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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
