It seems like ASAC and the other proponents of midwifery services have been successful! As of April 2009, you will now be able to have a midwife at home, or in a hospital, and have it covered by Alberta Health! Of course, this doesn't affect this birth at all, since I don't think this baby will wait until April. So we are still footing the $3000 bill. But for all those people out there who are like us, and really had to think hard about shelling out that kind of money to have the birth experience that they wanted, midwifery care is now an option :)
Government of Alberta Link:
http://www.alberta.ca/home/NewsFrame.cfm?ReleaseID=/acn/200810/24550063EBE33-96F3-5ED1-46942B3A9CB6A7DE.html
Local News Link:
http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20081016/EDM_midwife_081016/20081016/?hub=EdmontonHome
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Friday, October 10, 2008
Why are maternal mortality/morbidity rates not dropping?
Reading Ina May's Guide to Childbirth (see post of best pregnancy book ever), I was really suprised at the statistics that the book presents on maternal mortality and morbidity. Hers' are stats from the States, but I got curious as to what it was like in Canada. (all of this is from a published paper, by the way... here's the link http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1216316).
This paper had some interesting results.
"In summary, we found that severe maternal morbidity occurs in about 1 of 250 deliveries in Canada. Considerable increases have occurred over the past decade in rates of venous thromboembolism, uterine rupture, adult respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary edema, myocardial infarction, severe postpartum hemorrhage requiring hysterectomy, and the need for assisted ventilation. Because adjustment for maternal age, multifetal pregnancy and previous cesarean delivery did not change the overall results, these changes are unlikely to be caused by demographic trends; investigational attention should be paid to the reasons for these increases."
This is better than in the US, but the fact that morbidity is increasing is alarming. You would think that it would be going down, that all the docters and interventions involved in pregnancy/labour/delivery now would make it safer to have a baby. But the rates are going up. In her book, Ina May discusses reasons for this. Things like amniotic fluid embolism (major cause of maternal death) occur naturally about 1 in 50, 000 - 1 in 80, 000 births. Being induced increases this. One hospital in Phoenix had a AFE rate of 1 in 6000. If you get this complication, you have a 50% chance of dying. Other complications, such as uterine rupture, also increase with interventions like c-sections and induction.
On the WHO database of maternal mortality stats (http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/global_monitoring/RHRxmls/RHRmainpage.htm), Canada did pretty well for maternal mortality (6 per 100,000 births). Other countries like Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Ireland, Sweden and Spain did better. As it turns out , Sweden, Denmark, and Norway all have most of their babies delivered by midwives, not obstitricians. I couldn't find out anything about Iceland. Ireland and Spain both have midwives, but babies are delivered in hospitals, much the same way it is in Canada. I wonder what causes the very high infant/maternal death/morbidity rates in the US, as compared to Canada? I would have to guess at the lack of universal health care and prenatal care. One more reason to not privatize health care in Canada.
Not a very eloquent blog entry tonight, but i'm kind of tired, and i'm writing this as i'm doing the research, instead of putting it all together,and writing it out logically.
Only 2.5 weeks left :) Baby is posterior (facing my tummy instead of my back), by the way. I hope he/she turns around, or it might be a long, tough haul for me.
This paper had some interesting results.
"In summary, we found that severe maternal morbidity occurs in about 1 of 250 deliveries in Canada. Considerable increases have occurred over the past decade in rates of venous thromboembolism, uterine rupture, adult respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary edema, myocardial infarction, severe postpartum hemorrhage requiring hysterectomy, and the need for assisted ventilation. Because adjustment for maternal age, multifetal pregnancy and previous cesarean delivery did not change the overall results, these changes are unlikely to be caused by demographic trends; investigational attention should be paid to the reasons for these increases."
This is better than in the US, but the fact that morbidity is increasing is alarming. You would think that it would be going down, that all the docters and interventions involved in pregnancy/labour/delivery now would make it safer to have a baby. But the rates are going up. In her book, Ina May discusses reasons for this. Things like amniotic fluid embolism (major cause of maternal death) occur naturally about 1 in 50, 000 - 1 in 80, 000 births. Being induced increases this. One hospital in Phoenix had a AFE rate of 1 in 6000. If you get this complication, you have a 50% chance of dying. Other complications, such as uterine rupture, also increase with interventions like c-sections and induction.
