The busy time for most L&D units is summer time..."prime time"...those crisp cool autumn, and long, cold winter nights come to fruition, and we are slammed for the months of June through August...and this year it's been worse than most.
This year though, we kept getting slammed right on through September into October. Things seem to have settled down a bit, but we are still doing more deliveries than we did a year ago...which prompted a discussion between the nurses and residents last night...
Are these Recession Babies?
The timing seems about right...if indeed the recession that we are now told is resolving, peaked in late 2008 to early 2009.
Think about it. You've been laid off...or your partner has been laid off. No money to go out, you can't pound the pavement every minute of every weekday, so what's a person to do...
Have Sex!!!!! Why not? You're not exhausted from a busy work week, but you are stressed out from not being employed; or maybe you are stressed from the fear of losing your job.
I don't know about y'all, but I think sex is a pretty good stress reliever. Of course, I, in my advancing years, am not as likely to conceive as others...Thank God!
So, I put this question out to all of my other L&D nurse blogger friends out there...
Have you seen an increase in births that don't seem attributable to the usual summertime surge in deliveries?
Inquiring minds want to know...
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Have We Been Conned??? (or, Midwives and Doulas and Prosecuters Oh My! Redux))
So the big TLC event arrived...Anna Duggar gave birth to her first baby, a little girl, at home, and it was filmed by the crew and publicised for all to witness.
Good thing, right? After all, the Duggars have a big following...more ammunition in the "birth is not a medical event, homebirth is safe" arsenal.
Wrong.
When Josh and Anna "decide at the last minute" (I don't believe that for a minute...I suspect that this entire thing was planned) that they want to have their baby at home because their doctor is not in town, they call their Bradley teacher to ask her if she would still be their "doula" for their birth. Of course, she would.
Of course.
Except that the "doula", as it seems to appear on the show, was the only birth professional in the home at the time of birth. Interestingly enough, this "doula", seems to carry an awful lot of equipment that, during my training as a doula by DONA (Doulas of North America), I was specifically taught it was out of my scope of practice to provide to a family.
If indeed what we saw on this program is what actually happened, I think we've been conned by the Duggars, and their "doula".
Don't get me wrong. I think the Duggars are a pretty remarkable family. I don't agree with their "baby a year" lifestyle, but they seem to be self supporting, hard working people who unapologetically live according to their beliefs; but they've had the opportunity, thanks to TLC's penchant for pandering to the public's (and of course I've allowed myself to sink to this level) voyeuristic tendencies, to subtly or not so subtly use their show as a platform for those beliefs.
Now, we're all entitled to our beliefs...after all, it's a free country...but let's at least be honest about them, especially if we have the opportunity to display them in a platform that allows for millions of viewers to be exposed to them. If you believe in a concept, then say so; be willing to stand behind your beliefs...don't just sneak them in under the guise of something else, and, as a result, put that "something else" at risk to serve your own purposes...which is exactly what I think this family did.
The concept of a doula is difficult enough to promote in this culture of medicalised birth. When they appear to be attending home births as the primary birth attendant, a role for which they are specifically, if they are trained properly, taught is not in their scope of practice, their function is further undermined; as such, their role, along with the wonderful, needed, often vital service that they provide to both their clients, and yes, beleaguered nurses who support non-interventive birth practices, is subject to even more misunderstanding. This puts the entire profession (and it is a skilled profession), at risk...as well as the health of the clients they serve. It also puts the profession of midwifery at risk...allowing the public to think that anyone with training as a doula or a childbirth educator can hang out a shingle and call themselves a midwife.
Was it truly a "doula" that served as the attending professional at Josh and Anna's birth? Or was it a midwife flying under the radar, as it seems the one tending to the family in my most recent post was? To her credit, the woman who assisted Anna allowed herself to be filmed, and, if I recall correctly, her full name to be used when her Bradley Childbirth class was filmed; so if she indeed was a midwife posing as a doula, why not just say so? I don't know what the laws are in Arkansas regarding what professionals may serve as the primary attendant at a home birth; but with the recent press regarding homebirth being so negative, and with ACOG using every opportunity to bully the public into avoiding the practice, this episode of the show can only jeopardize the cause of those who are working so hard to establish a woman's right to give birth at home with a properly trained and skilled attendant.
With a properly trained and skilled attendant.
That is the key concept here.
There will always be those who choose to give birth unassisted. I don't agree with them.
Since the dawn of time, women have, by nature, sought out experienced women to assist them during their time of giving birth. Birth, while it is, given the right circumstances, i.e. a healthy mother, carrying a healthy baby, laboring in a clean, comfortable well-equipped environment, is safe, it is still unpredictable. The unexpected can happen, and things can go downhill fast. One of the biggest hindrances to homebirth in the United States (after the ignorance of the public, the sensationalism of the media, and the machinations of ACOG, the AMA, and now the ACNM, that is), is that we don't have the infrastructure that other countries that have such good homebirth statistics (and as a result, good overall birth statistics) have. We don't have a system where a family can prepare, with the full support of the medical community, for a homebirth. We don't have a system where the local emergency management system is made aware that a woman is laboring at home in the community, and resources are made available (i.e., an ambulance) should they be needed; and we're never going to get those things if the public, and the government remains ignorant of the safety of homebirth...with a properly trained and skilled attendant.
Families who chose to birth unassisted have the right, I suppose, to put their laboring mother and unborn children at the risk of the unexpected. If your "rugged individualism" means that you are willing to accept that risk (to say nothing of your unborn child, who doesn't get a say in your "choice"), then so be it; but don't attempt to con the rest of the world into thinking that you are doing it with an skilled birth attendant when you are not. Conversely, if you have a skilled birth attendant, then say so. Either way, be consistent. Don't allow your own selfish need to get what you want to confuse the issue for an already confused public, by default allowing the powers that be to use your "example" as a tool in their arsenal to damage what little progress homebirth and midwifery advocates have made.
There is homebirth, attended by a properly trained, skilled midwife; and then there is unassisted birth. The first is unquestionably safer than the second; and while it may be your right (ethically at least...because legal rights are being continually reinterpreted concerning reproduction), to give birth unassisted, it is not your right to do so at the expense of those who are working within the system, for their own right to give birth at home, with a midwife.
Where was the midwife at the Duggars birth? Who was the midwife? Was there a midwife?
ACOG is gonna love this.
Thanks, Duggars.
Good thing, right? After all, the Duggars have a big following...more ammunition in the "birth is not a medical event, homebirth is safe" arsenal.
Wrong.
When Josh and Anna "decide at the last minute" (I don't believe that for a minute...I suspect that this entire thing was planned) that they want to have their baby at home because their doctor is not in town, they call their Bradley teacher to ask her if she would still be their "doula" for their birth. Of course, she would.
Of course.
Except that the "doula", as it seems to appear on the show, was the only birth professional in the home at the time of birth. Interestingly enough, this "doula", seems to carry an awful lot of equipment that, during my training as a doula by DONA (Doulas of North America), I was specifically taught it was out of my scope of practice to provide to a family.
If indeed what we saw on this program is what actually happened, I think we've been conned by the Duggars, and their "doula".
Don't get me wrong. I think the Duggars are a pretty remarkable family. I don't agree with their "baby a year" lifestyle, but they seem to be self supporting, hard working people who unapologetically live according to their beliefs; but they've had the opportunity, thanks to TLC's penchant for pandering to the public's (and of course I've allowed myself to sink to this level) voyeuristic tendencies, to subtly or not so subtly use their show as a platform for those beliefs.
Now, we're all entitled to our beliefs...after all, it's a free country...but let's at least be honest about them, especially if we have the opportunity to display them in a platform that allows for millions of viewers to be exposed to them. If you believe in a concept, then say so; be willing to stand behind your beliefs...don't just sneak them in under the guise of something else, and, as a result, put that "something else" at risk to serve your own purposes...which is exactly what I think this family did.
The concept of a doula is difficult enough to promote in this culture of medicalised birth. When they appear to be attending home births as the primary birth attendant, a role for which they are specifically, if they are trained properly, taught is not in their scope of practice, their function is further undermined; as such, their role, along with the wonderful, needed, often vital service that they provide to both their clients, and yes, beleaguered nurses who support non-interventive birth practices, is subject to even more misunderstanding. This puts the entire profession (and it is a skilled profession), at risk...as well as the health of the clients they serve. It also puts the profession of midwifery at risk...allowing the public to think that anyone with training as a doula or a childbirth educator can hang out a shingle and call themselves a midwife.
