|
Hi all
I also had a restless night at the newest (and
unsurprising) report on birth. I too was concerned that 3 out of the 4
births were caesarean births. Justine, I am angry at the very limited air
time your were given, and the tiny bit of information from you they showed,
especially after the work you put in (reminds me of a Brisbane Extra segment on
homebirth/waterbirth I did a few years ago).
I am concerned as always, about the lack of
objectivity of the reporting - that the report did not include the views/stories
of women who have had a caesarean, and chosen and subsequently gone on to
give birth vaginally, and their reasons for choosing a vaginal birth foloowing a
previous caesarean.
Yet again, the story did not stress the adverse
outcomes associated with elective caesarean, and elective repeat caesarean, and
multiple caesareans for mothers or their infants. Scant attention
was paid to one of the rarest, (hysterestomy), but the
commoner and often as serious consequences were left undiscussed. Another
example of balanced reporting - pardon while I vomit.
While I commiserate with Vanessa, having followed
her tragic story, and understand her decision to have a caesarean foIlowing
Layla's birth and death, I wonder why Tracey had such a long time slot
which could have been used much more objectively (Ah....silly me! Of course it was objective - regarding the
safety and convenience of caesareans) by bringing in other women with
VBAC stories, for example. Must be a 'let's keep it in the family' reporter
thing.
Don't get me started on the dr - what was that
line in the hyppocratic oath? First, do no harm? Does he honestly think he is
doing no harm by caesaring all of his clients? I am so tired of hearing
this man say 'you will never be sued for doing a caesarean' - I am sorry, but
the time is coming where he or someone will, and it will take women to die
or to be maimed by unneccessary caesareans before it happens.
Avoiding a caesarean is one reason why women
choose a VBAC. For those of you on line who heard me talk (at the Midwifery
Intensives with Andrea, MAggie and Vicki) about Michele and Peter soon to have
their VBAC, stay tuned for their birth story. It's quite a
story!
Justine, well done!
An Angry, but unsurprised Lynne
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] 60
minutes
Dear Marilyn
I think you are right about the pogram being a(n)
paid/unpaid infomercial for caesarean birth and obstetric care.
They also forgot to mention most Obs do not know
how to facilitate a natural birth I think David Malloy would not know that C/S
is their specialty
Normal birth now is not natural birth in
Australia as less than 25% start and finish labour with -out induction or
augmentation in most Australian Hospitals and less than 13% birth without
drugs (a drigged mother is likely to be a drugged baby!) - definitely in
WA.
But Jenny Gamble's research and most midwives expereinces
confirms that the majority of women antenatally want or hope for a natural
birth but are funnelled by our maternity services into the "care" of
those who do not deliver this!
Do you think this program might be Dr Malloy and colleagues response to
Jenny's research??
Denise Hynd
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:20
PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] 60
minutes
I do firmly believe it was a(n) paid/unpaid
infomercial for caesarean birth and obstetric care. Normal birth in a
technological age is in their (am I paranoid?) sites!
marilyn
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 8:18
AM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] 60
minutes
Dear Justine,
Intelligent veiwers will see just in terms of
time and relative presentation of interviews, Liz Hayes empathy that the
program was biased.
Trouble is how many will analyse
it??
Two prominent journalists both who were "very
informed' of the horror alternatives and one who lost a baby from a
determined effort to have natural birth but saved the next with a C/s and
prominent doctor how can any natural childbirth advocate speak out
against them ....
How can any one speak out and
suggest bias let alone it was also negligent and insulting to
anyone who does not agree with the right of any and all woman to
choose vaginal by pass surgery - hang the costs or consequences
to the majority of women and our community!!
Hang the wonders of childbirth, and the
wishes and the efforts of the majority of pregnant, all the research about
what is safe and the risks of intervention, let alone surgery and 30
national enquiries, escalating costs, the pain of mothers and babies and
now increasing maternal deaths !!
Let alone sidelining and dismissing
midwives "she only had a midwife" ........
How low can journalists sink??
More
importantly can we let this one go publicly
unchallenged??
Denise
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 9:44
PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] 60
minutes
Hi All
Yes they got us again
(despite 5hrs of talking with them and them agreeing) What is the
worst thing is I had no idea that Vanessa O�Gorman or Tracey Curio were
going to be on (despite 2 requests as to who else was on and a
confirmation of who with no word of these 2!) I would not have
gone if I knew about Vanessa!
Also I tried very hard to line up a
midwife (they spoke with her and said oh she says all the same things
you say!!) I lined up 2 supportive Obs (one who has done 400
vaginal breaches) and is a great guy, they said they would interview
him, they didn�t. I think it is so important to attack them on
their own story heading, �Mother�s Choice� yeah what
choice!
Perhaps Media Watch may be interested!
Write your
letters to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Justine
|