On the WHO database of maternal mortality stats (http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/global_monitoring/RHRxmls/RHRmainpage.htm), Canada did pretty well for maternal mortality (6 per 100,000 births). Other countries like Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Ireland, Sweden and Spain did better. As it turns out , Sweden, Denmark, and Norway all have most of their babies delivered by midwives, not obstitricians. I couldn't find out anything about Iceland. Ireland and Spain both have midwives, but babies are delivered in hospitals, much the same way it is in Canada. I wonder what causes the very high infant/maternal death/morbidity rates in the US, as compared to Canada? I would have to guess at the lack of universal health care and prenatal care. One more reason to not privatize health care in Canada.
Not a very eloquent blog entry tonight, but i'm kind of tired, and i'm writing this as i'm doing the research, instead of putting it all together,and writing it out logically.
Only 2.5 weeks left :) Baby is posterior (facing my tummy instead of my back), by the way. I hope he/she turns around, or it might be a long, tough haul for me.
Belly Shots
Most of the people who read this are probably on my Facebook, and have seen all these, but I know a few who boycott facebook. A friend of ours took these about 2 weeks ago down in Millcreek Ravine, a few blocks from our house.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
October has arrived.
Everytime someone has asked when I am due, I have answered just, 'October' for simplicity's sake. Now that has to change. Today I responded by saying, 'A few weeks'. Wow. It sort of creeps up on you in the end. In a few weeks, Justin and I will be bringing an entirely new person into the world, who will one day actually do things and affect other people's lives. It can be hard to imagine that this little baby wiggling around will love, teach and influence the same way that we all do now. I'm having an easier time with this concept this time around, since Maddy is now at the age where she has really started influencing the world around her.
By the way, thanks Carly, for telling me how to fix that comments thing. Now you no longer need a google blogger account to leave a comment. It should make it a lot easier.
By the way, thanks Carly, for telling me how to fix that comments thing. Now you no longer need a google blogger account to leave a comment. It should make it a lot easier.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Blogger sucks. sorry.
So I have been wondering why I get no comments on my blog, not even from Justin, who I know reads it. So I asked him. As it turns out, you need to have a blogger account (I think gmail will work too) in order to leave a comment! It used to be that you could leave a comment as 'anonymous' and not have to sign in to anything. Anyway, what a pain in the ass. I harbour no hard feelings for receiving no comments. I blame it all on blogger.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Vitamin K injections? with a short note about the inadequacy of the Canadian voting system
All babies born in hospitals (and many born at home) are given a vitamin K injection at birth to prevent hemorrhagic disease of the newborn (HDN). This is one that i'm kind of stuck on.
HDN - Newborns are born with low levels of vitamin K (it doesn't cross the placenta well, and their gut flora is not well developed, which is where much of our vitamin K comes from), a necessary factor in clotting. It developes more often in breastfed babies, since formula contains higher levels of vitamin K than breastmilk does. From what I can find, it affects anwhere from 2-10 babies per 100,000, but it can be deadly since bleeding can happed in the brain. With the injection, rates can go as low as 0.25 babies per 100,000.
There might be some problems with the injection. Two studies done in the 90's (and several since then) linked vitamin K injection at birth to higher rate of childhood leukemia later on, but other studies have not found this connection. Vitamin K causes high rates of cell division in the fetus and newborn. The amount in the injection is about 20,000 times the amount naturally found in the baby. This high rate of cell division so close after birth is though to be what increases the risk of cancer. The risk of cancer is increased somewhere between 10-80%. It has been given to babies since the 60's in western countries. Apparantly, it can also cause newborn jaundice (although i couldn't find any studies to back that up).
The main reason that I wouldn't do it, is it just doesn't seem natural to me. I don't understand how evolution could have gotten it wrong. There is one alternative to the injection (oral administration) which has not been studied to show that it actually decreases HDN or to see if it still causes cancer (at least not that I can find). Lots of natural health websites seem to prefer the oral route, but without any evidence either way, I would kind of prefer the evil I know to the evil I don't.
Any opinions on the matter are greatly appreciated.
By the way, the midwife told me at our last appointment that the baby has dropped (kind of). If you imagine your pelvis divided into 5th's, 1/5 being baby kind of floating just inside the pelvis and 5/5 being the baby right at the cervix, this baby is now at 3/5. It is my prediction that this baby is not going to wait until Oct 27. Maybe it will be Oct 14. Maddy was born just days before a federal election too, and I COULDN'T VOTE!! If I left the hospital to vote, they would not let me back, and since Maddy wasn't being released yet, and I was breastfeeding, that wasn't really an option. I think its stupid that people in hospitals can't vote (unless they vote early, or by mail, but I could do neither). Anyway, that's a different topic alltogether.