Was it truly a "doula" that served as the attending professional at Josh and Anna's birth? Or was it a midwife flying under the radar, as it seems the one tending to the family in my most recent post was? To her credit, the woman who assisted Anna allowed herself to be filmed, and, if I recall correctly, her full name to be used when her Bradley Childbirth class was filmed; so if she indeed was a midwife posing as a doula, why not just say so? I don't know what the laws are in Arkansas regarding what professionals may serve as the primary attendant at a home birth; but with the recent press regarding homebirth being so negative, and with ACOG using every opportunity to bully the public into avoiding the practice, this episode of the show can only jeopardize the cause of those who are working so hard to establish a woman's right to give birth at home with a properly trained and skilled attendant.
With a properly trained and skilled attendant.
That is the key concept here.
There will always be those who choose to give birth unassisted. I don't agree with them.
Since the dawn of time, women have, by nature, sought out experienced women to assist them during their time of giving birth. Birth, while it is, given the right circumstances, i.e. a healthy mother, carrying a healthy baby, laboring in a clean, comfortable well-equipped environment, is safe, it is still unpredictable. The unexpected can happen, and things can go downhill fast. One of the biggest hindrances to homebirth in the United States (after the ignorance of the public, the sensationalism of the media, and the machinations of ACOG, the AMA, and now the ACNM, that is), is that we don't have the infrastructure that other countries that have such good homebirth statistics (and as a result, good overall birth statistics) have. We don't have a system where a family can prepare, with the full support of the medical community, for a homebirth. We don't have a system where the local emergency management system is made aware that a woman is laboring at home in the community, and resources are made available (i.e., an ambulance) should they be needed; and we're never going to get those things if the public, and the government remains ignorant of the safety of homebirth...with a properly trained and skilled attendant.
Families who chose to birth unassisted have the right, I suppose, to put their laboring mother and unborn children at the risk of the unexpected. If your "rugged individualism" means that you are willing to accept that risk (to say nothing of your unborn child, who doesn't get a say in your "choice"), then so be it; but don't attempt to con the rest of the world into thinking that you are doing it with an skilled birth attendant when you are not. Conversely, if you have a skilled birth attendant, then say so. Either way, be consistent. Don't allow your own selfish need to get what you want to confuse the issue for an already confused public, by default allowing the powers that be to use your "example" as a tool in their arsenal to damage what little progress homebirth and midwifery advocates have made.
There is homebirth, attended by a properly trained, skilled midwife; and then there is unassisted birth. The first is unquestionably safer than the second; and while it may be your right (ethically at least...because legal rights are being continually reinterpreted concerning reproduction), to give birth unassisted, it is not your right to do so at the expense of those who are working within the system, for their own right to give birth at home, with a midwife.
Where was the midwife at the Duggars birth? Who was the midwife? Was there a midwife?
ACOG is gonna love this.
Thanks, Duggars.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Midwives or Doulas and Prosecuters, Oh My!
There's a family in the midwest that is in a terrible predicament...one that is grossly unfair, and my heart goes out to them. The information on their website is that, after giving birth to a healthy child at home, with the assistance of a midwife "they made the decision"...(a few hours later)..." to call 911 just to be safe" because they were "a bit concerned about the mom". In the jurisdiction in which they placed the call, since a child was involved, the police were required to respond as well. The EMS personnel insisted that the baby "needed immediate medical attention", so mother and baby were transferred to the local hospital, both were found to be well and healthy, and after a few hours were released. The police took statements from both the midwife, and the woman's husband.
Two months later however, the family was served with a summons to appear in court having had the charges of child endangerment levied against them. At their most recent hearing, they were offered a plea bargain for the charge of "disorderly conduct", which the family chose not to accept because they feel that they "are not guilty of anything", that "a guilty plea would validate the charges against" them, and that a "guilty plea would give the impression that homebirth is wrong, and possibly open the door for other families to be prosecuted". All noble arguments, but not exactly in their best interests. In fact, despite this family's earnest sincerity (and I do believe they are sincere), I'm not particularly certain that their arguments are even in the best interests of the homebirth community at large.
I agree that this family did nothing wrong. I support their right to give birth in the place of their choosing, with an appropriately trained, skilled, experienced attendant of their choosing; but despite my compassion for this family, and my desire to help them, and my fervent prayer that the charges will be dropped, I have concerns. There must be more important issues for the authorities to be addressing than a homebirth where the outcome was healthy and safe.
Or is there?
Whenever I see "calls for support" go out over the web for midwives or families that are being pursued by the legal system for whatever charges that can be trumped up regarding a homebirth (practicing medicine or nursing without a license, child endangerment, etc.), it is in my nature to question both the reasoning of the local authorities, and the actual story of those who are being charged. More than once I've heeded the call to a "persecuted" midwife only to find out that there may actually have been some questionable management of the situation. It's a sad reality in our culture that, due to the tenuous legal standing of midwives in general, and homebirth and Direct Entry midwives in particular, that the care the family received must be beyond reproach. That is difficult enough to prove, even in the best circumstances, when we've got the machinations of the AMA, ACOG, and sensationalist reporting such as the "Perils of Midwifery" piece recently aired by the Today show swirling around us. It becomes even more difficult to prove when those who are being prosecuted are not being forthright with every minute detail of the situation.
So, quick to my trusty Iphone I went, dialed my beloved friend C., childbirth educator and doula extraordinaire, who also happens to be in regular communication with our local CPMs. It seems that indeed, a small piece of information has been overlooked in the most recent reports of the incident. In initial media reports, the midwife, when giving her statement to the police, identified herself as the family's "doula".
Whaaaat? Now, when a midwife transfers her clients to a hospital, she certainly does cease to become the primary care giver, and steps instead into the role of doula. However, during the incident about which she was giving her statement, she was acting as the primary care provider. That role, as such, places her in a position of responsibility regarding the outcome of the situation. By identifying herself as a doula, this midwife exposed her client to suspicion that they were attempting to give birth unassisted, and I said as much when I questioned the family and their supporters on the informational website.
What I did not point out at the time was that I was not questioning the family's right to give birth any way they chose (I wasn't...although I won't mislead anyone here and say that I am in favor of giving birth without a skilled care provider in attendance, be that physician or midwife...but that is for another post). I was simply pointing out two things that could have a very important impact on the outcome of their case. 1). Those who were telling the story, be they supporters or the family themselves were not being forthcoming with all the pertinent information, and 2). A midwife who identifies herself as a doula, is going to be perceived as someone with something to hide...and so will her clients.
Well, immediately I was accosted by both supporters of (of whom I still consider myself to be among...I just want more information), and members of the family, including the much beleaguered mother. Was I actually insinuating that this family did not have the "right" to an unassisted birth if they chose?; that the charges were valid if there wasn't a midwife present? From there the arguments became not about how best to support and provide for the best possible legal outcome for the family, but a heated discussion, mostly directed at me, about the family's "right" to choose to birth in whatever manner they saw fit. Try as I might, until one post late in the day, I could not convince those who saw red the moment they read my words, that this was not about the family's "rights"...it was about getting all the information in their defense out on the table where it could be considered...and perhaps improve their legal standing. Ironically, that post was from a mother who chose to have several of her children unassisted. She simply pointed out the dominant cultural biases against homebirth, and how being seen as potentially giving birth unassisted were not going to work in the family's legal favor, despite their philosophical "right" to do so.
The mother says that she stands beside her midwife 100 percent.
But is her midwife standing beside her 100 percent, when she identifies herself, not as a midwife, but as a doula, whose role by definition, is anything but midwifery?
The mother goes on to say that "It shouldn't matter that the authorities see homebirthers as irresponsible. They are supposed to enforce laws, not their opinions".
She's right, it shouldn't matter.
But, unfortunately, it does matter. It matters very much in our as yet unenlightened medico/legal culture. Is this family willing to martyr themselves to a cause that their trusted midwife does not appear to be willing to herself? After all, if indeed she is a midwife, she placed herself in the role of "authority"; and now when another type of authority is attempting to insinuate itself (apparently, tragically, and unfairly) into the situation, she recoils from that role? That is abandonment of her client...and that is irresponsible. What would we do if a doctor in similar circumstances said something to the effect of "Hey, don't look at me...I'm just the gardener!". I know I oversimplify...but truly...are we holding midwives to the same standards that we hold other care providers? Or are we, because we are so passionate to advance the cause, allowing them to assume less responsibility for outcomes we would not choose?
If the local authorities believe that a family is behaving irresponsibly, they are going to try to find a law to, if for nothing else, make an example of the family, if for no other reason than to further discourage other families from making a similar decision. In the process, the family in question is placed under great stress, both emotional and financial, at what should be one of the happiest times of their lives.
