I wouldn’t take St. Mary’s as the vanguard of modern obstetrical care! But seriously, I don’t consider that acceptable, I think all hospitals should allow mother and baby to stay together unless there’s some legitimate reason not to. But that being said, although I realize that the “quiet alert” phase exists, and it’s not hippie nonsense, did your OB textbook say what the long term (or even the short term) effects on bonding are?
That is astounding to me. In my case and my sister’s the babies were left with us and not a word was said about keeping them in the nursery. I’m not sure they would have done it even if I’d asked. I definitely think that there’s a benefit to finding a hospital who gives you autonomy in this regard, that is not something I find acceptable. But it also doesn’t mean it can’t be found in a hospital setting.
Yeah, I’m not buying that either. Our babies never left the room. That’s standard now. They get the baby onto the mom’s chest as soon as they clean the slime off. If whynot saw that happen, it’s the exception, not the rule.
I shouldn’t have made that crack about St. Mary’s, I’ve not heard anything bad about theml (my mother-in-law was an RN and worked there). I just tend to think of Catholic hospitals as being a bit old-fashioned, but in reality, that’s not true. I think it’s part of Resurrection Health Care now, and I’m actually pretty surprised that is their policy with newborns.
I gave birth in 2004 and 2007 at Ohio State University Medical Center here in Columbus. Their protocol both times was to immediately remove the baby to an “observation nursery” for a minimum of one hour post-birth. When this happened with my daughter in 2004, I wasn’t expecting it, and agreed without really thinking. I dispatched my husband to go along with the baby. He was not permitted to go into the observation nursery and had to watch from outside the glass. It was four full hours until I got my daughter back, and that was with repeated requests to please have the baby brought back to me.
In 2007, I was forewarned due to my prior experience, and made sure to tell my OB that I wanted to at least try the first breastfeeding before the baby was removed to the observation nursery. I also had a doula with me. With their support, it was no problem to hold off the “observation nursery” until after I’d had a chance to hold the baby, nurse the baby, etc. After about 45 minutes had passed, my son fell asleep and I gladly sent him off for “observation” for an hour or so. Much better experience- because I was forewarned.
Saying that baby-friendly practices are “standard” is misleading. I am absolutely not anti-hospital in the slightest but if anyone thinks that every hospital is going to practice the baby-friendly procedures mentioned in this thread without question (rooming in, no bottlefeeding, etc) they are in danger of facing a very unpleasant surprise if they happen to get a hospital like OSUMC instead.
I am SO glad I’m not the only one who got this vibe from this:
[QUOTE=Phlosphr]
John, this is a tough question that has - in our case - spiritual connotations that I don’t really like to chat about on open boards, because it leaves the doors open to criticism of spiritual beliefs and that is generally never a good thing. What I will say, is that the mind\body connection between mother and child is very strong, and some believe that the chemical cocktails floating around the mother and baby’s brains at the time of birth are extremely powerful and are the foundation of an inner spiritual connection between mother and baby. Again I hesitate to talk too much about it because many simply call that kind of thing “foo-foo talk”. Yes, I’ve heard that before.
And with the hostility this thread is bringing up I don’t want to open too many more cans of worms!
[/QUOTE]
Let’s see, you’ve got religious beliefs you don’t want to talk about because they’d be mocked on this board. . . and birth has spiritual connotations that are a direct relation to the “mind body” connection of the baby and mom.
Silent birth means creating a calm birthing environment, without those in the presence of mother and child talking. The reason for this is to protect both mother and child from adverse spiritual effects of the birth experience.
<snip>
It [Dianetics] explains that what is said around a person when in pain and unconscious stores in a part of the mind—called the reactive mind— which is always recording. Those recordings have an effect on a person’s spiritual and emotional well-being and can even cause up to 70% of man’s physical ills, which are psychosomatic.
[/QUOTE]
Did you actually read the Nature commentary you cite here? Two different groups repeated the analysis, and neither of them found results that changed the initial findings, other than for the prematurity risk. In fact, one of them found that the home birth risk was larger than in the original study!
I was in the process of fainting from blood loss at the time. I’m sure you would have managed to overcome this minor setback to have an argument with the labor and delivery staff anyway, but I am just not as tough as you.
Well, that probably wasn’t the best time to attempt to bond anyway, then.
I’m not getting all the “the eeeeeeeeevil doctors want to pump you full of drugs and cut your baby out!!11eleventy!!” thing. My daughter was born 20 years ago in a perfectly run-of-the-mill suburban hospital with no interventions, no drugs but a bit of demerol, and she stayed with me in my room.
If you don’t trust your OB, they’re not the right OB. Find another one.
And An Arky, home birth may or may not be “reasonable”, but it is absolutely inherently more dangerous, and asserting otherwise is ridiculous.
Determining when the life of the baby is at stake is largely a matter of opinion. Educated opinion, true, but there are lots of cases where a doctor thought a c-section was needed and the woman successfully delivered vaginally anyhow.
