I'm planning a natural birth at a birth center with a midwife. But I don’t find induction shocking or appalling. In fact, I think the “absolutely no intervention” crowd is often a bit over the top.

Women have been using whatever means available to induce labor for a long, long time. In the old days, help could be far away and difficult to find so a woman might take castor oil and go for a buggy ride over a bumpy road when her mother/sister/friend was available to help. Prayers to the goddess, herbs, acupressure, and other strange concoctions shoved inside an expectant mother have been used since women have been getting pregnant.

I’m not keen on pit and epidurals and c-sections, but I do think we need to be realistic and find balance. And in my opinion there are sometimes reasons, other than the standard medical ones, to opt for induction. For instance if a father is shipping out at 40weeks, the little family would probably be better served by inducing at 39+ than waiting for daddy to see his child for the first time for six months or a year.
But maybe I feel that way because I'm a crazy American.

To the first bolded, yes and no. In some cultures women would do "natural" things to induce their labor. But in other cultures, even to this day, women don't do anything, they just let nature take it's course. Even in some cultures if there is a complication, they don't do anything. The problem with medical inductions is that it carries a risk. Everytime you introduce medicine into your body it has a risk. Inductions should only be used when they are medically needed, not because a woman is uncomfortable, but when they are needed. We're finding out just now that Pitocin has links to behavioral problems in older children. Pitocin, the leading induction method in the US, hasn't been studied much until now. We've been inducing women like crazy, majority for no reason but convenience, and didn't even know about the short and long term risks to it. Sounds safe and smart to me. Then you have the problem with Cytotec, another very common induction medication in the US. It causes uterine rupture. Women have died after being induced with this, and their babies. Cytotec is far too powerful to be inducing with, and it says right there on the lable of the medication "not to be used during pregnancy or for induction of labor". Yet Doctors use it. And medications used in labor, believe it or not, is linked to money.

Not all Doctors are money hungry. Many Doctors are salaried so it doesn't matter if they do a c-section or not. But there are many accounts of Doctors who are not salaried that have done things to get more women under the knife to make more money. These are documented cases in the US in the past decade. There are also many documented cases of Doctors doing c-sections and inductions so they can push more women in and out of the rooms and so they can get home at a decent time. I find it funny that people don't want to believe these things when there is proof that inductions and c-sections are highest on Fridays and inbetween normal clinic hours. That is not a coincidence. This is an injustice of women, babies and medicine. The US is out of control. We have a horrible maternity care system. One thing that needs to stop is women just trusting their Doctors. We know with documented accounts that women need to look into things further instead. Doctors don't go to medical school for 12 years for OBGYN (which I often hear on forums). They only go for about 2 years and the focus is not on labor and delivery, the focus is on Gynecology and surgery.

To the second bolded, I completely agree, we need balance. However my balance would be to not do anything until you need it. Don't do a c-section unless you need one, and a 9 lb baby can be born vaginally by small women. Don't induce unless you need to. Full term is considered 38-42 weeks, not 40 weeks + 1 day like many Doctors think. Letting women be out of bed instead of strapped to machines. We know from research that labor is best when a woman is on her feet moving around, not laying in bed.

To the third bolded. I couldn't disagree more. I think that is a completely stupid reason to have an induction. You should be doing what is best for the mother and baby, and making a baby come sooner causes short and long term risks to the baby and can also make mom have a harder labor. Perhaps military families should plan their children better if they want to make sure dad will be there. I have several friends and family who are in the military and all of them have been overseas at one point, and they know more than 9 months in advance if they will be shipped out. But sometimes they don't, especially in the beginning of the war, but that is still no reason to make a baby come before they are ready. In life we need to be patient, and this is a good leason to learn to be patient and wait for someone else. This reason is nothing but selfish. Yes, it sucks to be a dad and not to get to see your baby be born, and it sucks to be a mom and not have your DH by yourside, but that is a part of life. There will be times, during a major event, where we can't have our way and have to re-asess our plans. My dad was not there when my mom gave birth to me, and my mom caught me herself (at the hospital though, Doctor didn't make it). Sucks, but guess what? My mom and I are ok, we don't suffer any affects due to my dad missing my birth. Not a big deal in the grand scheme of things. My dad also didn't see his first 3 daughters being born. Back then fathers weren't even allowed to witness birth. Again, no one suffers any long term affects. My dad only witnessed my brother and sister being born, and we all are bonded the same way. Many men don't even want to see it, they aren't any less of a dad or have bad bonds just becasue they didn't see the birth of their child.