As often happens, the support discussions concerning this family have evolved, for those who rally around them, more in support of the philosophy of birthing rights than the support of the family (although there is much to commend supporters on regarding the level of financial and other support being planned and given). Of course we have the "right" to give birth in any way we see fit; but legal "rights" are, unfortunately, variable, based on how a judge and/or jury interpret the law. How we present our argument to them is going to have a definite impact on their decision making process, and the outcome of the case.
The mother writes that a part of the charges say that she "gave birth in an unsanitary place and did not seek immediate medical treatment for the baby". Since they (the charges) did not address the presence (or absence of) an attendant, she does not feel that the midwife identifying herself would have changed anything.
But of course it would!
If, indeed, the woman who identified herself as a doula was actually a skilled, experienced midwife, and had identified herself as such, then the defense could point to the safety of midwife attended births in study after study, and it's acceptable practice in nearly half of the United States (let alone many other industrialized countries with much better maternal/infant, and dare I say it, economic outcomes than our own), thereby at least placing a chink in the prosecutions argument; but this would place the midwife in a precarious legal predicament, since the state in which the incident occurred is not one of the more "enlightened" states that provide a legal basis for the practice of midwifery for families giving birth at home.
So now the question becomes...on whose shoulders does the responsibility for the safe health care outcome of this situation rest?
On the Midwife's!...or at least as much as the family's!
Of course a birthing family is responsible for choosing the best possible care for their pregnant mother and unborn child. If they choose themselves as such, then they are responsible for the outcome...and liable should the outcome be not as expected. If they choose a midwife for that care, then the midwife, by the act of attending them, assuming the role of primary care provider prior to transport (if a transport is called for), and in accepting compensation for that role in whatever form deemed appropriate (money, barter, etc.), should accept responsibility for the outcome. Here it seems, only the family is being subject to prosecution, and I want to know,
Where is the Midwife?
Is the family protecting the midwife? Is the midwife going to publicly step up in the family's defense? Of course, if she does so, she assumes the risk that she will be prosecuted as well...but didn't she assume this risk when she chose to be a home birth attendant?
I'll be brutally honest here. I would have loved to trained as a midwife and provided care to mothers giving birth at home; but at the time, I was a single mother with two young children to support. I needed a steady paycheck, and I couldn't afford to risk being arrested and convicted of practicing nursing or medicine without a license, lest I lose custody of my sons. Does this make me unwilling to "put my money where my mouth is"? I guess it does. I decided get a bachelor's degree in nursing instead, and attend mothers giving birth in hospital. That does not mean I think that the hospital is the best place for a healthy, low-risk mother carrying a healthy baby to give birth. I don't; and every shift I work, I struggle with the dichotomy of my belief system while trying to give the best, most compassionate, physiologically appropriate care to my patients that I can. It helps (sometimes), that I work on a unit that accepts many complicated transfers of care, and that the majority of my patients are those who a qualified midwife would risk out anyway; but when a healthy mother in normal labor comes under my care, I struggle. That is my lot in life. I chose it, I live with the spiritual and emotional consequences. I don't have to live with the potential legal consequences that a Direct Entry Midwife has to, but that was my choice. Does that make me a less-valid supporter of a woman's "right" to choose her birthing situation? I still place myself in the position of risking my license if I would harm a patient with a medication or practice error, or by not advocating for her properly should I feel that her medical care provider not be practicing appropriately; and ironically, for all my work to avoid loss of income by choosing a more culturally accepted way to provide care, I've found myself in situations occasionally when providing that advocacy did, in fact, jeopardize my employment. It's not easy being a pro-birth choice nurse in a culture that sees technology and the practice of medicine as the preferable way to give birth; and it's not easy being a homebirth and midwifery supporter who works in the dominant health care system!
This family's freedom, as well as, should she choose to come forward, their midwife's is of paramount importance in this situation; but we need to be careful about how we couch our arguments in the current culture. The reality is that if we're to advance a woman's right to give birth in an environment of her own choosing, we are, again, going to have to hold ourselves to the highest of standards, both of care, and of how we present the appearance of that care to the "authorities". I don't see that happening here.
Again, I have only compassion for this family. I deeply want to see the charges dropped. I'm furious at the waste of taxpayer money being used to harass and traumatize them, for no good legal reason; but I think there is a missing piece of information that someone, somewhere, is unwilling to, for whatever reason, address that could help them.
And I think that information has to come from the midwife.
Two months later however, the family was served with a summons to appear in court having had the charges of child endangerment levied against them. At their most recent hearing, they were offered a plea bargain for the charge of "disorderly conduct", which the family chose not to accept because they feel that they "are not guilty of anything", that "a guilty plea would validate the charges against" them, and that a "guilty plea would give the impression that homebirth is wrong, and possibly open the door for other families to be prosecuted". All noble arguments, but not exactly in their best interests. In fact, despite this family's earnest sincerity (and I do believe they are sincere), I'm not particularly certain that their arguments are even in the best interests of the homebirth community at large.
I agree that this family did nothing wrong. I support their right to give birth in the place of their choosing, with an appropriately trained, skilled, experienced attendant of their choosing; but despite my compassion for this family, and my desire to help them, and my fervent prayer that the charges will be dropped, I have concerns. There must be more important issues for the authorities to be addressing than a homebirth where the outcome was healthy and safe.
Or is there?
Whenever I see "calls for support" go out over the web for midwives or families that are being pursued by the legal system for whatever charges that can be trumped up regarding a homebirth (practicing medicine or nursing without a license, child endangerment, etc.), it is in my nature to question both the reasoning of the local authorities, and the actual story of those who are being charged. More than once I've heeded the call to a "persecuted" midwife only to find out that there may actually have been some questionable management of the situation. It's a sad reality in our culture that, due to the tenuous legal standing of midwives in general, and homebirth and Direct Entry midwives in particular, that the care the family received must be beyond reproach. That is difficult enough to prove, even in the best circumstances, when we've got the machinations of the AMA, ACOG, and sensationalist reporting such as the "Perils of Midwifery" piece recently aired by the Today show swirling around us. It becomes even more difficult to prove when those who are being prosecuted are not being forthright with every minute detail of the situation.
So, quick to my trusty Iphone I went, dialed my beloved friend C., childbirth educator and doula extraordinaire, who also happens to be in regular communication with our local CPMs. It seems that indeed, a small piece of information has been overlooked in the most recent reports of the incident. In initial media reports, the midwife, when giving her statement to the police, identified herself as the family's "doula".
Whaaaat? Now, when a midwife transfers her clients to a hospital, she certainly does cease to become the primary care giver, and steps instead into the role of doula. However, during the incident about which she was giving her statement, she was acting as the primary care provider. That role, as such, places her in a position of responsibility regarding the outcome of the situation. By identifying herself as a doula, this midwife exposed her client to suspicion that they were attempting to give birth unassisted, and I said as much when I questioned the family and their supporters on the informational website.
What I did not point out at the time was that I was not questioning the family's right to give birth any way they chose (I wasn't...although I won't mislead anyone here and say that I am in favor of giving birth without a skilled care provider in attendance, be that physician or midwife...but that is for another post). I was simply pointing out two things that could have a very important impact on the outcome of their case. 1). Those who were telling the story, be they supporters or the family themselves were not being forthcoming with all the pertinent information, and 2). A midwife who identifies herself as a doula, is going to be perceived as someone with something to hide...and so will her clients.
Well, immediately I was accosted by both supporters of (of whom I still consider myself to be among...I just want more information), and members of the family, including the much beleaguered mother. Was I actually insinuating that this family did not have the "right" to an unassisted birth if they chose?; that the charges were valid if there wasn't a midwife present? From there the arguments became not about how best to support and provide for the best possible legal outcome for the family, but a heated discussion, mostly directed at me, about the family's "right" to choose to birth in whatever manner they saw fit. Try as I might, until one post late in the day, I could not convince those who saw red the moment they read my words, that this was not about the family's "rights"...it was about getting all the information in their defense out on the table where it could be considered...and perhaps improve their legal standing. Ironically, that post was from a mother who chose to have several of her children unassisted. She simply pointed out the dominant cultural biases against homebirth, and how being seen as potentially giving birth unassisted were not going to work in the family's legal favor, despite their philosophical "right" to do so.
The mother says that she stands beside her midwife 100 percent.
But is her midwife standing beside her 100 percent, when she identifies herself, not as a midwife, but as a doula, whose role by definition, is anything but midwifery?
The mother goes on to say that "It shouldn't matter that the authorities see homebirthers as irresponsible. They are supposed to enforce laws, not their opinions".
She's right, it shouldn't matter.
