Gina Crosly-Corcoran, The Feminist Breeder, like most natural childbirth/homebirth bloggers is a dangerous clown. A clown because she is so stunningly ignorant that she can’t fathom the depth of her own ignorance, and dangerous because she actually thinks she is knowledgeable. She’s even more dangerous whenever it becomes clear to her that she is wrong yet again; she deletes the evidence, makes no acknowledgement or apology for error, and proceeds as if she hadn’t been shown to be deadly wrong.
Her latest effort at “educating” her followers to her own level of stupidity was Facebook sharing (and then deleting) a piece about nuchal cords (umbilical cords wrapped around the neck). It illustrates so much that is wrong with the claims of natural childbirth advocates, including the habit of deleting evidence when they are wrong instead of acknowledging their mistakes.
1. The natural childbirth community is both an echo chamber and a stupidity amplifier.
Gina, a doula who has worked at a miniscule 20 births, referenced a doula in training, who hasn’t even done that, who quotes an “independent” Australian midwife who claims “the only way I can work to my full scope of practice, and provide the care I believe women deserve is to work as an independent homebirth midwife.” In other words a midwife who believes that she knows better than all the other midwives and obstetricians in Australia. This amplification of ignorance, spewed forth by those who are untrained, poorly trained or have rejected their training, is what passes for “education” among natural childbirth advocates.
2. It contains no scientific evidence of any kind.
What proportion of babies die from nuchal cords? You won’t find that information anywhere because none of the three “geniuses” involved in bringing this nonsense to you has a clue. They don’t tell you that 10-15% of stillbirths are associated with cord problems like nuchal cords and true knots. Without that information, anything they say on the topic is crap.
Gina likes to boast that she is “public health scholar” (instead of what she really is, a student). That makes it all the more mystifying that she appears never to read scientific papers, never quotes the relevant portions, has no inkling of the depth and breadth of the obstetric literature, rarely quotes the relevant statistics, and never performs any kind of analysis of the data that is being discussed. What exactly are they teaching her at her public health program if, after more than a year of classes, she is still incapable of even the most basic analysis?
3. As it typical of most natural childbirth/homebirth “information,” it is a half truth. Not all nuchal cords are dangerous. Only tight nuchal cords are dangerous, but according to what passes for “reasoning” in the natural childbirth community, if 100% of nuchal cords don’t end in death, then 0% of nuchal cords are dangerous. It’s the equivalent of claiming that since not buckling your seatbelt doesn’t have a 100% death rate (or anywhere close), not buckling your seatbelt is therefore safe and that anyone who suggests you should buckle your seatbelt is a fearmongerer.
4. It exploits the ignorance of basic physiology among natural childbirth avatars and their followers. Lauren Pace Specht, the nitwit who shared this piece originally thinks she is being snarky when she writes:
Nobody seems to realize that fetuses aren’t breathing through their necks, so it really doesn’t matter if the cord is looped around it. It’s not “choking” them as people envision.
Duh. No obstetrician is worried about nuchal cords because they believe a fetus breathes through their trachea (“neck”). The problem is not that the baby’s neck is compressed, the problem is that the baby’s cord, which is functioning as an air hose, is compressed. Imagine that you were breathing through an air hose with a knot in it wrapped around your neck. If the knot cuts off the supply of air, it doesn’t matter whether or not your neck is compressed; you’ll die for lack of oxygen. Specht isn’t snarky. She is clueless.
5. The ignorant reference the ignorant. When multiple people pointed out to Gina that she has no idea what she is talking about, she referred to information she got from other doulas who are as ignorant as she is.
6. Babies may die from the “education” provided by ignorant fools like Gina, and she will never face any responsibility for those deaths. The most important practical difference between obstetricians and “birth workers” is that the former bear responsibility for the information they present, while the latter face no consequence for themselves. Does Gina plan to take any responsibility for the incredible stupidity that dribbles from her pen? Of course not.
To summarize, Gina, the righteously ignorant, spouts deadly misinformation that exploits the lack of basic physiology knowledge among her followers, depends on a half truth, references other equally clueless natural childbirth advocates, and could lead to the death of your baby. And when she finally recognizes that she is completely and utterly wrong, she deletes the post without acknowledging her mistake.
Does Gina care that she is transmitting and amplifying stupidity? Of course not. In her ignorance, she is PROUD of herself. Does she plan to take any blame if a baby dies from the misinformation that she regularly conveys?
Absolutely not. You can bet your baby’s life on it.
I am Gina BIO MOTHER. YES THAT’S RIGHT HER MOTHER AND I WANT TO SAY, YOU ARE RIGHT Gina needs help and I will be the 1st to say it. Gina is a pathological liar and has been disowned by her whole maternal family for the lies she has told about her life. I am a Nurse. That’s right a nurse. Anyone who has read anything Gina has written knows she claims she comes from an uneducated white trash family. NOT TRUE. That being said it’s my fear that her claims on “natural” childbirth and home vs hospital birth WILL LEAVE TO THE DEATH OF A BABY AND MAYBE EVEN A MOTHER. I’m begging women to listen to your Dr not a woman who exaggerates her education to gain attention. Please. Gina is a born liar.