 

[Tasha]

Every single baby and placenta is different. My first placenta was fine (35/36) weeks, my second was fine (37 weeks), my third was too small, clots abruption etc etc (36+6), my fourth was pass maturity or what ever they call it (39 weeks) and my fifth was mature at 24 weeks. A placenta doesnt get to midnight at 40 weeks and suddenly decide it is too old now or 41 weeks, and so on.

I think in the UK mostly it is daily CTG scanning that is offer

 

[madasa]

NaturalMomma - there are some taht would argue that there are distinct disadvantages to the FOB being at the birth! Many reasons, including bringing adrenaline into the room, and/or because the labouring woman sometimes ends up "carrying" her partner emotionally instead of the other way round. I know one lady who KNEW that her partner was extremely upset to see her in pain. She was expending energy trying to HIDE her pain. She kept getting up and going to the loo to be TOTALLY on her own just so she could moan through the sensations. Is it any wonder her baby "got stuck" when she couldn't open up and let go in front of her partner, because she didn't want to upset him?! Yeah, it's a whole nutha topic.... Sorry.

 

[littlemonster]

I have family members and family friends who deliver babies (they're doctors) and let me break it down for you all.
In the U.S., when it comes to OBGYN malpractice, mothers will win almost every case. Because mothers will sue over the drop of a hat (these mainly being uneducated and ignorant mothers who are money hungry) the doctors have to do whatever they can to cover their butts. The malpractice rules set their standard because no malpractice insurance wants to pay anything out.
For example: If a baby's shoulders get caught in the birth canal during labor a mother can sue just because of that, even though it's a pure anatomy issue the doctor has nothing to do with and that's a lawsuit she will automatically win.
So doctors will do things that way and will also push for c-sections when they aren't necessary. They will use scare tactics and anything they can to get women to have c-sections because it's easier on them. They don't have to wait or be up all night or anything like that if someone has a scheduled c-section.
I am disgusted with that kind of practice which is why I see my OBGYN. They have decent malpractice insurance and all the doctors, PA's and nurse practioners have a common goal for all pregnant women at their practice: Vaginal birth unless it is medically necessary!
I'm diabetic and they also agree it's not in my best interest to have a c-section...because it's major abdominal surgery.

 

[aliss]

For example: If a baby's shoulders get caught in the birth canal during labor a mother can sue just because of that, even though it's a pure anatomy issue the doctor has nothing to do with and that's a lawsuit she will automatically win.

I don't disagree with most of your post but this is not accurate.

Medical interventions, when not necessary, can increase the risk of shoulder dystocia. Induction, epidurals, they all contribute. Yes, shoulder dystocia is a result of the baby being in an anatomically incorrect position but interventions that delay labour and delay pushing will increase the risk. Many times the intervention risk is appropriate (ie. infection) but when doctors are inducing for non-medical reasons (ie. father not being present), combined with the inevetiable epidural which is rarely medically necessary, it can spell disaster for women who are already at a risk for SD.

Me, I was induced for good reason (infection), given an epidural on day 2 (my choice, albeit misinformed, but again my responsibility), and allowed to labour into day 3 (all with massive amounts of pitocin) and pushed for 4 hours. That, with a 9lb 3oz baby and petite pelvis was a recipe for SD disaster and my OBGYN herself admitted that she made the wrong call by allowing my labour to continue. I left my labour and my boy's life into her hands and she made a mistake. It happened. I'm traumatized from it. I also don't think she's a bad person as I work in emergency services myself and know that this happens. But it doesn't mean that she had no fault in it.

Being Canada, she felt safe enough to admit that. Lawsuits are very rare here. In the United States where medical malpractice suits are more prevalent, I can imagine few doctors would admit to being at fault (although fatal SD is rare, it's usually unilateral paralysis of the arm or cerebral palsy in sever cases)