But, unfortunately, it does matter. It matters very much in our as yet unenlightened medico/legal culture. Is this family willing to martyr themselves to a cause that their trusted midwife does not appear to be willing to herself? After all, if indeed she is a midwife, she placed herself in the role of "authority"; and now when another type of authority is attempting to insinuate itself (apparently, tragically, and unfairly) into the situation, she recoils from that role? That is abandonment of her client...and that is irresponsible. What would we do if a doctor in similar circumstances said something to the effect of "Hey, don't look at me...I'm just the gardener!". I know I oversimplify...but truly...are we holding midwives to the same standards that we hold other care providers? Or are we, because we are so passionate to advance the cause, allowing them to assume less responsibility for outcomes we would not choose?
If the local authorities believe that a family is behaving irresponsibly, they are going to try to find a law to, if for nothing else, make an example of the family, if for no other reason than to further discourage other families from making a similar decision. In the process, the family in question is placed under great stress, both emotional and financial, at what should be one of the happiest times of their lives.
As often happens, the support discussions concerning this family have evolved, for those who rally around them, more in support of the philosophy of birthing rights than the support of the family (although there is much to commend supporters on regarding the level of financial and other support being planned and given). Of course we have the "right" to give birth in any way we see fit; but legal "rights" are, unfortunately, variable, based on how a judge and/or jury interpret the law. How we present our argument to them is going to have a definite impact on their decision making process, and the outcome of the case.
The mother writes that a part of the charges say that she "gave birth in an unsanitary place and did not seek immediate medical treatment for the baby". Since they (the charges) did not address the presence (or absence of) an attendant, she does not feel that the midwife identifying herself would have changed anything.
But of course it would!
If, indeed, the woman who identified herself as a doula was actually a skilled, experienced midwife, and had identified herself as such, then the defense could point to the safety of midwife attended births in study after study, and it's acceptable practice in nearly half of the United States (let alone many other industrialized countries with much better maternal/infant, and dare I say it, economic outcomes than our own), thereby at least placing a chink in the prosecutions argument; but this would place the midwife in a precarious legal predicament, since the state in which the incident occurred is not one of the more "enlightened" states that provide a legal basis for the practice of midwifery for families giving birth at home.
So now the question becomes...on whose shoulders does the responsibility for the safe health care outcome of this situation rest?
On the Midwife's!...or at least as much as the family's!
Of course a birthing family is responsible for choosing the best possible care for their pregnant mother and unborn child. If they choose themselves as such, then they are responsible for the outcome...and liable should the outcome be not as expected. If they choose a midwife for that care, then the midwife, by the act of attending them, assuming the role of primary care provider prior to transport (if a transport is called for), and in accepting compensation for that role in whatever form deemed appropriate (money, barter, etc.), should accept responsibility for the outcome. Here it seems, only the family is being subject to prosecution, and I want to know,
Where is the Midwife?
Is the family protecting the midwife? Is the midwife going to publicly step up in the family's defense? Of course, if she does so, she assumes the risk that she will be prosecuted as well...but didn't she assume this risk when she chose to be a home birth attendant?
I'll be brutally honest here. I would have loved to trained as a midwife and provided care to mothers giving birth at home; but at the time, I was a single mother with two young children to support. I needed a steady paycheck, and I couldn't afford to risk being arrested and convicted of practicing nursing or medicine without a license, lest I lose custody of my sons. Does this make me unwilling to "put my money where my mouth is"? I guess it does. I decided get a bachelor's degree in nursing instead, and attend mothers giving birth in hospital. That does not mean I think that the hospital is the best place for a healthy, low-risk mother carrying a healthy baby to give birth. I don't; and every shift I work, I struggle with the dichotomy of my belief system while trying to give the best, most compassionate, physiologically appropriate care to my patients that I can. It helps (sometimes), that I work on a unit that accepts many complicated transfers of care, and that the majority of my patients are those who a qualified midwife would risk out anyway; but when a healthy mother in normal labor comes under my care, I struggle. That is my lot in life. I chose it, I live with the spiritual and emotional consequences. I don't have to live with the potential legal consequences that a Direct Entry Midwife has to, but that was my choice. Does that make me a less-valid supporter of a woman's "right" to choose her birthing situation? I still place myself in the position of risking my license if I would harm a patient with a medication or practice error, or by not advocating for her properly should I feel that her medical care provider not be practicing appropriately; and ironically, for all my work to avoid loss of income by choosing a more culturally accepted way to provide care, I've found myself in situations occasionally when providing that advocacy did, in fact, jeopardize my employment. It's not easy being a pro-birth choice nurse in a culture that sees technology and the practice of medicine as the preferable way to give birth; and it's not easy being a homebirth and midwifery supporter who works in the dominant health care system!
This family's freedom, as well as, should she choose to come forward, their midwife's is of paramount importance in this situation; but we need to be careful about how we couch our arguments in the current culture. The reality is that if we're to advance a woman's right to give birth in an environment of her own choosing, we are, again, going to have to hold ourselves to the highest of standards, both of care, and of how we present the appearance of that care to the "authorities". I don't see that happening here.
Again, I have only compassion for this family. I deeply want to see the charges dropped. I'm furious at the waste of taxpayer money being used to harass and traumatize them, for no good legal reason; but I think there is a missing piece of information that someone, somewhere, is unwilling to, for whatever reason, address that could help them.
And I think that information has to come from the midwife.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Trying...My Best...
To get back to posting. Navelgazing Midwife made a comment on Facebook recently that it seemed so much easier to post there than on her blog. I know the feeling...with Facebook we get nearly immediate response to our posts...it's more interactive than the solitary blog...and much more seductive when you have limited time.
I spend entirely too much time on Facebook. I could (and probably will at some point) write an entire entry on the media and how it affects communication between me and many of my peers. It can be a boon...lots of access to information that I might miss but that other nurses and midwives have come across...and even more access to public opinion (or lack of awareness of) that information.
But my original intent in starting this blog was to write about my experiences in, and transitions into various areas of women's health and maternity care; to hone my writing skills; and to increase my critical thinking/writing skills with the feedback of those who may still be checking in on my posts. The time I spend on Facebook has given me yet another way to avoid writing. Time to address that.
On a positive note...I truly am back...or at least rebounding nicely from...my recent health scare. Pulmonary Rehab has done wonders. I'll soon complete the program and return to work full time (I'm already back part-time). I'm exercising regularly, my sats are back to near-normal, and I've lost 24 lbs (to date)! In that department I have a long way to go...but it's been a great start...one that I plan to continue...
...just like this blog.....
I spend entirely too much time on Facebook. I could (and probably will at some point) write an entire entry on the media and how it affects communication between me and many of my peers. It can be a boon...lots of access to information that I might miss but that other nurses and midwives have come across...and even more access to public opinion (or lack of awareness of) that information.
But my original intent in starting this blog was to write about my experiences in, and transitions into various areas of women's health and maternity care; to hone my writing skills; and to increase my critical thinking/writing skills with the feedback of those who may still be checking in on my posts. The time I spend on Facebook has given me yet another way to avoid writing. Time to address that.
On a positive note...I truly am back...or at least rebounding nicely from...my recent health scare. Pulmonary Rehab has done wonders. I'll soon complete the program and return to work full time (I'm already back part-time). I'm exercising regularly, my sats are back to near-normal, and I've lost 24 lbs (to date)! In that department I have a long way to go...but it's been a great start...one that I plan to continue...
...just like this blog.....
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
In Praise of Level One Hospitals
Recently I received a comment from Ruralnrs, extolling the benefits of her workplace, a small, rural hospital. In her comments, she spoke of the low rates of intervention that occur to mothers giving birth at her facility, as well as the level of personalized care that would be difficult to match in a large metropolitan hospital. She spoke of the benefits of fewer "personalities" that (and here I paraphrase liberally), contribute to the multiple interpretations of policies that can "get in the way" of a mother's attempt to achieve a non-interventive birth in hospital. She also pointed out that the success of her unit in achieving a high level of non-intervention, as well as patient satisfaction, lies in the fact that, since the unit is not equipped to (routinely) handle high risk labors and births, they do not want to risk making a labor high risk by engaging in the administration of interventions thay may actually produce the risk! Oh, the exquisiteness of common sense!
Ruralnurs's comments were timely ones. Recently in a community not far from the large metropolitan area where I work, a tragedy occurred to two women, within 24 hours of each other, at the same small L&D unit of a small Level One hospital. Both women received epidural analgesia. Both delivered healthy babies; and both women, the day after giving birth, began experiencing complications that were first attributed to the epidural but which became progressively worse. Each woman was soon transferred... first to that hospital's ICU, and shortly thereafter to another large hospital in the city in which I practice. One of these women subsequently died. Of course an investigation is underway, the public has been "assured" that the cause of the illness, bacterial meningitis, is not communicable, and that everything possible is being done to both determine the cause of the tragedy, and to prevent it from occurring in the future.