There is a time and place for everything and internet is neither a place nor time to say such things about your own child.
I may dislike her and be abhorred by how she conducts herself in regard to safety and rights of women in childbirth, but I would not wish a mother like you on anyone.
🙁
Ms. Stockbridge, please don’t do this in public. Please reconsider your post. I am someone’s daughter and so are you. I don’t think it’s right for you to bash her. I’m a big supporter of Dr Amy and I disagree with Gina’s ideas about birth care decisions. Yes, she banned me from comments in her Facebook page. However, despite that, I happen to agree with a lot of her views on political things, gay/queer rights, a lot of stuff not related to birth. I am truly sorry that the two of you are hurting. For what it’s worth, I think Gina is smart and resilient, and you can take pride in that. – Andrea
Gina is the worst of the worst and I have seen her around long enough to know her stupiditiy from the very beginning. The thing I truly love about her is the way she won’t engage in any type of argument when you call her out and will basically ban you from the discussion when you start to back her into a corner (which isn’t hard to do). She has zero education and from what it sounds like she couldn’t even finish the education she was attempting so by all means let’s give her credence because she has attended 20 deliveries. I did more than that in my first week as a resident and I can tell you I wasn’t experienced at that point, but somehow she is. She is dangerous and will eventually cause a baby or mother to die because of her inept drivel.
For people popping in for a nuchal cord discussion I invite you read my baby’s story, kindly posted by Dr. Amy: http://www.skepticalob.com/2012/03/cascade-of-non-intervention-emilys.html
An acquaintance of mine lost her baby four days before her due date because of an issue with the cord. It’s heartbreaking. She is pregnant again and has a c-section scheduled for the first day they will let her have her baby.
Gina is worse than stupid – she spreads actively dangerous information. She also makes it harder for people like my acquaintance who shouldn’t have to justify to other people why she wants an elective c-section.
My parents best friend lost her baby to a nuchal cord. It was her first pregnancy, no problems, went 3 days past her due date. Woke up one morning to no movement, went straight to the Dr. who couldn’t find a heartbeat and they determined that it was to late for the baby. She was admitted and induced and had her little boy vaginally. It was a long, hard, painful labor of which she knew the outcome. This was in the early 90’s. Her other 3 kids were born via C-Section 2-3 weeks before her due date.
“Responsibility”? What’s that?
Errrr…. I sort of get the impression that she’s not in that MPH program any longer…
Well yeah but she did that 3 week long internship at the birth center where nobody wears shoes so she’s kind of a total expert.
What makes you say that? We all knew she was going to fail at some point but I didn’t realise it was yet.
And this nitwit travels around teaches classes for “birth workers” and advocates. She’s as dumb and arrogant as they come!
Haven’t read any of the posts yet, so I apologize if already eluded to. Tight umbilical cords don’t even have to be around the neck, they can wrap around the groin, axilla, or neck and become tight and lead to variable decels and stillbirth. Couple this with low AFV, and the danger is compounded. How many crunchy sites boast about refusing induction for low AFV? They boast to just drink more water. If I am not mistaken, drinking more water only helps if you are already dehydrated and may increase AFI by 1-3 cm at best. This won’t help a well hydrated woman with an AFV of 2.
2 vessel cords are associated with IUGR and congenital heart defects. Hyprecoiled, hypocoiled, and short cords have there own ominous associations. Not all cords have abundant Wharton’s jelly which helps protect the cord from compression. IUGR and AMA babies seem to have wimpy thin cords that can just get compressed between the baby and the contracting uterus.
Then there are the placenta risks which is for a different thread.
“Gina likes to boast that she is “public health scholar” (instead of what
she really is, a student). That makes it all the more mystifying that
she appears never to read scientific papers, never quotes the relevant
portions, has no inkling of the depth and breadth of the obstetric
literature, rarely quotes the relevant statistics, and never performs
any kind of analysis of the data that is being discussed. What exactly
are they teaching her at her public health program if, after more than a
year of classes, she is still incapable of even the most basic
analysis?”
THIS. Is she able to pass her classes? How is she able to survive the program that she’s in? I didn’t think that sort of program would allow you to fart around and opine endlessly to the exclusion of actual research.
Well, there are some people, the quacks who go to school just to get the paper, who can apparently partition their minds. They are intelligent enough to learn what the professor is teaching and give the right answers on tests, but they don’t actually believe most of it. The CPM turned CNM who takes on twin homebirths anyway is a great example.
Of course, she might not be able to pull off her thesis.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/780171 http://www.jpmi.org.pk/index.php/jpmi/article/download/1496/1306
http://www.rcog.org.uk/womens-health/clinical-guidance/caesarean-section-nuchal-cord-query-bank-may-2009
http://www.ajol.info/index.php/cmch/article/viewFile/71481/60425
I really don’t like it when people post multiple links without explanation. What do you mean by linking to these articles? What are you trying to say? Why should I read them?
studies or reports that indicate that nuchal cord actually really isn’t all that big of a deal
Yeah.. a nuchal cord isn’t really all that big of a deal…. until it is
And.. of course you don’t know whether it’s a big deal or not until the baby is born FFS
I only clicked the RCOG link, but A) that is not a study; and B) it doesn’t say what you think it says.
