Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
I recall a woman in Canberra about 6 years ago who had her 8th baby at home after 7 c/sections. Take heart, Sue My sister had a lscs for pih / failed induction (don't ask) and then went on to have a failed attempt at a VBAC (same Dr) he noted a thin lower segment. I agree with the natural state theory and discussed this thought with my sister, as the dr advised her not to have any more children suggesting that she was at risk of uterine rupture. She has since moved to Brisbane, had another lscs, and the OB never mentioned anything unusual with her uterus. She is now trying to fall pregnant with her 4th. megan
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Woohoo 7! I read the stories of a US woman online the other day who has had 11 c-secs - so far. No thoughts of anything else after the initial surgery. Rather sad and dangerous, I thought. J - Original Message - From: Sue Cookson To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar I recall a woman in Canberra about 6 years ago who had her 8th baby at home after 7 c/sections.Take heart,Sue My sister had a lscs for pih / failed induction (don't ask) and then went on to have a failed attempt at a VBAC (same Dr) he noted a thin lower segment. I agree with the natural state theory and discussed this thought with my sister, as the dr advised her not to have any more children suggesting that she was at risk of uterine rupture. She has since moved to Brisbane, had another lscs, and the OB never mentioned anything unusual with her uterus. She is now trying to fall pregnant with her 4th. megan
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
I prefer the term obstructed labour. Then one needs to properly describe what the obstruction was, i.e. POP and not descending despite best effors at positioning, etc. Or obstructed by medical ignorance of the natural process! Cheers Judy --- brendamanning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When women tell me they were C/Sd for FTP I always explain this to them as your baby just couldn't come out because...??? I am looking for further information from them or imparting what I know of the situation which led to their surgery. I do NOT say: you didn't dilate ie it's your fault that your Cx 'failed' to open, or the baby to descend etc. Apportioning blame is not a productive exercise here. FTP is a 'blanket term' for heaps of things as Janet says. It would be much more helpful to the women in understanding what's happened to them if we isolated the problem specified it rather than put it all under 1 heading which by its very wording assumes the mother is somehow at fault ! With kind regards Brenda Manning www.themidwife.com.au - Original Message - From: Janet Fraser To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar There's a thread on JB called FTP? FTW? which has research on it and how FTP is, oddly enough ; ) not something normally recognised or diagnosed in midwifery. FTP is one of the main reasons in Australia for c-sec, the other two reasons being breech and previous surgery. Shocking. J - Original Message - From: Kelly @ BellyBelly To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:35 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar I'd love to use all three but I will stick with the one that women know well - most of the birth stories in our forum have that in it, unfortunately. Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet Fraser Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 1:18 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar It's really failure to wait and failure to stop poking about... - Original Message - From: Kelly @ BellyBelly To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar Oh yes we are having a big discussion about the wording after that post, and I told everyone I am going to write an article: Failure to Progress: Why Doctors Need to Move On LOL I will too ;) Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet Fraser Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:16 AM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar What a bloody crock. Yes, that's a common protocol to wave at birthing women who'd be doing just fine with a bit of evidence based care. I've heard limits of 38 weeks (yes, really!) through to 41 weeks on the time a woman with previous surgery is told she's allowed to gestate before being forcibly sliced open. It depends on the hospital and whether or not she employs a private surgeon. Tell her to run for the hills if she wants to be safe. And don't get me started on the intrinsically offensive nature of that term... TOS - trial of service is what it really means! J - whose sister is currently labouring for her HBAC at 42+4 without ANY crap like that! - Original Message - From: Kelly @ BellyBelly To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:25 AM Subject: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar Just wondering what guidelines exist for trial of scar. a woman on my site said that she has been given until 41 weeks to give birth or she'll be having another caesarean. Is this right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen otherwise. Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support On Yahoo!7
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
One thing I have seen a lot of is Obs stating in
the operative notes that uterus was 'very thin' or 'translucent' and using this
as justification for the repeat c/s
One lady recently was wanting vbac very badly -
came in in early labour i.e. not really established, at T+10. Got ARM'd - 2cms
dilated, mec liquor ( not unusual post dates) CTG'd - nothing sinister on the
trace, but a few hours later was told she needed c/s for fetal distress!