Thanks to the "gag" order that has almost certainly been issued by attorneys to the grieving families, pending the inevitable malpractice investigation, we may never know the final outcome of the research into the incidents; of course, in the birthing community, suspicion immediately turned to the administration process during which each woman received her epidural.
Regardless of the cause, a woman has died, a family has been denied a loved one's continued presence in their lives, a child is motherless, and another family's anticipation of one the happiest times of their lives has changed from joy to horror as they gather to support the surviving mother in her journey back to health; and while I can't...could not possibly trump the tragedy being experienced by these two families, incidents like this place all of us in peril in a way, because they feed the usually incorrect perception that care at a smaller, usually rural, Level One hospital is "not as good" as care given in large metropolitan hospitals. Indeed, the continuing survival of this hospital, and many others like it, could be considered at risk due to this type of thinking, and unfortunately, when tragedies like this happen, that risk increases.
Don't quote me here...because I haven't taken the time to gather the research to bolster my words... but I've heard statistics that upwards of 50 percent...in some states, 80 percent...of babies are born in Level One hospitals. A Level One hospital is likely to be located in a rural area or a small town. If it does provide care to birthing women, often the services provided take place in small L & D units...two to four labor rooms as opposed to the dozen-plus common in metropolitan hospitals. There may be only one surgical suite, no Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU), and only a handful of practitioners...Obstetricians and Midwives, usually Nurse Midwives. Access to anesthesia is often readily available only during daytime hours, and on an "on call" basis at night. In some Level One hospitals, access to surgical services...even emergency surgeries...depends on an "on call" staff that has to come in from home should a patient require unscheduled surgery during the night...hence ACOG's prohibitive stance on VBAC (Vaginal Birth After Cesarean) birth in Level One hospitals; they don't believe it is "safe" for a woman to labor on a scarred uterus in an institution of this size and limitation.
I beg to differ, both with the perceived public view in general, and with ACOG's stance in particular. These hospitals serve a huge portion of the population of the United States, and as such, are a critically important part of our country's health care system. To deny low risk pregnant women served by these hospitals access to the full spectrum of birth-related services endangers not only those women, but the overall health of our country, as well as our national economy.
Although I currently work in a large university medical center, I live about 30 minutes from my previous employer, a Level One hospital. It too has a small L&D unit, and it too has seen it's share of tragedies; but poor outcomes happen everywhere...the size of an institution is not indicative of the skill of its' practitioners. Indeed, the physicians at a Level One hospital need to be particularly skilled, in that in time of crisis, they are the point of access to care for the individual(s) involved, unlike in a larger hospital where there may be several (or many). These folks need to "know their stuff"... have exceptional critical thinking skills, and the confidence to put put those skills into action quickly; not that these attributes aren't necessary in a larger institution where there are more practitioners...of course they are...but in a smaller hospital, fewer hands can mean more responsibility on those hands. I can only speak for this one particular hospital...but if a woman I loved were to need care, I would have total confidence if she were admitted there. The skill and care given to women at this particular institution rivals that given where I work any day. No, they don't have a special care unit for infants; but the nurses were well trained to support even tiny preemies until transport from the nearest NICU could arrive. During my employment at that particular hospital I saw hemorrhages, fetal demises, preterm labors and births, even one uterine rupture...all handled expertly by the well-trained and skilled nursing and medical staff, and all with the healthy survival of both mother and infant. Until ACOG's edict limiting VBACs to basically only large tertiary care centers, that unit also saw it's share of successful VBACs.
Health care dollars being limited, resources are going to have to be distributed where they are likely to be used the most; hence Level One hospitals, particularly those few that remain independent of larger healthcare "systems" such as Humana, will rarely be the ones to have the newest and latest of the technology; JCAHO standards should provide that a reasonable standard of care in terms of technological resources will be available at any hospital. Should a patient require more, resources for adequate support should be available until a transfer can be arranged; but for initial access to care, particularly for low risk situations such as normal labor, a community based hospital is the most cost-effective and appropriate level of entry to care (actually, I really believe that home is the most appropriate level of entry to care for laboring women, but my topic being levels of medical care for laboring women, and our culture being what it is, that statement will have to suffice...for this post at least).
I think level of entry and access are the core issues here. A healthy woman experiencing a normal labor does not need all the "bells and whistles" of a unit like the one I work on; she needs care that is accessible...in her community. One of most ridiculous misuse of resources I've ever seen occurred, ironically, in the same community as the hospital that I just praised so highly. The health department in this community contracted its prenatal care to the residency staff of a larger city hospital over 35 miles away! When the women cared for at the public clinic went into labor, they were expected to travel into the city. Not all of them had the resources to get there however. Those that did not have transportation to get from their homes in the town ended up...of course...at the local Level One hospital, where the only access we had to their prenatal information was via fax...and that was if we could track the information down, and if we had time to get the information faxed to us before the mother gave birth. It made absolutely no sense, when right there in the woman's home town a perfectly good medicaid eligible clinic was available to her, within the very hospital that she would ultimately give birth in...attended by physicians she was familiar with.
It can be difficult enough to get access to health care in our country. Even in the city where I work, there are more than a few mothers who get little or no prenatal care because they cannot manage the bus fare to get to clinic; or they do not live near public transportation. How much more of a burden do we place on women in sub-suburban communities we close down the L&D unit in the local community hospital, forcing them to travel, if they have the means, to the next town or city over? Often the woman cannot meet that burden, and she goes without prenatal care, possibly setting off a sequela of events that turn a healthy, low-risk pregnancy into a high-risk situation...and a high cost situation ensues, should that mother and or her infant end up requiring a level of care that may have been avoidable had she had access to good prenatal care. How much of a burden do we place on a woman when we prevent her access to VBAC based on the perceived level of care at a hospital that may have a proven record of successful VBAC births, forcing her instead to travel out of her community, adding yet another expense on top of the considerable (and avoidable) expense ( as well as the increased risks and discomfort) of a scheduled cesarean? Neither situation can be considered a good outcome for either mother and infant...and it can't bode well for a health care system that is already crumbling under the weight of not enough financial resources to provide access to all of its citizens. Prenatal care is, more often than not, preventative care...head the high risk situations (those that we can) off, and prevent the huge expense (and increased potential for morbidity and mortality) of an unnecessary surgical delivery...or of a mother or infant in intensive care.
Our culture has collectively "forgotten" that there is an entire world of medical care independent of the big, dramatic city hospital we see on primetime television with it's depiction of exotic diseases and traumatic occurences that seem to happen every day and require the highest and most expensive level of technology to treat. We forget that when we use resources appropriately to maintain our health, that this level of drama and expense is the exception, not the norm. Of course the tragedy that occurred in the Level One L&D that I depicted in the beginning of this post was just that...a tragedy (and likely a very avoidable tragedy); but with appropriate investigation into the cause, and corrective intervention taken (albeit after the fact), the hospital involved can reduce dramatically the likelihood of a reoccurrence. It would be an even larger tragedy to close the unit, and reduce access to the pregnant women of the community served by the hospital.
I love what I do...I love where I work...but my family continues to utilize the same health care providers that we did when I worked for my previous employer. I've found, both as a patient and as an employee that the care is both cost, and health effective. Level One care can be, and often is the very best care.
Ruralnurs's comments were timely ones. Recently in a community not far from the large metropolitan area where I work, a tragedy occurred to two women, within 24 hours of each other, at the same small L&D unit of a small Level One hospital. Both women received epidural analgesia. Both delivered healthy babies; and both women, the day after giving birth, began experiencing complications that were first attributed to the epidural but which became progressively worse. Each woman was soon transferred... first to that hospital's ICU, and shortly thereafter to another large hospital in the city in which I practice. One of these women subsequently died. Of course an investigation is underway, the public has been "assured" that the cause of the illness, bacterial meningitis, is not communicable, and that everything possible is being done to both determine the cause of the tragedy, and to prevent it from occurring in the future.
Thanks to the "gag" order that has almost certainly been issued by attorneys to the grieving families, pending the inevitable malpractice investigation, we may never know the final outcome of the research into the incidents; of course, in the birthing community, suspicion immediately turned to the administration process during which each woman received her epidural.