The RCOG reports references multiple studies, not alll which lead to the same conclusions. In the name of fairness, are you going to excoriate the study authors same like Corcoran?
Exactly.
I HATE blind links.
Respect your reader’s time–explain what you are linking to and why it’s worth their while.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/10215867/No-oxygen-available-at-botched-home-birth
Who is Ms. D? Anyone notorious?
I do not know who Ms D is. I’m not of that world. Knowing what I now know, I’m horrified the first-time mother chose home-birth and I’m very sad for her that her chosen midwife agreed.
They anonymise alphabetically, so generally the client will be Ms. A, Midwife Ms. B, Dr. C and so on in the case findings. There is a naming policy on the Health and Disability Commissioners website.
Don’t think NZ has too many notorious health practitioners, the ones that pop up to mind are ones like gynaecologist/obstetrician Roman Hasil that had a string of botched surgeries among other issues. Generally, it’s one-off failings and often if it is a serious incident, they’ll either be stood down by the DHB or stop work voluntarily while investigations/review of the case go on. That being said, in the previous case I mentioned the DHB was supposed to be providing supervision and criticised for failing to act more quickly to complaints. Not good at all.
NZ midwifery is notoriously woo infested. All the standard NCB crap, anti intervention, all doctors are bastards (golfers), witchcraft and mythology etc. etc.
The Australians even talk about “NZ midwife syndrome” when yet another disaster transpires.
That’s because the midwives don’t get paid unless the mother is low risk and births vaginally. If the mother is referred to a high risk team and chooses a C-section as a result (say breech), they don’t get as much – hello ‘variation of normal’. It’s in their financial interest to push the woo.
http://www.ohbaby.co.nz/pregnancy/hot-topics/what-do-midwives-get-paid/
Midwives attend *every* birth in NZ, staff high-risk (and other obstetric related) clinics and
post-natal along with Obstetricians/Obstetric Registrars and so on. We don’t have nurses working in L&D but there may be some in post-natal wards. This is how it’s been done for decades. They do get paid for providing care attending pre-natal appointments, labour care (and that can include scrubbing up and assisting with caesar if able) and post-natal.
You obviously didn’t read the article properly as they clearly state they are paid according to “care modules”, because they attend all births there is no real loss in the main if care is solely done by the high-risk team, or if care is transferred part-way through as there is plenty of work otherwise and care is usually transferred back for e.g. post-natal care. “In fact in many cases a midwife would receive the same fee, but for less work, if the woman was transferred to secondary or tertiary care and they took over all or a portion of the care.”
Plenty of work for all, and clearly no interest in pushing . For instance, if a mother is seen by an Obstetrician as their baby is breech as is standard practice and booked in for a caesar, the midwife still is LMC and will continue care and continue to provide care up until the mother has the operation, and then will take over over again when she goes home. It would be equally bollocks to suggest Plunket nurses (these do well-child visits from 6 weeks to 5 years) engage in such competition with Paediatricians because dosh, that’s not the way it works.
This is stated in the Midwifery Councils standards of practice “The midwife understands, promotes and facilitates the physiological processes of pregnancy and childbirth, identifies complications that may arise in mother and baby, accesses appropriate medical assistance, and implements emergency measures as necessary. When women require referral midwives provide midwifery care in collaboration with other health professionals.”
Lets make it clear, mistakes get made and malpractice sometimes happens and these should *always* be addressed and preventative measures put in place to prevent it happening again but the situation overall is collaborative rather than being one of financial conflict and it is made clear that part of the job is being able to identify complications and involve other, more specialised care when it is needed.
This isn’t like the US where you have poorly trained practitioners competing for care in some instances, where their payment solely relies on who they can get for their funding and there is no integration of care.
I know the New Zealand model well – I was born and live here. I have also chosen to spend the ~$4000 (twice) for private Obstetric care, because I think the midwifery led model still needs work. Before getting pregnant myself, the 5 people I knew who had most recently given birth had all had issues that the midwife didn’t pick up on, including undiagnosed breech for one, and too small pelvis diagnosed after 40 hours of labour for another.
The fact that most of the midwives who make mistakes here just get a slap on the wrist, and because of our suppression laws can continue to practice with future clients being none the wiser is still a major problem in my opinion. And while ACC is a godsend for parents whose children have birth injuries, the fact that the midwives aren’t prosecuted or held to account is horrifying.
For a GP’s opinion on the change in the 90’s to the current system, read The Baby Business by Dr Lynda Exton.
http://www.fishpond.co.nz/Books/Baby-Business-Dr-Lynda-Exton/9781877333835
Oh and the woo is definitely creeping in – a few mothers in a Facebook group I’m in are passing around copies of Ina May’s books, referred and loaned to them by a mother who did a couple of years midwifery training but decided not to complete it.
