Re: [ozmidwifery] Speaking of steps backwards...

2006-10-02 Thread Justine Caines
Dear Kelly Is your friend well versed on the real risk of rupture? Has she articulated that the risk of spontaneous abortion (at 1-2%) following amniocentesis is higher than rupture from VBAC (and remember rupture is not always fatal). Get her to put the "risk"into perspective. It is hard that

Re: [ozmidwifery] Speaking of steps backwards...

2006-10-02 Thread Synnes
Fight it, I know its so tiring when you're pregnant to have to fight for these rights, but she may just come to an agreement witht he hospital that she will be happy with. Take it from a VBAC herself, she needs to be 'bloody' minded all the way thru the pregnancy and thru the birth. Stick with

Re: [ozmidwifery] Speaking of steps backwards...

2006-10-02 Thread Jo Bourne
Well there is nothing they can do about making you accept a medical procedure you don't want!! Her body, her baby, her choice to be constantly monitored or not. On 02/10/2006, at 5:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From a woman wanting a VBAC in my forums, who is also a dear friend and I hop

RE: [ozmidwifery] Speaking of steps backwards...

2006-10-02 Thread Mary Murphy
I think the answer is a clear “NO”.  The research still does not support continuous monitoring.  Even in VBAC’s the monitor does NOT warn of impending rupture.  It tells one when the baby is in the abdomen.  Other subtle clues are more important warning than the monitor. Nancy Reagan had it