Regardless of the cause, a woman has died, a family has been denied a loved one's continued presence in their lives, a child is motherless, and another family's anticipation of one the happiest times of their lives has changed from joy to horror as they gather to support the surviving mother in her journey back to health; and while I can't...could not possibly trump the tragedy being experienced by these two families, incidents like this place all of us in peril in a way, because they feed the usually incorrect perception that care at a smaller, usually rural, Level One hospital is "not as good" as care given in large metropolitan hospitals. Indeed, the continuing survival of this hospital, and many others like it, could be considered at risk due to this type of thinking, and unfortunately, when tragedies like this happen, that risk increases.
Don't quote me here...because I haven't taken the time to gather the research to bolster my words... but I've heard statistics that upwards of 50 percent...in some states, 80 percent...of babies are born in Level One hospitals. A Level One hospital is likely to be located in a rural area or a small town. If it does provide care to birthing women, often the services provided take place in small L & D units...two to four labor rooms as opposed to the dozen-plus common in metropolitan hospitals. There may be only one surgical suite, no Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU), and only a handful of practitioners...Obstetricians and Midwives, usually Nurse Midwives. Access to anesthesia is often readily available only during daytime hours, and on an "on call" basis at night. In some Level One hospitals, access to surgical services...even emergency surgeries...depends on an "on call" staff that has to come in from home should a patient require unscheduled surgery during the night...hence ACOG's prohibitive stance on VBAC (Vaginal Birth After Cesarean) birth in Level One hospitals; they don't believe it is "safe" for a woman to labor on a scarred uterus in an institution of this size and limitation.
I beg to differ, both with the perceived public view in general, and with ACOG's stance in particular. These hospitals serve a huge portion of the population of the United States, and as such, are a critically important part of our country's health care system. To deny low risk pregnant women served by these hospitals access to the full spectrum of birth-related services endangers not only those women, but the overall health of our country, as well as our national economy.
Although I currently work in a large university medical center, I live about 30 minutes from my previous employer, a Level One hospital. It too has a small L&D unit, and it too has seen it's share of tragedies; but poor outcomes happen everywhere...the size of an institution is not indicative of the skill of its' practitioners. Indeed, the physicians at a Level One hospital need to be particularly skilled, in that in time of crisis, they are the point of access to care for the individual(s) involved, unlike in a larger hospital where there may be several (or many). These folks need to "know their stuff"... have exceptional critical thinking skills, and the confidence to put put those skills into action quickly; not that these attributes aren't necessary in a larger institution where there are more practitioners...of course they are...but in a smaller hospital, fewer hands can mean more responsibility on those hands. I can only speak for this one particular hospital...but if a woman I loved were to need care, I would have total confidence if she were admitted there. The skill and care given to women at this particular institution rivals that given where I work any day. No, they don't have a special care unit for infants; but the nurses were well trained to support even tiny preemies until transport from the nearest NICU could arrive. During my employment at that particular hospital I saw hemorrhages, fetal demises, preterm labors and births, even one uterine rupture...all handled expertly by the well-trained and skilled nursing and medical staff, and all with the healthy survival of both mother and infant. Until ACOG's edict limiting VBACs to basically only large tertiary care centers, that unit also saw it's share of successful VBACs.
Health care dollars being limited, resources are going to have to be distributed where they are likely to be used the most; hence Level One hospitals, particularly those few that remain independent of larger healthcare "systems" such as Humana, will rarely be the ones to have the newest and latest of the technology; JCAHO standards should provide that a reasonable standard of care in terms of technological resources will be available at any hospital. Should a patient require more, resources for adequate support should be available until a transfer can be arranged; but for initial access to care, particularly for low risk situations such as normal labor, a community based hospital is the most cost-effective and appropriate level of entry to care (actually, I really believe that home is the most appropriate level of entry to care for laboring women, but my topic being levels of medical care for laboring women, and our culture being what it is, that statement will have to suffice...for this post at least).
I think level of entry and access are the core issues here. A healthy woman experiencing a normal labor does not need all the "bells and whistles" of a unit like the one I work on; she needs care that is accessible...in her community. One of most ridiculous misuse of resources I've ever seen occurred, ironically, in the same community as the hospital that I just praised so highly. The health department in this community contracted its prenatal care to the residency staff of a larger city hospital over 35 miles away! When the women cared for at the public clinic went into labor, they were expected to travel into the city. Not all of them had the resources to get there however. Those that did not have transportation to get from their homes in the town ended up...of course...at the local Level One hospital, where the only access we had to their prenatal information was via fax...and that was if we could track the information down, and if we had time to get the information faxed to us before the mother gave birth. It made absolutely no sense, when right there in the woman's home town a perfectly good medicaid eligible clinic was available to her, within the very hospital that she would ultimately give birth in...attended by physicians she was familiar with.
It can be difficult enough to get access to health care in our country. Even in the city where I work, there are more than a few mothers who get little or no prenatal care because they cannot manage the bus fare to get to clinic; or they do not live near public transportation. How much more of a burden do we place on women in sub-suburban communities we close down the L&D unit in the local community hospital, forcing them to travel, if they have the means, to the next town or city over? Often the woman cannot meet that burden, and she goes without prenatal care, possibly setting off a sequela of events that turn a healthy, low-risk pregnancy into a high-risk situation...and a high cost situation ensues, should that mother and or her infant end up requiring a level of care that may have been avoidable had she had access to good prenatal care. How much of a burden do we place on a woman when we prevent her access to VBAC based on the perceived level of care at a hospital that may have a proven record of successful VBAC births, forcing her instead to travel out of her community, adding yet another expense on top of the considerable (and avoidable) expense ( as well as the increased risks and discomfort) of a scheduled cesarean? Neither situation can be considered a good outcome for either mother and infant...and it can't bode well for a health care system that is already crumbling under the weight of not enough financial resources to provide access to all of its citizens. Prenatal care is, more often than not, preventative care...head the high risk situations (those that we can) off, and prevent the huge expense (and increased potential for morbidity and mortality) of an unnecessary surgical delivery...or of a mother or infant in intensive care.
Our culture has collectively "forgotten" that there is an entire world of medical care independent of the big, dramatic city hospital we see on primetime television with it's depiction of exotic diseases and traumatic occurences that seem to happen every day and require the highest and most expensive level of technology to treat. We forget that when we use resources appropriately to maintain our health, that this level of drama and expense is the exception, not the norm. Of course the tragedy that occurred in the Level One L&D that I depicted in the beginning of this post was just that...a tragedy (and likely a very avoidable tragedy); but with appropriate investigation into the cause, and corrective intervention taken (albeit after the fact), the hospital involved can reduce dramatically the likelihood of a reoccurrence. It would be an even larger tragedy to close the unit, and reduce access to the pregnant women of the community served by the hospital.
I love what I do...I love where I work...but my family continues to utilize the same health care providers that we did when I worked for my previous employer. I've found, both as a patient and as an employee that the care is both cost, and health effective. Level One care can be, and often is the very best care.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
STAY TUNED.....
I've had the misfortune of experiencing the evolution of a simple upper respiratory infection into a major exacerbation of long asyptomatic asthma. As such, I've had little time or energy for much more than multiple physician's visits interspersed with frustrated, boring days at home with the occasional tentative (and frequently abortive, due to shortness of breath and a general inability to tolerate much in the way of activity) foray to the grocery store or the bookstore.
And so, the blog has suffered my absence.
My husband though, I think has suffered the most, bless his heart. He, in addition to running his own small consulting firm, has been keeping up with (well, as much as any non-homemaker can) the housework, laundry and cooking, dealing with the misadventures of raising two impetuous, impertinent, impulsive, sometimes rebellious, usually know-it-all, but always endearing and beloved teenage boys, and a wife who is one minute crabby and whiny, and the next remorseful and grateful. God bless that man!
I miss work. I haven't been there for nearly two months! After multiple trips to my family physician and pulmonologist, one trip to the ER (I tried to go back to work...wasn't gonna happen, my body immediately let me know), and even one trip to an urgent care center two days before Memorial day (sure...let's just add double otitis media to the mix...I can handle it...not), I found myself in the care of an amazing Nurse Practitioner who works in my pulmonologist's office. What a stroke of luck! My appointment with this wonderful woman came only after multiple phone calls trying to get another appointment with the pulmonologist ("No, July 25th will not work, I'm consistently satting 90 percent at rest, I've got to be able to get well enough to get back to work, and I can't wait two months to find a way to get this fixed!".) Finally I called my case manager in a weight loss-program I am now involved in and told her my plight...I was afraid to exercise unsupervised until I got this respiratory thing under control, but I couldn't get an appointment to get the advice of my physician. She, bless her, brought up the idea of pulmonary rehab. Really? Did I really need something that drastic?