I also had an online argument with this former almost midwife, who was adamant that homebirth was ‘just as safe if not safer’ than hospital birth, and tried to convince me and another C-section mum that we should feel robbed of our birth experiences and if we were to have more children that we should try to do it right next time.
It’s here – and it’s getting worse.
I don’t need to read a book, I live here too and I got obstetrician by referral from a midwife.
That said, I’m not all that convinced from reading her website just using few points:
1. New Zealand’s infant mortality rate ranking getting steadily worse compared to other countries. (Not a measure of actual maternity care , Dr Amy has referenced this many time as a false figure to use. Also, what has happened is the figures haven’t “worsened” it’s that the rate of improvement slowed, so other countries have passed us in the rankings).
2. Dramatic rises in hospital admissions for pregnancy complications and caesarean rates. (I don’t think this is a problem, this would reflect appropriate care and timely referral into the system would it not? I’m over the breast beating about caesareans, they save lives. We also do try and educate women about higher risks caused by things like obesity, and encourage them to take folate etc but you’ve just got to deal with what you’ve got. Pregnancy is no time to get someone to crash diet).
3. Coroners’ calls for a comprehensive review of the maternity system falling on deaf ears (A review was done of the system by the National Health Committee in 1999, and as it was a Wellington Coroner (I think Evans but could be wrong) that called for this there was a review of Wellington services in 2008. So there have been reviews, also data and stats can be found here: http://www.health.govt.nz/nz-health-statistics/health-statistics-and-data-sets/maternity-and-newborn-data-and-stats as well as results from the aforementioned reviews).
I’ve also got an anecdote, my husband’s cousin died as a result of his botched birth by a GP. The real claim that underlies a lot of this is that care in NZ is dangerous, but I don’t find this making broad claims and pulling things out of butts convincing. That’s not apparent, and from being in delivery suite while I was training, one thing that you should realise is that GP’s only had an additional six months training IIRC, and again needed to refer on to an Obstetrician. In effect, I’m not all that sure that system worked fantastically either as it seemed they pretty much only wanted to be called at second stage, often didn’t make it there until after and needed to pass over complications also.
If criticising the current system of care, one should really be looking at this critically. One of you needs to address the figures and these weird claims of witchcraft and suchlike. That’s a bizarre claim. So is alleging that nothing happens to midwives and they aren’t held accountable. Fact is we do have a system that holds health professional accountable.
Seriously, have you looked at the provisions of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 and cases at the Health Practioners Disciplinary Tribunal? Or perhaps you’re doing the thing and looking at HDC cases and ignoring the bit about the case being referred to the director of proceedings (a lawyer) who then determines if the breach is severe, and then passes it on and just looking at the other bits like where they order apologies etc. Because midwives are prosecuted, *named*, made to pay the court costs of hearings and face a range of penalties just like every other professional group working in health care by the tribunal. It isn’t the role of the HDC to discipline, but in general, everyone points to those cases and not to what eventuates later. Not naming is a policy for earlier on, if it is needed. Claiming one occupational group gets a free pass from the law doesn’t fly, they are all covered by the act and must deliver care according to the code of rights for patients (also enshrined in law). That’s a accountability right there, that’s how we get to see these cases reported on.
The bait and switch here is going from steeped in witchcraft and woo to mistakes. Now, I hope you realise health professionals are human, sometimes it can be that they do make mistakes, other times it can actually be negligence. We do measure quality of care in a range of ways, by monitoring what you call ‘sentinel events’ which can indicate poor care, keeping statistical data (and NZ’s is pretty good quality) through to specific committees such as the Perinatal and Maternal Mortality Committee that reviews all cases. Now if we look at negligence, what I’d be looking at is not just claims NZ health care system is crap, but whether we have high rates, and whether there are any patterns to it and what occupational groups are affected.
Secondarily, what you’d look at is response to problems, because one of the things they did review after the changeover in the system was check that same data I’ve posted because if care had deteriorated, it would be reflected in it. And set up that committee I mentioned to identify problems and areas where NZ is doing poorly with maternity care or where services can be improved. They didn’t change and some parameters have shown improvement over the years, so going “witchcraft” isn’t a valid criticism. There are definitely some things that could be made better, but I’m pretty confident that it’s not just being ignored.
If you read my comments again – I make no reference to ‘witchcraft’ myself. So calling me out on a bait snd switch is disingenuous. I do think ‘woo’ is getting more prevalent here though with the amount of misinformation available through the internet, evidenced by comments made by people in my aquaintance.
You have obviously looked into this a lot more than I have so I find myself unable to counter your arguments point by point. I am just a regular woman, making decisions based on what I see and hear around me – and fact of the matter is I don’t trust that the midwifery model here is robust enough for me to want to use it. I could look into all the things you reference, but quite frankly I would just rather spend the money and know I’m getting the best.
As for the mistakes that are made – I feel that it is a sign that woo is taking over here. Enough of them are due to complications that could have been avoided if the midwife wasn’t working within the bounds of NCB ideology rather than the best interest of the mother and baby – and not enough of them are named and held to a high standard if accountability. Most just get away with an apology, and maybe 6 months ‘supervision’. That to me is the Midwifery Council protecting itself and its interests, rather than making sure they have the highest standard of care.