Still not even in established labour, and I could see no evidence of fetal
distress on the trace. The ob wrote 'translucent lower segment' on the
notes.
Apart from the total b.s. of her needing a repeat
c/s this was so obviously a decision made by the ob without her understanding or
ability to question his decision ( I was not there - talked about it with a
colleague and we looked through the notes). Result is a woman who feels
very aggrieved and disempowered.
If she had had more knowledge and support she may
well have had the ability to say no to the ARM and continuous monitoring,
question what was deemed to be fetal distress on the monitor, and even not come
in that early in her labour or go home again to establish. Instead she has
had a second uneccessary c/s and is heading for a second bout of
PND.
Anyone have any comments on these 'thin lower
segment' claims? My belief is that it is probably a normal state for the
lower segment but 'they' see it as a sign of imminent rupture (of course if they
weren't about to slice into it they wouldn't be able to see how thin it
was)
On a slightly different tack - can anyone point me
to the latest thinking with active vaginal herpes lesions? Automatic c/s,
or is there an alternative option?
TIA Sue
- Original Message -
From:
brendamanning
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 12:37
PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
When women tell me they
were C/Sd for FTP Ialways explain this to themas "your baby just
couldn't come outbecause...??? I am looking for further
information from them or imparting what I know of the situation which led to
their surgery.
I do NOT say: "you
didn't dilate" ie it's your fault that your Cx 'failed' to open, or the baby
to descend etc. Apportioningblame is not a productive exercise
here.
FTP is a 'blanket term'
for heaps of things as Janet says.
It would be much more
helpful to the women in understanding what's happened to themif we
isolated the problem specified it rather than put it all under 1 heading
which by its very wording assumes the mother is somehow at fault
!
With kind regardsBrenda Manning www.themidwife.com.au
- Original Message -
From:
Janet
Fraser
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:36
PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
There's a thread on JB called
"FTP? FTW?" which has research on it and how FTP is, oddly enough ; ) not
something normally recognised or "diagnosed" in midwifery. FTP is one of the
main reasons in Australia for c-sec, the other two reasons being breech and
previous surgery. Shocking.
J
- Original Message -
From:
Kelly
@ BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:35
PM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
Id love to use
all three but I will stick with the one that women know well most of the
birth stories in our forum have that in it,
unfortunately
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au
Gentle Solutions
From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly
Birth Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet FraserSent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 1:18
PMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
It's
really "failure to wait" and "failure to stop poking
about"...
- Original Message -
From: Kelly
@ BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent:
Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:19 PM
Subject: RE:
[ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Oh yes we are
having a big discussion about the wording after that post, and I told
everyone I am going to write an article:
Failure to
Progress: Why Doctors Need to Move On
LOL I will
too ;)
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, Be
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
My sister had a lscs for pih / failed induction
(don't ask) and then went on to have a failed attempt at a VBAC (same Dr) he
noted a thin lower segment. I agree with the natural state theory and discussed
this thought with my sister, as the dr advised her not to have any more children
suggesting that she was at risk of uterine rupture.
She has since moved to Brisbane, had another lscs,
and the OB never mentioned anything unusual with her uterus.
She is now trying to fall pregnant with her
4th.
megan
- Original Message -
From:
Susan
Cudlipp
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 12:04
AM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
One thing I have seen a lot of is Obs stating in
the operative notes that uterus was 'very thin' or 'translucent' and using
this as justification for the repeat c/s
One lady recently was wanting vbac very badly -
came in in early labour i.e. not really established, at T+10. Got ARM'd - 2cms
dilated, mec liquor ( not unusual post dates) CTG'd - nothing sinister on the
trace, but a few hours later was told she needed c/s for fetal distress!
Still not even in established labour, and I could see no evidence of fetal
distress on the trace. The ob wrote 'translucent lower segment' on the
notes.
