VeggieBoards banner
1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,962 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thalia View Post

Don't people choose the dates of their inducement all the time?
If they're doing it to watch the Superbowl or the World Series or the finale of Lost, then they're just as silly as this woman.

I supppose I'm just not dedicated enough to my favorite teams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,494 Posts
i find this article sad. i find elective c-sections problematic as well as inducements. there is a lot of material out there to suggest that these things are dangerous to both mothers and children, often resulting in premature births and the related issues.

it's sad when a child's health is less important than a doctor's pocket, golf game, or a father's football tickets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,494 Posts
due dates given by ultrasound are known for being inaccurate up to 3 weeks inaccurate. also, many people count form the 'last menses' which also gives an inacuracy (could be anywhere from 1 to 3 weeks).

both of these methods place "estimated" due dates, which typically are anywhere from 1 to 3 weeks off--the date being 1-3 weeks earlier than the actual due date if one used the date of ovulation (via charting or related).

thus, many babies are being born up to 3 weeks prematurely, and often they'll schedule a section for the 35th week (when lungs are developed), but based on an estimated due date. thus, babies electively induced at the 40th week may be having a baby as young as only 37 weeks (still 3 weeks of gestation), babies electively induced at the 35th may be only 32 weeks and thus may not be fully developed to handle the outside world.

beyond this, both inducing and elective c-sections carry risks to both mother and infant for injury or death. these risks are both unnecessary and they are far lesser when birth naturally occurs. there is plenty of information about this on the internet, honestly.

my biggest problem isn't with this woman's choice, but with the underlying theory that it's ok to induce birth for convenience.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,618 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoebird View Post

beyond this, both inducing and elective c-sections carry risks to both mother and infant for injury or death. these risks are both unnecessary and they are far lesser when birth naturally occurs. there is plenty of information about this on the internet, honestly.
There are also valid medical reasons to to elect to be induced or have a c-section. I don't believe there is anything wrong with a mother and her physician making a decision that is best for them, and I am certain together they can come up with a better plan that what a yoga instructor can give them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,494 Posts
tame:

first, i agree that there are 'valid medical reasons' for c sections and inducements which far outweigh the risks of natural births in that situation. I also agree that parents and doctors can make these decisions. but, this is irrelevant to the post topic--which is about inducing or sectioning purely electively, that is without a medical reason, for reasons of convenience.

second, my profession doesn't preclude me from having an opinion on a cultural ideology about a woman having a baby early for non-medical reasons such as 'her husband wnats to go to a football game.' to me, this doesn't quallify as a 'valid medical reason' for inducing or sectioning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,962 Posts
Perhaps a valid medical reasoning argument could be made on behalf of the husband. If the mom went into labor on game day and he left her alone at the hospital, she might kill him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,962 Posts
Where did you read that?
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top