If you read what I wrote that was the comment that I was responding to and that obviously sailed right over your head. That said, fair is fair and it’s a worthwhile opinion, but the problem I have is the gross misrepresentation of our health care system with little reference to what is actually happening. You can’t use a “former almost midwife” as an example of woo as they
clearly are not a midwife and couldn’t cope with the training. That is very obviously not the same thing as registered midwives who have to conform with our legislative system in order to practice here.
Safety and quality of service is what we should be looking at, not blatherings about witchcraft and golf games in ignorance. That is because it does matter that we get it right. I mean that, and I struggle with the idea that any health professional (as a whole) would not be interested in the best for their clients and that this idea treats midwives as isolated in the health care system and ignores that we do have Obstetricians (and Registrars who are training to go into that profession) integrated in there who also have a stake in this and in providing quality care. I think people have to get past this idea that because midwives are a part of this that’s all you get and look at any issues more broadly as I see this as diminishing the important role of medical practitioners in providing maternity care.
Therefore it’s not enough to just allege that the people had a particular philosophy or that something happening was done in that way because in my opinion, that isn’t all that clear and what I’m seeing is more simple failure to practice up to standard and in some cases systematic failures that involve DHB’s as well as individual practitioners with the exception of a few cases that I’ve read from the HDC where it was clear that they bought into that (and that is not solely limited to midwives BTW). The fact is that if you are talking about mistakes or error, it can
happen with any health professional quite easily with no philosophy
involved. Negligence/malpractice is another matter again, but again I’d be looking for real problems (e.g. is there a problem with our systems for supervision for overseas registered health professionals?) not just making broad claims of witchcraft and woo that are too easily debunked and ignored (unless of course, you can say it was exactly that that was the problem).
The Midwifery Council is not in the situation to “protect itself” as any cases are referred to them for competency assessment (not supervision) are via the HDC and they have no control over that and they are not in the position to filter complaints like is the situation with similar bodies overseas.
Similarly, they have no control over cases sent to the HPDT for disciplinary proceedings as that is a separate body, and separate from the regulatory function they have in registering midwives etc. HPDT is the one that does order a range of penalties, depending on the breach (rather like our penal code) this has a range of penalties which can be supervision, striking off the register (can be permanent or short-term) and they say when a person can reapply and what the requirements are for this (usually extensive retraining) and it is standard for the person being censured to pay costs of the hearing which can run into 10’s of thousands of dollars.
If you are going to criticise, make the right criticisms and more importantly do the right thing and start agitating if you think they are being too soft on people. It’s that simple.
If part of your reply wasn’t directed at me, then perhaps you should have split your reply.
With regard to how mistakes are dealt with, perhaps it’s a problem with our media then, as if the penalties are that robust, I as a lay person haven’t heard about them.
I’m not enough of an activist to start agitating – this is where I think organisations like AIM are worth their weight in gold, however it pains me to hear some of the woo coming out of the 200 odd women I have contact with over birth matters on a nearly day to day basis (2 due date groups with nearly 100 women each, plus antenatal and PIN group mothers). I’m not saying this makes me an authority on any of the matters you bring up, but it gives me a perspective to create my opinion on. And my opinion is that while the system prior to 1990 wasn’t perfect, what it was replaced with needs work as well. While it’s nowhere near as wild west as what we see on this board, I think there can be improvements made.
It was you that replied to my reply to others, so yeah. In any case, now I’m back from hols and agreed our system, like any other system has flaws. At the same time, it’s not completely crap, and a lot of work has gone into investigating and preventing problems in that system and there will be more work to do in the future. It’s also incredibly important especially for loss families that we have good systems, and work to address any failings so other families never have to deal with the same situation.
If dealing with those flaws it doesn’t really work when it’s anything other than actual problems and flaws in the system that are being addressed. It’s like you saying perhaps it a media problem, but no it isn’t. It’s that you haven’t bothered to look at how the disciplinary system works and what happens with those cases. The media only highlight a certain portion, mostly at the start of the process and you cannot expect to get an idea of what goes on with that just based on that. If you can work out what was happening in 1990 and have an opinion on those changes, you should also get to grip with the other changes that have happened and that the disciplinary process have changed over the years. One thing I think important is criticising what is, not what it is thought to be.
And another thing is that yes, I’d guarantee that you are hearing woo, but the challenge is that that’s not coming from official sources. If we want to criticise midwives, need to do something more like Dr. Amy does and actually use their words and take them apart, not use other statements from other unrelated people that may or may not be anything to do with what midwives or doctors have actually said or done. It’s unfortunate that a lot of this woo is just around and can be easily sourced on the internet giving people incorrect ideas of how things work, and what happens in hospitals. I have to say one thing I am reassured by is that unlike some other countries I have heard about there is no push to do things like encourage home birth or try and reduce caesareans or anything like that. For now anyway, I’d certainly protest if there are any moves in that direction.