Apart from the total b.s. of her needing a repeat
c/s this was so obviously a decision made by the ob without her understanding
or ability to question his decision ( I was not there - talked about it with a
colleague and we looked through the notes). Result is a woman who feels
very aggrieved and disempowered.
If she had had more knowledge and support she may
well have had the ability to say no to the ARM and continuous monitoring,
question what was deemed to be fetal distress on the monitor, and even not
come in that early in her labour or go home again to establish. Instead
she has had a second uneccessary c/s and is heading for a second bout of
PND.
Anyone have any comments on these 'thin lower
segment' claims? My belief is that it is probably a normal state for the
lower segment but 'they' see it as a sign of imminent rupture (of course if
they weren't about to slice into it they wouldn't be able to see how thin it
was)
On a slightly different tack - can anyone point
me to the latest thinking with active vaginal herpes lesions? Automatic
c/s, or is there an alternative option?
TIA Sue
- Original Message -
From:
brendamanning
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 12:37
PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
When women tell me
they were C/Sd for FTP Ialways explain this to themas "your baby
just couldn't come outbecause...??? I am looking for
further information from them or imparting what I know of the situation
which led to their surgery.
I do NOT say: "you
didn't dilate" ie it's your fault that your Cx 'failed' to open, or the baby
to descend etc. Apportioningblame is not a productive exercise
here.
FTP is a 'blanket
term' for heaps of things as Janet says.
It would be much more
helpful to the women in understanding what's happened to themif we
isolated the problem specified it rather than put it all under 1
heading which by its very wording assumes the mother is somehow at fault
!
With kind regardsBrenda Manning www.themidwife.com.au
- Original Message -
From:
Janet
Fraser
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:36
PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
There's a thread on JB called
"FTP? FTW?" which has research on it and how FTP is, oddly enough ; ) not
something normally recognised or "diagnosed" in midwifery. FTP is one of
the main reasons in Australia for c-sec, the other two reasons being
breech and previous surgery. Shocking.
J
- Original Message -
From:
Kelly @ BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:35
PM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
Id love to use
all three but I will stick with the one that women know well most of
the birth stories in our forum have that in it,
unfortunately
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au
Gentle
Solutions From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly
Birth Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
It just stands to reason, doesn't it, that a muscle that stretches so far in pregnancy wouldn't be as thick as it is when empty! And yes, like everyone says, if those women weren't being carved up no one could come out with that crap. It's a bit like the "We have to induce for low liquor" rubbish when everyone who's read anything of worth knows that low liquor means bubs is on the way shortly... Pathologising the utterly normal, again! : ) J - Original Message - From: meg To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 1:08 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar My sister had a lscs for pih / failed induction (don't ask) and then went on to have a failed attempt at a VBAC (same Dr) he noted a thin lower segment. I agree with the natural state theory and discussed this thought with my sister, as the dr advised her not to have any more children suggesting that she was at risk of uterine rupture. She has since moved to Brisbane, had another lscs, and the OB never mentioned anything unusual with her uterus. She is now trying to fall pregnant with her 4th. megan - Original Message - From: Susan Cudlipp To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 12:04 AM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar One thing I have seen a lot of is Obs stating in the operative notes that uterus was 'very thin' or 'translucent' and using this as justification for the repeat c/s One lady recently was wanting vbac very badly - came in in early labour i.e. not really established, at T+10. Got ARM'd - 2cms dilated, mec liquor ( not unusual post dates) CTG'd - nothing sinister on the trace, but a few hours later was told she needed c/s for fetal distress! Still not even in established labour, and I could see no evidence of fetal distress on the trace. The ob wrote 'translucent lower segment' on the notes. Apart from the total b.s. of her needing a repeat c/s this was so obviously a decision made by the ob without her understanding or ability to question his decision ( I was not there - talked about it with a colleague and we looked through the notes). Result is a woman who feels very aggrieved and disempowered. If she had had more knowledge and support she may well have had the ability to say no to the ARM and continuous monitoring, question what was deemed to be fetal distress on the monitor, and even not come in that early in her labour or go home again to establish. Instead she has had a second uneccessary c/s and is heading for a second bout of PND. Anyone have any comments on these 'thin lower segment' claims? My belief is that it is probably a normal state for the lower segment but 'they' see it as a sign of imminent rupture (of course if they weren't about to slice into it they wouldn't be able to see how thin it was) On a slightly different tack - can anyone point me to the latest thinking with active vaginal herpes