O! So muc more tan just a “like” .. “LOVE IT” perfect..

that address for that website is actually thebirthsurvey.com ….it’s doesn’t work without the word “the” in there.

Then he should’ve given another reason, based off of his fact-based evidence to prove to the mother that a c/s was in order instead of bullying her and manipulating the situation with scare tactics. Very poor bedside manner at the very least. Any mother in labor deserves to be treated with respect, even if the OB did not agree with the situation, he should’ve been professional enough to handle the situation appropriately instead of berating and belittling the mother’s choices.

Nope. Sorry. If the situation was such an emergency that it required a surgical birth then he would have had more to say than just “the ONLY PIECE of medical information I can give you is….” (emphasis mine). That right there proves it is a lie. If he truly had no other information to go on in that moment than he had no business refusing to obtain more info.

And just so you know, statistically the most likely people to sue are those treated the most disrespectfully regardless of the actual outcomes. Whereas when people are able to feel they have made informed decisions without having been coerced they are statistically far less likely to sue, even in the event of a poor result.

But you are right when you say an OB has a lot of other factors [to look at] before proceeding with a c-section. That’s why these parents were well within there rights to insist that he do so, and that he inform them as to what those other factors actually were.

Chris: Sorry but I have to agree with the OB in this one. There are too many natural birth advocates nowadays that believe they know more than an OB that spent more than 6 years studying what they do.Refusing treatment when an OB is concerned about an outcome for mum or baby is plain ridiculous and I’ll bet my bottom dollar that if something went wrong the mother would have been the first person to sue.Looking at the monitor and noting “no incident” is only one piece of it. An OB has a lot of other factors before proceeding with a c-section.

Chris: Sorry but I have to agree with the OB in this one. There are too many natural birth advocates nowadays that believe they know more than an OB that spent more than 6 years studying what they do.Refusing treatment when an OB is concerned about an outcome for mum or baby is plain ridiculous and I’ll bet my bottom dollar that if something went wrong the mother would have been the first person to sue.Looking at the monitor and noting “no incident” is only one piece of it. An OB has a lot of other factors before proceeding with a c-section.

If the baby was fine after a few hours on the monitor without incident, then clearly it wasn’t an emergent situation. Calling a woman a bad parent because she wants to wait before having major abdominal surgery that may be unnecessary is a *scare tactic.* It’s manipulation.

If the doctor had come in saying, “Your baby’s heart rate is in the fifties and we believe he’s in distress. We need to have a C-section now,” that’s different from “Well, let’s just section you. No? Well, then you’re a bad mommy!”

What the hell is it with doctors who are afraid that giving information to the patient is going to remove it from their own brains forever? If he could justify his decision to have a section, then he should have provided that information. If he wants to proceed to a c-section on NO OTHER GROUNDS than “the baby’s heart is beating” then which babies will be delivered vaginally?

Exactly what are you agreeing with??
The only thing he said was that the mother was a bad parent and that the baby’s heart was beating.
If he’s refusing to give the mother more information, which he clearly did, why should she agree to major abdominal surgery?
I’m all for cesareans when they save a mother and baby’s life, but at least give me a reason!
I’d love for the mother to chime in here so we can find out what happened.

You’re making so many assumptions, Chris.
You’re assuming the caregiver the parents had for their planned homebirth was less educated and experienced than the doctor. While they might have been less trained in surgical procedures, it’s very likely they had extensive training and experience in variations or normal birth, AND assessing fetal heart tones for signs of distress.

You’re assuming the only reason a mother would choose to transfer is for a surgical birth. This is not true, as sometimes a transfer is chosen for maternal exhaustion, for IV fluids, or administration of pain relief. Yes, sometimes an epidural actually helps, in certain circumstances.

If the baby was not in distress before or during the transfer, immediate consent to major abdominal surgery without a clear reason given as to its necessity doesn’t make sense. Clearly the mother had her reasons for refusing unnecessary surgery, and clearly she was right since the baby was not in distress!

I do agree that refusing surgery *when it is necessary* is irresponsible. There is nothing in the information presented here to indicate anything except that the doctor was mad at this woman for planning a homebirth, and refused to answer her legitimate request for information about why he wanted to cut her open.

“Refusing treatment when an OB is concerned about an outcome for mum or baby is plain ridiculous…”

If the fact that the OB was concerned is grounds to call refusing treatment “ridiculous,” then any time an OB is concerned his suggested treatment must be right. Do you agree with that?

Then I guess I am ridiculous. I didn’t consent to a routine, repeat c-section with my 2nd baby just because my OB was concerned that VBACs were always dangerous. I still didn’t consent to a c-section for that 2nd baby when my new OB was concerned that I was suffering from CPD and FTP just because I couldn’t push him out while the nurses held my legs down. (I was so ridiculously stubborn that when they let go of me, I changed positions and gave birth vaginally. SHOCKING!)

I also didn’t consent to another c-section when, after 3 successful VBACs, one of the OBs I interviewed for my 5th birth became very concerned that having another VBAC would be “very dangerous,” telling me that the more VBACs you have, the more likely you are to have a uterine rupture. (I think she was confusing “VBACs” with “c-sections.”) I ultimately decided not to use an OB for my prenatal care, and when I arrived at the hospital in labor, the OB on call was *very* concerned. She worried that since I had not been seeing an OB, I needed an immediate c-section. How ridiculous that I didn’t consent to that, right?

Ultimately, I consented to a c-section with my fifth baby. But crazy, irresponsible, and ridiculous as I am, I waited until there was an actual medical reason and used actual medical information provided by the OB (a different one) to make my decision.

“An OB has a lot of other factors before proceeding with a C-section.” Yes, Chris. Like how many holes of golf they can get in if they hurry up with the Chop.

Cara, I am so sorry you were treated this way. I do not understand why hospitals jump straight to “abuse” so many times when someone transfers there. Does that not just further alienate someone who is already not wanting to be hospitalized? Does it not just validate every single fear or concern they feel about hospitals? So counterproductive!

I am glad your baby was born safely and healthy, and I say GOOD FOR YOU for not allowing an incompetent and rude doctor bully you into something completely unnecessary!