Yeah, right. I’d expect “The Australians” to diss us any chance they got, particularly in sport but not limited to that. I suppose they’ve got to try and beat us at something, even if it’s only whinging. I’ll refrain from saying anything about their treatment of aboriginals in their nation, it’s not a competition.
Great that you can make such overarching comments without even giving so much as a specific example of this woo. Come on, got to get some specifics on this alleged witchcraft and mythology. Maybe you can look at the competences and specify which ones qualify? http://www.midwiferycouncil.health.nz/midwifery-competence/
It’s quite interesting because I’m not seeing this woo, there is no push like in the UK for homebirths for instance. Also, care in NZ is not solely provided by midwives, not a good idea to ignore the total system and the important contributions of obstetricians (and believe me, the NZ lot would be kicking up merry hell if they saw poor care). The latest figures show improvements overall and they should show deteriorating rates if care is poor/woo filled, and I’d say that while not perfect and clearly there are some things we could be doing better (like in the tragic case cited above) it’s in line with other developed nations.
The figures for 2011 show 6.7/1000 perinatal mortality, 3.5/1000 stillbirth, 2.6/1000 neonatal mortality. Maternal death rates are stable, with little change since 2006.
In 2009 the figures were 7.5/1000, 4.7/1000, 2.9/1000. 1996 NZ figures: 9.1/1000, 6.6/1000,
3.4/1000. UK figures for 2009 were 7.6/1000, 5.2/1000, 3.2/1000 as a contrast.
The golf one gives me a laugh, because that’s an US thing as far as I am concerned. There isn’t the same push as most women will be seen by the Obstetrician rostered on at the hospital, and certainly they seem to be smart enough to get cover sorted in private practice for things like annual leave and so on. There’s no stress about vanishing for a golf game in the middle of things when someone else is going to turn up for their shift at clinic or on-call.
It’s why groups such as AIM exist in NZ:
http://aim.org.nz/
We also have the Home Birth Association that I’d think you’d generally look less than favourably on.
AIM is one group, and it fills an important advocacy role and done some great submissions to parliament among other things but it’s not the whole picture, and certainly nothing there to cause a characterisation that midwives (and Obestetricians and other health providers in the system who obviously contribute) are involved in witchcraft, woo and so on. There are failings, and indivdual practitioners may tragically fail like another recent case where an Obstetrician failed to do a timely caesar but basing it on someone Australian going “common knowledge” is not evidence that woo is the problem. Other official organisations like the Perinatal and Maternal Mortality Committee, The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Midwifery Council, Health and Disability Commissioner, Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal etc are all involved or review any cases of poor practice and would provide much better information as to might be going on.
Given we are small country, with less resources and pretty isolated with the next stop Antarctica it’s piss poor that “The Australians” will always punch down, but I’m not seeing this in our figures (in fact improvements over the years) and if our country was steeped in woo like US homebirth midwives, they should be much worse because as Dr Amy keeps pointing out, it’s dangerous care, and kills babies and mothers. You’d be expecting for our figures to be much worse than other countries, but they are not.
The figures for 2011 shows 6.7/1000 perinatal mortality, 3.5/1000 stillbirth, 2.6/1000 neonatal mortality. Maternal death rates are stable, with little change since 2006. In 2009 the figures were 7.5/1000, 4.7/1000, 2.9/1000.
1996 NZ figures: 9.1/1000, 6.6/1000, 3.4/1000. UK figures for 2009 were 7.6/1000, 5.2/1000, 3.2/1000 as a contrast.
We will just have to be happy that NZ tops the world in the Social Progress index, Aussie ranks 10th. Good thing being born here, just recently discovered it’s only in 2013 the US has managed to get insurance companies to provide for babies born with congenital defects, prior to that it wasn’t covered. So lucky to be born here in NZ, I got the care I needed right from birth.
Maybe that person thinks the recently released mockumentary “What We Do In The Shadows” is real, because Aussies, but it’s not and we don’t have to send women into delivery suite clutching garlic and crosses.
Oh, and forgot to say as proof we don’t all die in childbirth, there is going to be a USA Eagles vs NZ All Blacks match in Chicago on the 1st of November. Might as chuck in a pitch for that particular test match.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOhkJv1PTTY
How sad. They just forgot to pack the oxygen? And they didn’t call for ambulance until after they’d tried to resuscitate themselves, without oxygen? Yikes.
Oddly enough, every HB stillbirth seems to be blamed on a nuchal cord or “cord accident that nobody could have done anything about.” So it’s not dangerous, but is the only reason babies die in homebirth?
(Note: I’m not at all saying that such accidents don’t happen or every claim of such is false. It happens and it’s a tragedy. It just seems rather odd how the fatality potential is taken as a given when it covers the midwife’s butt, but is totally nonexistent otherwise.)
It’s not odd when you think about how their minds work. To them, nuchal cord being the cause of death for some babies isn’t a good enough reason to make them an issue. It’s one of those, “The baby just wasn’t meant to live” and “babies die in hospitals, too” scenarios. Since so many babies with nuchal cords are born without a problem, that’s a good enough reason to ignore the deaths. To the NCB crowd, “unnecessary” interventions that result in an uneventful birth is worse than a dead baby in a homebirth setting.