lesions? Automatic c/s, or is there an alternative option? TIA Sue - Original Message - From: brendamanning To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 12:37 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar When women tell me they were C/Sd for FTP Ialways explain this to themas "your baby just couldn't come outbecause...??? I am looking for further information from them or imparting what I know of the situation which led to their surgery. I do NOT say: "you didn't dilate" ie it's your fault that your Cx 'failed' to open, or the baby to descend etc. Apportioningblame is not a productive exercise here. FTP is a 'blanket term' for heaps of things as Janet says. It would be much more helpful to the women in understanding what's happened to themif we isolated the problem specified it rather than put it all under 1 heading which by its very wording assumes the mother is somehow at fault ! With kind regardsBrenda Manning www.themidwife.com.au - Original Message - From: Janet Fraser To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar There's a thread on JB called "FTP? FTW?" which has research on it and how FTP is, oddly enough ; ) not something normally recognised or "diagnosed" in midwifery. FTP is one of the main reasons in Australia for c-sec, the other two reasons being breech and previous surgery. Shocking
[ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Just wondering what guidelines exist for trial of scar a woman on my site said that she has been given until 41 weeks to give birth or shell be having another caesarean. Is this right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen otherwise Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Kelly, I think it depends on the womans care-giver his personal stance. I have 4 women duethis monthwho are having VBACs they each have a different Dr who has a different set of guidelines. The one in hospital at the moment with PIH is being pressured to accept ARM as IOL (with an unripe Cx, now there is a recipe for 'failed IOL" if ever I saw one) because she is 40+4. If she chooses to wait ( her PIH doesn't worsen) she is booked for C/S regardless of condition at 41/40. If her PIH worsens she will consent to El C/S anytime but wants to wait if stable. She understands well that surgerycannot be performed without her consent. However, obviously she wants to do what's best for her baby. They are really under the pump aren't they ? It's not conducive to any 'hormonal release' that'sfor sure. With kind regardsBrenda Manning www.themidwife.com.au - Original Message - From: Kelly @ BellyBelly To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:25 AM Subject: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar Just wondering what guidelines exist for trial of scar a woman on my site said that she has been given until 41 weeks to give birth or shell be having another caesarean. Is this right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen otherwise Best Regards,Kelly ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
What a bloody crock. Yes, that's a common protocol to wave at birthing women who'd be doing just fine with a bit of evidence based care. I've heard limits of 38 weeks (yes, really!) through to 41 weeks on the time a woman with previous surgery is told she's "allowed" to gestate before being forcibly sliced open. It depends on the hospital and whether or not she employs a private surgeon. Tell her to run for the hills if she wants to be safe. And don't get me started on the intrinsically offensive nature of that term... TOS - trial of service is what it really means! J - whose sister is currently labouring for her HBAC at 42+4 without ANY crap like that! - Original Message - From: Kelly @ BellyBelly To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:25 AM Subject: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar Just wondering what guidelines exist for trial of scar a woman on my site said that she has been given until 41 weeks to give birth or shell be having another caesarean. Is this right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen otherwise Best Regards,Kelly ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support
RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Oh yes we are having a big discussion about the wording after that post, and I told everyone I am going to write an article: Failure to Progress: Why Doctors Need to Move On LOL I will too ;) Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet Fraser Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:16 AM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar What a bloody crock. Yes, that's a common protocol to wave at birthing women who'd be doing just fine with a bit of evidence based care. I've heard limits of 38 weeks (yes, really!) through to 41 weeks on the time a woman with previous surgery is told she's allowed to gestate before being forcibly sliced open. It depends on the hospital and whether or not she employs a private surgeon. Tell her to run for the hills if she wants to be safe. And don't get me started on the intrinsically offensive nature of that term... TOS - trial of service is what it really means! J - whose sister is currently labouring for her HBAC at 42+4 without ANY crap like that! - Original Message - From: Kelly @ BellyBelly To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:25 AM Subject: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar Just wondering what guidelines exist for trial of scar a woman on my site said that she has been given until 41 weeks to give birth or shell be having another caesarean. Is this right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen otherwise Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
It's really "failure to wait" and
"failure to stop poking about"...
