Hi everyone,
As a journalist and mother of four I was disgusted by the 60 minutes debacle. Hence, the reason I freelance - and probably the reason no publication except for Wellbeing was interested in my "homebirth-not just for hippies" article. I'm thrilled the editor of Wellbeing liked it but it's kind of like preaching to the converted. Other's had a read but the same story was 'it's not for us'. I love being on this list and keeping up to date with birthing issues. Your responses to Glenda are wonderful and do not show signs of weariness. I only hope she takes notice of your points and the information you give her!
Anyway just wanted to add my opinion two bobs worth,
Kylie
>From: "Dean & Jo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] CS story
>Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:44:22 +0930
>
>Hi everyone,
>Here is the letter I sent in yesterday:
>
>Dear Glenda,
>I am writing to you to express my concern about the proposed debate on
>elective caesareans. As co-ordinator of CARES SA (Caesarean Awareness
>Recovery education Support SA) and doula (birth support companion) I am
>dreading yet another sensationalistic biased story/segment on caesarean
>births that channel 9 seem to relish in doing. The recent 60 minutes
>story was so biased and in some instances medically incorrect; I am
>again filled with dread that women in our society are going to be
>subjected to non-evidence based information provided by �experts� and
>women saying CS is the easiest way to birth when they in fact have never
>experienced vaginal birth to be able to offer this opinion.
>
>The trouble I have with this type of journalism is the same old doctors
>have their say, without opportunity for a decent rebuttal. Even in the
>context of debate, I am weary due to the type of OB invited to speak.
>For every one OB who believes that a woman�s body is fundamentally
>incapable of birthing vaginally, there are ten who support vaginal birth
>as the safe option that it is� however channel 9 never seems to access
>these doctors! It seems to be the same faces and expert opinions each
>time!? Why an obstetrician has a greater understanding of a normal
>healthy birth over a midwife amazes me when they are trained in treating
>complications hence the expert on complicated births not healthy ones???
>Why a women who has never had a safe normal vaginal birth can comment
>about what is best amazes me even further, as I have said before.
>
>Even the pro vaginal birth people are the same: women (usually portrayed
>as hippy home birthers) or midwives (despite the fact that midwives are
>the international BEST professional for healthy birthing women) and yet
>what they have to say is dismissed by OB having the last word or the CS
>mum who says �my baby would have died without a cs�. (Just letting you
>know, babies die and even more women die from CS as well.)
>
>After the recent 60 minutes story my support group and others around the
>country were inundated with deeply upset women who felt the story had
>trivialized what they relate as a traumatic experience in their lives.
>CS does increase chances of post partum depression and even post
>traumatic shock, yet high profile journalists are given free reign to
>insult these women�s trauma by stating that birth is not a right of
>passage into motherhood. Also, the medical reason given by Tracy that
>her CS prevents incontinence is sadly incorrect: an Australian study has
>shown that lack of pelvic floor exercises and pregnancy hormones affect
>the function of the pelvic floor and CS birth can do nothing to prevent
>it. Pity though as the incorrect information presented by Tracy Curo, a
>journalist!, will have impacted many women�s desires to choose CS. I
>hope that in future a journalist will show more professionalism by
>presenting information that is at the very least accurate.
>
>I implore you if this debate does go ahead to serious consider the
>population that has been adversely affected by CS birth and acknowledge
>these people. I assure you their grief and adverse emotional reactions
>from their caesarean experiences are very real and very damaging.
>
>It would be great also to hear the opinions of OBs that have not graced
>our screens so frequently in the past.
>
>I actually think that this debate is futile. The real issues include not
>what is �better�, but:
>
>~ Why is it that the rare but extremely serious risks of Caesarean
>births are steadily on the increase and yet the safety of CS is
>continuously being shouted from the roof tops, and women are not being
>told these risks? Some of these risks are more common than the risk of
>uterine rupture in a VBAC (vaginal birth after cs) and yet VBAC is
>consider too risky for many women!
>~ Why is vaginal birth considered so risky in a day and age where women
>are the healthiest and well educated?
>~ Why has birth become so medicalized; and is it possible that the
>perceived damaged caused by vaginal birth is actually damage caused by
>intervening in a process that is in fact normal.
>~ Why it is that women who birth in the private sector are subjected to
>more interventions that those in the public sector?
>~ Why is it that even though birth centres and midwifery led programs
>are perpetually full (women having to book almost at conception!) and
>yet these models of care are not expanded?
>~ Why is it that New Zealand women can access government covered
>midwifery services including homebirth and we can not? Over 70% of
>birthing women in NZ use midwives and our best Australian midwives
>desperately want to leave our shores to work in an environment that sees
>birth as a healthy event in women�s lives and not one that can only be
>experienced with the �aid� of a surgeons knife?
>
>All of this is proven by research.
>
>I could go on but wont. I wish you luck with your debate and hope that
>there is opportunity for some real issues to be discussed. I hope that
>this will not be yet another story that leaves women misinformed,
>insulted and outraged as the 60 minutes segment and many of the ACA
>segments have done so in the past. I personally feel that our society
>is getting tired of this discussion topic and would be more interested
>in looking deeper into the issues of birthing.
>I don�t mean this to be an attack on you personally, but as you can well
>imagine the many CS stories in the media have caught my attention and
>even involvement, and unfortunately all have, without exception, been
>aired with heavy biased editing and (as I have mentioned so frequently)
>seriously subjective information. This can and does impact on women in
>more ways than can be imagined. The station/newspapers may get letters
>of concern after these stories are aired/printed, but groups like CARES
>are left to deal with the emotional distress caused by these stories.
>
>Yours sincerely
>
>J Bainbridge
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Philippa
>Scott
>Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 10:58 AM
>To: ozmidwifery
>Subject: [ozmidwifery] Fw: �/S Story
>
>
>Philippa Scott
>Birth Buddies
>----- Original Message -----
>From: HYPERLINK "mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"Philippa Scott
>To: HYPERLINK "mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 10:54 AM
>Subject: �/S Story
>
>I would love for this to be a story that actually has some positive
>effect on this situation. Glenda, it is not about a debate between
>supporting elective c/s or opposing elective c/s. It is about truly
>informed choice & women being responsible for their own decisions. If
>you are going to do a story that will do justice to this issue then I
>would be pleased to participate. As it stands though I dont have faith
>in Channel Nine to present a fair & well balanced story. You use the
>same "experts" each time & end with some celebrity saying how pleased
>she was. Have you ever spoken to a woman who has had a c/s & would not
>go down that road again unless in an emergency? I can tell you there are
>plenty of women out there who prefer Vaginal births to c/s after having
>had both. Also lets look at the effect on the tax payer. If a c/s is
>truly elective then why is the taxpayer being made to pay for it. They
>want us to pay for some peoples choice & yet wont pay for other peoples
>choice. Some women want a personal midwife & the option to birth where
>ever they choose including at home. This is considerably less costly but
>the taxpayer is not asked to pay for this, they are forced to pay more
>for that woman's unwanted choice of a Dr./hospital birth. Lets make this
>about informed choice & the right of women to choice what is best for
>them & then I would be happy to talk to you.
>Regards,
>Philippa Scott
>Birth Buddies
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004
>
>
>---
>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/8/2004
>