Yes, CEFM has never decreased the CP rate. But it has decreased the intrapartum stillbirth rate and neonatal seizure rate. By following the tracing and “intervening” when appropriate these Homebirth cord accident deaths could have been prevented.
Beth S brought it up and I’ve been wondering, what is the deal with the blue water birth babies? When my husband first saw one he freaked out. (We were planning a home water birth at the time, I guess that should’ve been a red flag). But why are so many of them blue? And are land born babies blue less frequently? I honestly wonder.
I saw babies being born at hospital during my training as a physician. I am not an OB, I must say. All of them (20-30) were PINK. Little blue on hands an feet but their heads and bodies were PINK. Even a couple of them born with mechonium in the amniotic fluid I remember them as pink. All of them had continuous electronic foetal monitoring during labor and delivery and if there were distress signs a C-section or other intervention would be routinely performed.
Those waterbirth babies are poorly monitored and if they show distress signs an intervention is not readily available as it is at a hospital. That is probably the reason why lots of them end up being born blue. The blue colour indicates low blood oxygen, it is not a good sign.
I had a pink one, a purple one and a blue one. They did not act like my little blueberry was a variation of normal.
A lot of home birth babies in general are born blue. And they’ll often claim that all babies are born this way, and as long as the cord is attached, they’re fine.
My babies were pink right away.
I was born blue. But my birth was an emergency c-section after labor went south VERY fast in the hospital.
I forgot that the NCB world believes that babies are supposed to be born blue. After all we can’t be perfect mother warriors unless we have battled through at least one variation of normal forsaken all but the most natural of interventions, and have a blissful orgasmic homebirth. Oh and if that baby dies it just wasn’t meant to live and should never be spoken of again for fear of being MEEEEEEEEEN and hurting someone’s feelings or harshing their vibe.
I just found this site and I am in shock. Dr. AMY IS THE BEST. My new neighbor recently told me she was pregnant and had no health insurance so was doing her own prenatal and unassisted homebirth. She is a vba. Well she then told me she ws a CNM. She talked about homebirthing and how she did about 100 births ect. I am an educated woman and know the difference between a CNM and a lay midwife. So i googled hername and found she was just a CPM. For herto mislead the public is wrong. We live in Ohio so she is not breaking the law because it is not defined here. I am thankful Dr. AMY is making it her business, this lay midwife is a liar and risking her own birth. God only knows what she does to the public! Scary!
Should say vbac2
Ask her about losses from Ina May Gaskin. Judy Fraser, Annie Bourgault, Laura Shanley, and Caoline Lovell. Wonder what her protective mechanism rationalization would be.
Midwife might not be a legally protected term, but certified nurse midwife sure is. This person is literally claiming to be a nurse, and if she isn’t, that’s illegal.
Only if she claims it to patients, not just neighbors.
I agree. There is not much I can do, but i will be calling CPS when she is about 9 months. Maybe it will help, maybe it wont.
Sadlady
You mean remove the baby from its mother? That’s not going to help it learn to latch.
Asphyxiating in the mother’s abdominal cavity after her uterus ruptures isn’t going to help it learn to latch, either. I doubt CPS can do anything, though.
Ugh. That terrifies me. Who is going to help her if both she and baby have problems at delivery? Why doesn’t one of her midwife friends help her? (Maybe they wouldn’t because she can’t afford to pay them?) Also, why doesn’t she have any insurance at all? That alone speaks to the fact that she is not a true care provider. I’d never go without insurance after everything I’ve seen.
Please try to find out if she is claiming to be a CNM to anyone else. As it is, I’d still notify the board of nursing in your state. I worked hard for my RN license, and CNMs have worked even harder for theirs. It makes me so mad that people think they can claim that title without repercussions.
Gina learned nothing from her previous mistake. She’s at it again:
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10152183347217727&id=185813897726
A baby died of a cord prolapse. The parents are suing claiming that the C-section should have been performed faster. Gina, never shy about exhibiting her idiocy, believes that the cord prolapse was caused by spontaneous rupture of membranes during an office vaginal exam …. more than 12 hours before.
The article doesn’t even say it was during a vaginal exam — it just says “medical exam.”
She’s an idiot.
Those comments are stupid and infuriating. The same people reflexively support the “Sisters in Chains”. Geez…..
Can a simple vaginal exam cause ROM?
It can, especially if the cervix is starting to efface/dilate and the membranes are bulging. It’s why you should always auscultate the fetal heart before and after the exam.
Because Gina knows how to use medical jargon she is dangerous to mothers who have no background in anatomy/physiology. She is not your garden variety crunchy mamma natural child birth midwife promoter. I liken her to those shills selling supplements on the morning AM radio. Instead of seeking real medical care she wows you with her use of language.
why is that not plausible?
I found this article about a certain person today http://groundedparents.com/2014/06/27/please-stop-calling-yourself-a-feminist/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=please-stop-calling-yourself-a-feminist
What is even funnier is that TFB goes on and on about how ‘real’ feminists MUST support the right of other women to go have their baby out in the woods and can’t even raise objections to it if they want to be considered ‘pro choice’ but then will object to formula feeding using the exact same arguments that she has just rejected as being illegitimate. A hypocrite of the first order.
