----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 11:54 PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] caesarean
section
I was in fact reading the Maternal Deaths report
at work today, the most recent complete one (94-96); over the past 30 years
maternal deaths have decreased but hit a steady patch over the last few
triennial periods. As Marilyn says, many were extremely ill, to the point
where one must wonder at their choosing to embark on or maintain a pregnancy;
some had reappearance of malignancy (particularly Ca Breast and Malignant
Melanoma); some refused treatment early in the disease process (PIH, other
hypertensive states); some had catastrophic haemorrhages and infections
particularlu Gp A Streptococcus Pyogenes (what's that? never heard of it).
There were a surprising number of amniotic fluid embolism, occurring in
women not necessarily given induction agents which surprised the examining
panel also. Many had LSCS and subsequently died but it would be hard to
attribute death solely or even largely because of that. It's very interesting
reading. For that triennium, maternal death Australia wide was 13/100,000; in
1964-66 it was about 40/100,000 and even in 1970 it was
30/100,000.
Monica
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 1:37
AM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] caesarean
section
MIchelle:
I would urge you to go actually read the case
studies around these maternal mortality stats. The studies are also on the
web site, at least they were because I downloaded them a couple of years
ago. What I found/interpreted were many very ill women with various
cardiovascular disorders plus women with rapidly escalating
pre-eclampsi/eclampsia and one immediate postpartum eclamptic seizure (after
an NVB and early d/c). For most of the women who died it would seem to me
that caesarean birth was their only option for surviving childbirth, in
another time they would probably not attempted to conceive.
In thinking about this I have wondered for a
while how this increasing maternal mortality is related to the
increasing c/s rate, simply because these women were true cases of needing
c/s in other words they were definetly not elective c/s nor did any of the
cases represent unnecessary c/s, at least not to my mind. I now think there
is an indirect link. Perhaps, in the ether of the promotion of the
choice and safety of caesarean birth women who otherwise would have
considered themselves too ill to undergo pregnancy and childbirth consider
childbearing a possibility and then it becomes a probability.
I am sure there are other
possibilities.
marilyn
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 6:52
AM
Subject: [ozmidwifery] caesarean
section
Hi,
I'm new to the list but had to add a bit to the caesarean section
issue. Doing an assignment last year we had to analyse some
perinatal statistics (Qld). In the last 30 years the maternal
mortality rate has slowly and steadily increased (figures up to
1996) and while they didn't give a breakdown on the maternal deaths,
surely this has to be due to the slow but steady increase in caesarean
section? It is unbelievable that in 30 years of medical advances
that more women are dying - and no one is looking for the cause. I
didn't see the 60 minutes program, but was there any mention of the
increased maternal mortality with caesareans?
Michelle
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo!
Movies.