Turns out I did. I made one call to the coordinator of the pulmonary rehab department, who promptly got me an appointment with the NP. That wonderful woman (the NP, although the director of the rehab department is wonderful as well) did more for me in one 30 minute appointment than the ER, and three physicians had done in six weeks! In the past week I've undergone a slew of pulmonary tests, I've been x-rayed and CT scanned, scheduled for allergy testing and a sleep study, been exercise tested (managed to gasp my way through), and admitted to the pulmonary rehab program.
All indications are that I should be able to return to work with in a month's time, probably part-time first, gradually increasing back to full time.
I knew being an L&D nurse was a big part of my identity, but this experience has really pushed home just how true that is. Maybe that's not a good thing. Maybe I need to get moving on some of those "transitions" I talked about when I began this blog. I've certainly had time to think about them enough.
It's also hard to "watch" via Facebook, my friends working their backsides off, knowing that my absence is contributing to a lack of staff during the busiest time of year on our unit. When coming off of a shift, they will comment to each other how busy things, are, how tired they are, and here I sit...in front of the computer, inhaler at my side, just wanting to be there to lighten their load a little. I love my family. They are my first priority; but I get a lot out of my job (in addition to the frustrations), and I respect the work that my coworkers do.
C'est La Vie. What is, is. For now, I'm slowly improving, looking forward to getting stronger and learning more about how to control this disease through rehab, and I've even managed to start losing some of this extra weight ( "...the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step..."). With my husband's help, and my "expert" directions, I'm starting to get caught up on all the long-neglected organizational tasks that I've put off in favor of sleep when I wasn't working, and I'm hoping that will clear a path to beginning some of those "transitions" (I'm the kind of person that needs to be organized in order to have a mind clear enough to concentrate effectively...at least at home...at work, I've learned to with the flow...the crazy, ridiculous flow...it's called survival!). Truth be known, I think this has been coming for some time. I wasn't taking care of myself well enough. The last few weeks at work I could barely make it to the car, so exhausted would I be at the end of a shift. My body finally revolted and forced me to take a good long look at how I've been not caring for it, and here I am; but I think (hope, pray) that I've dodged a few serious bullets in the past few weeks, and am now on the road to a full recovery, with a wiser appreciation of just how important it is to not let myself get run down.
In the meantime, the writing bug is hitting me again (a person can only knit so many preemie outfits and blankets, watch so much TV, read so many books, or vegitate on the internet...did I mention I'm spending money I don't have on things I don't need on EBAY?...for so long), and just in the nick of time I got a (coincidence...I think not) response to my last post that gave me the idea for my next one.
Stay tuned!
And so, the blog has suffered my absence.
My husband though, I think has suffered the most, bless his heart. He, in addition to running his own small consulting firm, has been keeping up with (well, as much as any non-homemaker can) the housework, laundry and cooking, dealing with the misadventures of raising two impetuous, impertinent, impulsive, sometimes rebellious, usually know-it-all, but always endearing and beloved teenage boys, and a wife who is one minute crabby and whiny, and the next remorseful and grateful. God bless that man!
I miss work. I haven't been there for nearly two months! After multiple trips to my family physician and pulmonologist, one trip to the ER (I tried to go back to work...wasn't gonna happen, my body immediately let me know), and even one trip to an urgent care center two days before Memorial day (sure...let's just add double otitis media to the mix...I can handle it...not), I found myself in the care of an amazing Nurse Practitioner who works in my pulmonologist's office. What a stroke of luck! My appointment with this wonderful woman came only after multiple phone calls trying to get another appointment with the pulmonologist ("No, July 25th will not work, I'm consistently satting 90 percent at rest, I've got to be able to get well enough to get back to work, and I can't wait two months to find a way to get this fixed!".) Finally I called my case manager in a weight loss-program I am now involved in and told her my plight...I was afraid to exercise unsupervised until I got this respiratory thing under control, but I couldn't get an appointment to get the advice of my physician. She, bless her, brought up the idea of pulmonary rehab. Really? Did I really need something that drastic?
Turns out I did. I made one call to the coordinator of the pulmonary rehab department, who promptly got me an appointment with the NP. That wonderful woman (the NP, although the director of the rehab department is wonderful as well) did more for me in one 30 minute appointment than the ER, and three physicians had done in six weeks! In the past week I've undergone a slew of pulmonary tests, I've been x-rayed and CT scanned, scheduled for allergy testing and a sleep study, been exercise tested (managed to gasp my way through), and admitted to the pulmonary rehab program.
All indications are that I should be able to return to work with in a month's time, probably part-time first, gradually increasing back to full time.
I knew being an L&D nurse was a big part of my identity, but this experience has really pushed home just how true that is. Maybe that's not a good thing. Maybe I need to get moving on some of those "transitions" I talked about when I began this blog. I've certainly had time to think about them enough.
It's also hard to "watch" via Facebook, my friends working their backsides off, knowing that my absence is contributing to a lack of staff during the busiest time of year on our unit. When coming off of a shift, they will comment to each other how busy things, are, how tired they are, and here I sit...in front of the computer, inhaler at my side, just wanting to be there to lighten their load a little. I love my family. They are my first priority; but I get a lot out of my job (in addition to the frustrations), and I respect the work that my coworkers do.
C'est La Vie. What is, is. For now, I'm slowly improving, looking forward to getting stronger and learning more about how to control this disease through rehab, and I've even managed to start losing some of this extra weight ( "...the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step..."). With my husband's help, and my "expert" directions, I'm starting to get caught up on all the long-neglected organizational tasks that I've put off in favor of sleep when I wasn't working, and I'm hoping that will clear a path to beginning some of those "transitions" (I'm the kind of person that needs to be organized in order to have a mind clear enough to concentrate effectively...at least at home...at work, I've learned to with the flow...the crazy, ridiculous flow...it's called survival!). Truth be known, I think this has been coming for some time. I wasn't taking care of myself well enough. The last few weeks at work I could barely make it to the car, so exhausted would I be at the end of a shift. My body finally revolted and forced me to take a good long look at how I've been not caring for it, and here I am; but I think (hope, pray) that I've dodged a few serious bullets in the past few weeks, and am now on the road to a full recovery, with a wiser appreciation of just how important it is to not let myself get run down.
In the meantime, the writing bug is hitting me again (a person can only knit so many preemie outfits and blankets, watch so much TV, read so many books, or vegitate on the internet...did I mention I'm spending money I don't have on things I don't need on EBAY?...for so long), and just in the nick of time I got a (coincidence...I think not) response to my last post that gave me the idea for my next one.
Stay tuned!
Thursday, April 2, 2009
On Childbirth Education
More than once in my work I've met a couple who brought with them the expectation that what they learned in childbirth class is what they would experience in the hospital. Simple, right?
Unfortunately, no.
I know a few childbirth educators. Most of them are excellent (My beloved friend C., well, she's just the absolute best of the best). Others, not so much. At least one of them is not particularly supportive of her clients who are planning to birth in a hospital (read that...she can barely contain her disgust), and therefore, not helpful at all...a total waste of her clients' time and money. Others are just plain not giving their students accurate information - for example their couples come in asking for oral vitamin k instead of injected vitamin k for their baby (we don't have it); they ask to be monitored via doppler or fetoscope (we don't have a fetoscope, and we don't have the staffing to use doppler monitoring...aside from which, no hospital is going to risk not having a paper tracing of a labor; they ask that the newborn nursery not bathe their baby, but simply massage the vernix into his or her skin (fat chance!); or, they ask to be allowed to eat during labor (good luck), or my personal favorite, not to be administered an enema or shave prep (we haven't done this in over twenty years, so I'm wondering why these particular educators are not checking to see if their information is realistic, accurate, or current). I'm not saying any of this is right, it's just what is, albeit at best unfortunate. Finally, several educators, whose classes I've not had a chance to observe, or who I don't have an opportunity to converse with often, are, well, I'm just not certain what kind of information they are giving (or not giving) to their students.
Case in point: I once cared for a sweet couple having their first baby, who were genuinely shocked that their very aggressive obstetrician was just that...extremely agressive. This couple came in, and Mom was 4 centimeters dilated, with bulging membranes. She was laboring beautifully, and I told her physician as much. As if he didn't hear a word I said, he ordered "(have a resident) Rupture her membranes, put in internals, and start 4 by 4 Pit (twice the amount of Pitocin that is normally used)". Truth be known, it was the day of "The Big Game" in our town, and Mr. MD wanted this delivery over before "all the traffic started up". Baloney...he didn't want to risk being called away from his toasty box seats, but what do I know...I've only watched this ass leave several dozen labor rooms looking like the aftermath of a suicide bombing, always in such a hurry to be done that he can't bother to leave a perineum intact, put instruments back on the table instead of dropping them on the floor, or even put his bloody gown in the biohazard can instead of tossing it aside for the nurse to pick up. This is one of those guys that make me wonder why in the hell I keep doing this.