HDN - Newborns are born with low levels of vitamin K (it doesn't cross the placenta well, and their gut flora is not well developed, which is where much of our vitamin K comes from), a necessary factor in clotting. It developes more often in breastfed babies, since formula contains higher levels of vitamin K than breastmilk does. From what I can find, it affects anwhere from 2-10 babies per 100,000, but it can be deadly since bleeding can happed in the brain. With the injection, rates can go as low as 0.25 babies per 100,000.
There might be some problems with the injection. Two studies done in the 90's (and several since then) linked vitamin K injection at birth to higher rate of childhood leukemia later on, but other studies have not found this connection. Vitamin K causes high rates of cell division in the fetus and newborn. The amount in the injection is about 20,000 times the amount naturally found in the baby. This high rate of cell division so close after birth is though to be what increases the risk of cancer. The risk of cancer is increased somewhere between 10-80%. It has been given to babies since the 60's in western countries. Apparantly, it can also cause newborn jaundice (although i couldn't find any studies to back that up).
The main reason that I wouldn't do it, is it just doesn't seem natural to me. I don't understand how evolution could have gotten it wrong. There is one alternative to the injection (oral administration) which has not been studied to show that it actually decreases HDN or to see if it still causes cancer (at least not that I can find). Lots of natural health websites seem to prefer the oral route, but without any evidence either way, I would kind of prefer the evil I know to the evil I don't.
Any opinions on the matter are greatly appreciated.
By the way, the midwife told me at our last appointment that the baby has dropped (kind of). If you imagine your pelvis divided into 5th's, 1/5 being baby kind of floating just inside the pelvis and 5/5 being the baby right at the cervix, this baby is now at 3/5. It is my prediction that this baby is not going to wait until Oct 27. Maybe it will be Oct 14. Maddy was born just days before a federal election too, and I COULDN'T VOTE!! If I left the hospital to vote, they would not let me back, and since Maddy wasn't being released yet, and I was breastfeeding, that wasn't really an option. I think its stupid that people in hospitals can't vote (unless they vote early, or by mail, but I could do neither). Anyway, that's a different topic alltogether.
Monday, September 15, 2008
We are our own solution.
I think that our society has become too dependent on others to solve our problems for us. My recent insomnia will be my example. I have not been sleeping well (never more than 4-5 hours a night) for a few weeks now. That kind of sleep deprivation really takes its toll on you physically, and emotionally. I would find myself totally losing it, over nothing, just from sheer exhaustion. I didn't have the energy to do anything, so I would often end up doing nothing but the bare minimum (laundry only when we ran out of underwear etc etc) every day, and feeling worse as each day passed. I can see how many women end up depressed in late pregnancy/postpartum. Lack of sleep will do that to you! Anyway, I went to Calgary withmy Mum this past weekend, to do some serious shopping/eating. It was awesome, and we were on our feet, walking around all day Saturday and Sunday and guess what? I slept like a baby! All this time, I have been asking my midwife what I can take (herbal teas, etc) to help me sleep, when really all it took was enough exercise to beat me out. I expected the solution to this problem to come from some outside source, when it was in me all along to fix this. I wonder how much better everyone would feel if they got out for a nice, long walk everyday. So i'm going to start walking the dog. It has been Justin's job the last few months, but I obviously need the exercise. I think the solutions to many (most?) of our health problems are already there, we just need to get off the couch and do it.
On a side note, the baby's room (aka. junk room for the last 6 months) is starting to take shape. I actually cleaned out some of the junk today, put blankets away and gave us some room to work. Now Justin can put the crib together. I need to find a nice quilt for the crib, so I can start some kind of decorating scheme in there. Rental house beige just doesn't do it for me.
Six weeks to go! (Although my internal clock is telling me it might be sooner.)
On a side note, the baby's room (aka. junk room for the last 6 months) is starting to take shape. I actually cleaned out some of the junk today, put blankets away and gave us some room to work. Now Justin can put the crib together. I need to find a nice quilt for the crib, so I can start some kind of decorating scheme in there. Rental house beige just doesn't do it for me.
Six weeks to go! (Although my internal clock is telling me it might be sooner.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