Plus, the baby’s not always the most important person in the room. shrugs
One of the most famous cases of a forced c-section was a Nigerian woman who was in a Chicago hospital. She was only in the US temporarily, and knew that when she returned to Nigeria, a c-section scar would be lifethreatening to her in a later labor. The risk of uterine rupture was high in Nigeria, and she knew that. She knew her current fetus would probably die without the c-section, and she was okay with that to preserve her life and the lives of her future children. She was restrained with 4 point restraints and given a forced c-section anyhow.
That’s pretty fucked up, if you ask me.
Oh, neither would I, after being there! But yeah, that’s what’s happening there. Names named. Fuck the innocent. And, no, it’s not really considered a “bad” hospital, although they’re not equipped for very premature or sick babies like Northwestern and Evanston North Shore are. It’s pretty middle of the road - somewhere between Stroger and Northwestern in repute.
And really, if you think about it, MOST hospitals aren’t the vanguard, by definition. We’re spoiled for choices here where we live, but in most of the US, you have one, maybe two hospitals to choose from. Most places aren’t full of high-tech, urban hospitals committed to the newest and latest information with the newest machines that go Ping!
Short term, we see moms spending more time in the passive “Taking In” phase, rather than moving to the active “Taking Hold” phase. I’ve not seen any studies about long term effects.
Yes, they are part of Resurrection. And I should point out that there’s a difference between official hospital policy and actual hospital practice. I’m only reporting on what I saw nurses actually *doing *on the floor and was told what to do as a nursing student; I never read the handbook to see what the actual Resurrection Policies are. Policies, to me, are less important than what actually happens.
Sorry; in the interest of posting a pithy one-liner, I left out some detail.
Basically, I gave birth, everything was OK, they showed me the kid, I asked if I could breastfeed, they said, “No, we need to do the observation nursery.” I was feeling a little bit light-headed and still kind of trippy from the delivery, so I said, “ok,” not really realizing that I was agreeing to my kid being hauled off for the next four hours. I had the vague idea that they were going to go run a blood sugar check and bring her right back.
Then as soon as she was out of the room the nurse wanted me to get into a wheelchair to be transported to a “recovery room”. I tried this, and promptly fainted. They pumped some fluids into my IV, I woke up a minute later, and was allowed to stay in my current room since I was apparently too much of a pussy to handle wheelchair transport.
At that point, felt fine, would have liked to have seen my baby, and was wondering where the hell she and my husband were. Spent the next hour or so alone in my room without even any nursing staff. (I assume someone would have come in if I’d rung a call button or something.)
Well if you were on your back, you were on your back. I didn’t mean you personally should have lept of of bed or anything, but was your husband there to advocate for you?
I get how it is when it’s the first time, and you’re drained, and you’re not tracking, and you just go along with whatever they say, though.
Oh, I wish! I had to beg for my epidural. I had to beg for medication. (I didn’t need pitocin, but since my OB nurse had decided I wasn’t in labor at all and was going to go home and this was false labor, I had other issues). And my birth story isn’t that unusual in the last decade or so.
Not surprising he was in good shape, given that is was his wife who had the baby, not him, right? But seriously, I generally agree with Dio on this topic, but I would say the best time to get educated about this is prior, as you pointed out. To me, getting educated means having a happy, pleasant, safe hospital experience, not to run screaming from all hospitals in favor of something less safe.
All urgent medical decisions are matter of professional opinion. the parents are not qualified to have an opinion, and it would be senseless to let them overrid professionals.
Yes, agreed. It just gets my back up when I see people claiming that hospitals have all changed and do not involve…well, experiences like the one I had.
I will agree that in general hospitals are vastly improved from the “bad old days” and that homebirthing out of fear of hospitals is silly. But you should always go in prepared, and have a good advocate with you.
We Minnesotans do live in a pretty crunchy granola state when it comes to birthing centers. It is possible that it is not universal. At the same time, it certainly isn’t universal that OBs are delivering between tee times, babies are given bottles, babies spend their time in nurseries, and medication and interventions are pushed.
I disagree about the baby being the most important person. In fact, I think the mother’s health should always supersede the baby’s, because the baby’s not even really sentient yet, but it’s not my call for other people, obviously.
What’s the basis behind your argument that the baby is the most important person in the room?
How often is there actually going to be a choice between the mother and baby in a delivery room anyway, and how does home birthing remove that potential?
But seriously, I don’t consider that acceptable, I think all hospitals should allow mother and baby to stay together unless there’s some legitimate reason not to. But that being said, although I realize that the “quiet alert” phase exists, and it’s not hippie nonsense, did your OB textbook say what the long term (or even the short term) effects on bonding are?
And, no, it’s not really considered a “bad” hospital, although they’re not equipped for very premature or sick babies like Northwestern and Evanston North Shore are. It’s pretty middle of the road - somewhere between Stroger and Northwestern in repute.