Why indeed...because I want those who choose to give birth in a hospital to know that they have options...options that far too many physicians and nurses don't let them know they have. No, I can't monitor you with a doppler...and I can't find oral Vitamin K for your baby, but, damnit, if I don't think you need Pitocin (yet), I'll tell you...and If you want to wait until your membranes rupture on their own, and you and your baby are doing well, I'll remind you that you don't have to consent to that. If I can't "effectively facilitate communication" between physician and patient (some physicians are not interested in two-way communication), I'll advocate for my patient.
This couple stood their ground though. they gently, but firmly asked the resident who was itching to carry out their physicians orders why this was necessary. They asked for more time to make a decision. Finally, after being cajoled and hassled for hours, they gave in. They consented to having the water broken.
But we have a happy ending...for this couple at least...miracle of miracles, before the resident could finish a delivery in another room, I saw a look..."that look" come over the mother's face, and my heart nearly leapt for joy as "that look" turned into an unmistakable grimace, followed by a surprisingly loud grunt from such a petite woman, and a splash of fluid from beneath her gown spilled onto the floor, over the shoes of her startled husband, and flowed into the towel I quickly flung onto the floor to catch it. At my urging she climbed into bed just in time for her little boy to squirm his own way into the world, without Pitocin, without internal monitors, without artificial rupture of membranes, heck, without even a doctor in the room! Baby in the Bed! I loved it. Take THAT Dr. Ass (as if he cared...as if he even realized it was possible).
But for those situations that are not the recipients of such Grace, what are the Childbirth Educators in question telling their students? I wish I knew. This poor couple, when I told them what their OB wanted me to do, were absolutely stunned...who wouldn't be? They had learned in their childbirth class to stay home as long as possible, that they could avoid pitocin if the labor was progressing well, that internal monitors were an uncessary intervention if the baby was doing well and easy to trace (as was the case here), and that they should avoid having the membranes artificially ruptured if possible.
All good information; but were they encouraged the to speak with their care provider about this information? This wasn't the first couple that had come under my care with these same or similar expectations, only to be blindsided by the basic hospital "business as usuall" delivery system. All of these couples seemed genuinely confused that their physicians would order care that was so different from that they were taught to avoid.
Perhaps the educators did encourage these couples to speak with their care providers, and the couples did just that, only to be brushed off or outright lied to. Perhaps the couples, as expectant couples are sometimes apt to do, just assumed that their care provider would practice as their childbirth educator taught, so they sort of "zoned out" when the educator was advising them to speak with their provider...like so many couples do when the topic of cesarean section is brought up...they assume it won't happen to them, so they don't really listen. Or maybe, just maybe the ecucators themselves are simply teaching a philosophy...without reminding their students that theirs is not the only philosophy out there...and that, if they can, they need to learn the philosphy of both the hospital, and of the provider they are trusting to care for them during the most important moments of their lives...or at least be prepared for the possibility that they may have some significant "negotiating" ahead of them, and be given suggestions (doula anyone?) to help navigate those negotiations.
Moms, Dads, what do you think? What has been your experience? Educators, do you ever hear from your students after they give birth? What do they tell you?
Enlighten this frustrated Labor Nurse, please.
Unfortunately, no.
I know a few childbirth educators. Most of them are excellent (My beloved friend C., well, she's just the absolute best of the best). Others, not so much. At least one of them is not particularly supportive of her clients who are planning to birth in a hospital (read that...she can barely contain her disgust), and therefore, not helpful at all...a total waste of her clients' time and money. Others are just plain not giving their students accurate information - for example their couples come in asking for oral vitamin k instead of injected vitamin k for their baby (we don't have it); they ask to be monitored via doppler or fetoscope (we don't have a fetoscope, and we don't have the staffing to use doppler monitoring...aside from which, no hospital is going to risk not having a paper tracing of a labor; they ask that the newborn nursery not bathe their baby, but simply massage the vernix into his or her skin (fat chance!); or, they ask to be allowed to eat during labor (good luck), or my personal favorite, not to be administered an enema or shave prep (we haven't done this in over twenty years, so I'm wondering why these particular educators are not checking to see if their information is realistic, accurate, or current). I'm not saying any of this is right, it's just what is, albeit at best unfortunate. Finally, several educators, whose classes I've not had a chance to observe, or who I don't have an opportunity to converse with often, are, well, I'm just not certain what kind of information they are giving (or not giving) to their students.
Case in point: I once cared for a sweet couple having their first baby, who were genuinely shocked that their very aggressive obstetrician was just that...extremely agressive. This couple came in, and Mom was 4 centimeters dilated, with bulging membranes. She was laboring beautifully, and I told her physician as much. As if he didn't hear a word I said, he ordered "(have a resident) Rupture her membranes, put in internals, and start 4 by 4 Pit (twice the amount of Pitocin that is normally used)". Truth be known, it was the day of "The Big Game" in our town, and Mr. MD wanted this delivery over before "all the traffic started up". Baloney...he didn't want to risk being called away from his toasty box seats, but what do I know...I've only watched this ass leave several dozen labor rooms looking like the aftermath of a suicide bombing, always in such a hurry to be done that he can't bother to leave a perineum intact, put instruments back on the table instead of dropping them on the floor, or even put his bloody gown in the biohazard can instead of tossing it aside for the nurse to pick up. This is one of those guys that make me wonder why in the hell I keep doing this.
Why indeed...because I want those who choose to give birth in a hospital to know that they have options...options that far too many physicians and nurses don't let them know they have. No, I can't monitor you with a doppler...and I can't find oral Vitamin K for your baby, but, damnit, if I don't think you need Pitocin (yet), I'll tell you...and If you want to wait until your membranes rupture on their own, and you and your baby are doing well, I'll remind you that you don't have to consent to that. If I can't "effectively facilitate communication" between physician and patient (some physicians are not interested in two-way communication), I'll advocate for my patient.
This couple stood their ground though. they gently, but firmly asked the resident who was itching to carry out their physicians orders why this was necessary. They asked for more time to make a decision. Finally, after being cajoled and hassled for hours, they gave in. They consented to having the water broken.
But we have a happy ending...for this couple at least...miracle of miracles, before the resident could finish a delivery in another room, I saw a look..."that look" come over the mother's face, and my heart nearly leapt for joy as "that look" turned into an unmistakable grimace, followed by a surprisingly loud grunt from such a petite woman, and a splash of fluid from beneath her gown spilled onto the floor, over the shoes of her startled husband, and flowed into the towel I quickly flung onto the floor to catch it. At my urging she climbed into bed just in time for her little boy to squirm his own way into the world, without Pitocin, without internal monitors, without artificial rupture of membranes, heck, without even a doctor in the room! Baby in the Bed! I loved it. Take THAT Dr. Ass (as if he cared...as if he even realized it was possible).
But for those situations that are not the recipients of such Grace, what are the Childbirth Educators in question telling their students? I wish I knew. This poor couple, when I told them what their OB wanted me to do, were absolutely stunned...who wouldn't be? They had learned in their childbirth class to stay home as long as possible, that they could avoid pitocin if the labor was progressing well, that internal monitors were an uncessary intervention if the baby was doing well and easy to trace (as was the case here), and that they should avoid having the membranes artificially ruptured if possible.
All good information; but were they encouraged the to speak with their care provider about this information? This wasn't the first couple that had come under my care with these same or similar expectations, only to be blindsided by the basic hospital "business as usuall" delivery system. All of these couples seemed genuinely confused that their physicians would order care that was so different from that they were taught to avoid.
Perhaps the educators did encourage these couples to speak with their care providers, and the couples did just that, only to be brushed off or outright lied to. Perhaps the couples, as expectant couples are sometimes apt to do, just assumed that their care provider would practice as their childbirth educator taught, so they sort of "zoned out" when the educator was advising them to speak with their provider...like so many couples do when the topic of cesarean section is brought up...they assume it won't happen to them, so they don't really listen. Or maybe, just maybe the ecucators themselves are simply teaching a philosophy...without reminding their students that theirs is not the only philosophy out there...and that, if they can, they need to learn the philosphy of both the hospital, and of the provider they are trusting to care for them during the most important moments of their lives...or at least be prepared for the possibility that they may have some significant "negotiating" ahead of them, and be given suggestions (doula anyone?) to help navigate those negotiations.
Moms, Dads, what do you think? What has been your experience? Educators, do you ever hear from your students after they give birth? What do they tell you?
Enlighten this frustrated Labor Nurse, please.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)