- Original Message -
From:
Kelly @
BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:19
PM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
Oh yes we are having
a big discussion about the wording after that post, and I told everyone I am
going to write an article:
Failure to Progress:
Why Doctors Need to Move On
LOL I will too
;)
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions
From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth
Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet FraserSent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:16
AMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
What a
bloody crock. Yes, that's a common protocol to wave at birthing women who'd be
doing just fine with a bit of evidence based care. I've heard limits of 38
weeks (yes, really!) through to 41 weeks on the time a woman with previous
surgery is told she's "allowed" to gestate before being forcibly sliced open.
It depends on the hospital and whether or not she employs a private
surgeon.
Tell her to
run for the hills if she wants to be safe. And don't get me started on the
intrinsically offensive nature of that term... TOS - trial of service is what
it really means!
J -
whose sister is currently labouring for her HBAC at 42+4 without ANY crap like
that!
- Original Message -
From: Kelly @
BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent:
Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:25 AM
Subject:
[ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Just wondering what guidelines
exist for trial of scar
a woman on my site said that she has been given
until 41 weeks to give birth or shell be having another caesarean. Is this
right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen otherwise
Best Regards,Kelly ZanteyCreator,
BellyBelly.com.au
Gentle Solutions
From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth
Support -
http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support
RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Id love to use all three but I will stick with the one that women know well most of the birth stories in our forum have that in it, unfortunately Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet Fraser Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 1:18 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar It's really failure to wait and failure to stop poking about... - Original Message - From: Kelly @ BellyBelly To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:19 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar Oh yes we are having a big discussion about the wording after that post, and I told everyone I am going to write an article: Failure to Progress: Why Doctors Need to Move On LOL I will too ;) Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet Fraser Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:16 AM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar What a bloody crock. Yes, that's a common protocol to wave at birthing women who'd be doing just fine with a bit of evidence based care. I've heard limits of 38 weeks (yes, really!) through to 41 weeks on the time a woman with previous surgery is told she's allowed to gestate before being forcibly sliced open. It depends on the hospital and whether or not she employs a private surgeon. Tell her to run for the hills if she wants to be safe. And don't get me started on the intrinsically offensive nature of that term... TOS - trial of service is what it really means! J - whose sister is currently labouring for her HBAC at 42+4 without ANY crap like that! - Original Message - From: Kelly @ BellyBelly To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:25 AM Subject: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar Just wondering what guidelines exist for trial of scar a woman on my site said that she has been given until 41 weeks to give birth or shell be having another caesarean. Is this right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen otherwise Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
There's a thread on JB called "FTP?
FTW?" which has research on it and how FTP is, oddly enough ; ) not something
normally recognised or "diagnosed" in midwifery. FTP is one of the main reasons
in Australia for c-sec, the other two reasons being breech and previous surgery.
Shocking.
J
- Original Message -
From:
Kelly @
BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:35
PM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
Id love to use all
three but I will stick with the one that women know well most of the birth
stories in our forum have that in it,
unfortunately
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions
From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly
Birth Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet FraserSent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 1:18
PMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
It's really
"failure to wait" and "failure to stop poking
about"...
- Original Message -
From: Kelly @
BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent:
Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:19 PM
Subject: RE:
[ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Oh yes we are
having a big discussion about the wording after that post, and I told
everyone I am going to write an article:
Failure to
Progress: Why Doctors Need to Move On
LOL I will too
;)
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au
Gentle Solutions
From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth
Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet FraserSent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:16
AMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
What a
bloody crock. Yes, that's a common protocol to wave at birthing women who'd
be doing just fine with a bit of evidence based care. I've heard limits of
38 weeks (yes, really!) through to 41 weeks on the time a woman with
previous surgery is told she's "allowed" to gestate before being forcibly
sliced open. It depends on the hospital and whether or not she employs a
private surgeon.
Tell her
to run for the hills if she wants to be safe. And don't get me started on
the intrinsically offensive nature of that term... TOS - trial of service is
what it really means!
J -
whose sister is currently labouring for her HBAC at 42+4 without ANY crap
like that!
- Original Message -
From: Kelly @
BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent:
Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:25 AM
Subject:
[ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Just wondering what guidelines
exist for trial of scar
a woman on my site said that she has been given
until 41 weeks to give birth or shell be having another caesarean. Is
this right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen otherwise
Best Regards,Kelly ZanteyCreator,
BellyBelly.com.au
Gentle Solutions
From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth
Support -
http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support
Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
When women tell me they
were C/Sd for FTP Ialways explain this to themas "your baby just
couldn't come outbecause...??? I am looking for further
information from them or imparting what I know of the situation which led to
their surgery.
I do NOT say: "you didn't
dilate" ie it's your fault that your Cx 'failed' to open, or the baby to descend
etc. Apportioningblame is not a productive exercise here.
FTP is a 'blanket term'
for heaps of things as Janet says.
It would be much more
helpful to the women in understanding what's happened to themif we
isolated the problem specified it rather than put it all under 1 heading
which by its very wording assumes the mother is somehow at fault !
With kind regardsBrenda Manning www.themidwife.com.au
- Original Message -
From:
Janet
Fraser
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:36
PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
There's a thread on JB called "FTP?
FTW?" which has research on it and how FTP is, oddly enough ; ) not something
normally recognised or "diagnosed" in midwifery. FTP is one of the main
reasons in Australia for c-sec, the other two reasons being breech and
previous surgery. Shocking.
J
- Original Message -
From:
Kelly @
BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:35
PM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
Id love to use all
three but I will stick with the one that women know well most of the birth
stories in our forum have that in it,
unfortunately
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au
Gentle Solutions
From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly
Birth Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet FraserSent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 1:18
PMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
It's
really "failure to wait" and "failure to stop poking
about"...
- Original Message -
From: Kelly @
BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent:
Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:19 PM
Subject: RE:
[ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Oh yes we are
having a big discussion about the wording after that post, and I told
everyone I am going to write an article:
Failure to
Progress: Why Doctors Need to Move On
LOL I will
too ;)
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au
Gentle Solutions
From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth
Support - http://www.bellybellycom.au/birth-support
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janet FraserSent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:16
AMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Trial of
Scar
What a
bloody crock. Yes, that's a common protocol to wave at birthing women
who'd be doing just fine with a bit of evidence based care. I've heard
limits of 38 weeks (yes, really!) through to 41 weeks on the time a woman
with previous surgery is told she's "allowed" to gestate before being
forcibly sliced open. It depends on the hospital and whether or not she
employs a private surgeon.
Tell her
to run for the hills if she wants to be safe. And don't get me started on
the intrinsically offensive nature of that term... TOS - trial of service
is what it really means!
J -
whose sister is currently labouring for her HBAC at 42+4 without ANY crap
like that!
- Original Message -
From: Kelly
@ BellyBelly
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent:
Thursday, July 06, 2006 8:25 AM
Subject:
[ozmidwifery] Trial of Scar
Just wondering what
guidelines exist for trial of scar
a woman on my site said that she has
been given until 41 weeks to give birth or shell be having another
caesarean. Is this right? I am sure I have heard otherwise and seen
otherwise
Best
Regards,Kelly
ZanteyCreator, BellyBelly.com.au
Gentle
Solutions From Conception to ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth
Support -
http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support