I consider myself a real feminist and I would never dream of giving birth at home… I am probably not feminist enough according to her standards, but I could not care less…
I think giving birth in a hospital is a feminist act. The medical establishment didn’t steal birth from midwives. Women FOUGHT to have doctors recognize that the lives of women matter enough to give them medical care on the most dangerous day of their life. Pain relief for women who want it, formula for women who want it, and the ability of interventions to help make birth safer are all feminist acts because in a world without these things women would have far fewer options.
This!! And some men are proposing to go back to those days and deny women the right to a hospital birth! (See Canadian Andre Picard)
Yes. And then women fought to be the doctors delivering the babies in a safe hospital. SCORE!
My favorite was when someone quoted Ina May saying something like, “a smart baby loops its cord around its neck.” I can’t fathom what that could mean.
Actually, my (very non-woo, hospital) midwife told me something similar when I was asking about the possibility of a cord prolapse occurring a second time. Only it was, “It’s much more likely for cord to be looped around his neck. That can still cause distress, but we’ll detect that on the monitor and then you can have a c-section.”
Ok, that makes sense. But I wonder if that’s what Ina May was thinking given that she discounts all risk…
Yeah…..
http://www.gomerblog.com/2014/01/uterine-cord (medical-humor site.)
stuck at hospital. thanks for the site. I liked this one:
http://www.gomerblog.com/2014/03/empowered-patient/
While it’s true that a nuchal cord (or a nuchal cord x 2, or x3), or a true knot, usually case no problems, THAT’S WHY WE MONITOR!!!! So what if the baby has a nuchal cord? It’s not like we go looking for that on ultrasound, or make anything of it if we notice it (well, maybe in deciding to try to turn a breech baby). If the baby has distress in labor, we act on it. I don’t care if it was from cord compression or not.
As a matter of fact, if cord compression is taking place [either as an occult prolapse where the cord is being squeezed between the baby’s head and the pelvis during contractions, or if there is a short cord which is also wound around the baby’s neck and therefore stretched during contractions], there is a distinctive type of monitor tracing, with characteristic “type 1 decelerations”. As long as the FHR spontaneously and quickly returns to normal after each contraction, nothing needs to be done during labor except possibly giving the mother a bit of O2 and putting her on her left side. But the staff need to be alerted to the possibility that the baby might need some additional assistance immediately after birth.
Preach, Dr. T.
Okay, that just made me think of ‘The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T.’ and now I’m going to have nightmares about evil piano teachers and S&M elevator operators.
I had to google that reference. Scary!
I’m 12 years old, because it made me think of Magic Fingers beds. Which, it turns out, you can buy for 79.99 in the US or 95.99 if you’re in Canada.
http://www.magicfingers.com/
Here we go again. Perhaps we will end up finding out some of the private terms of the previous lawsuit.
At least the terms mean that they can still write about each other.
Can cord problems run in families? Because both my maternal grandmother and my mother had cord issues with one of their pregnancies, and I don’t know about my other relatives.
In my grandmother’s case, she had a late-term stillbirth (the natural outcome), and in my mother’s case she had a full-term c-section resulting in a healthy baby (the unnatural outcome).
I don’t think you need to ask which one was happier with their birth experience.
Not genetic, but very common. About 1/3 of babies have a nuchal cord, almost always just a single loop, rarely associated with any problems.
That explains it. They were both nuchal cords–though, in my sister’s case, we’re not 100% sure that was the problem. She wasn’t handling the last couple of weeks well, and one day, her vital signs scared the crap out of the OB and mom was rushed out for a c-section.
Cord length can run in families, and having too-long cords can be a problem (knots, nuchal loops, body or limb loops) as can short cords. But whether any given extra-long cord gets a baby in trouble is a matter of luck. Also, cord fatness is very important – thick stiff cords with lots of Wharton’s jelly won’t kink off as easily – but I don’t know if cord fatness runs in the family.
Is being a labor nurse why I am so terrified of scuba diving? ( ie air supply via hose)
You’d panic if you tried diving with an air compressor!
The links to birth stories with/without cut nuchal cords at the end of the midwife thinking post are withering in their ignorance. They all blame the cord cutting and not the tight nuchal cord for the baby’s depressed state after birth. Tight cords cut off circulation to the brain! Who cares if the cord is supplying blood if it can’t get to the brain.
I guess I should qualify that I know nothing about physiology other than that there are some important arteries in the neck. Dr. Amy wrote about compression of the arteries in the cord which also sounds likely. In either case, it is not no-bigd-deal as implied by Gina.
And, of course, the obligatory rant against clamping the cord. Because umbilical cords are magic, see, and nothing bad can happen to your child unless the cord is cut by an evil doctor.
On my IUGR message board, we have many many women who’ve been sent for c-sections when they failed a BPP or NST, and more who’ve had c-sections because the baby went into distress as soon as labor really got going. And when the baby emerged:
Thin cords with dry jelly, or not enough, or with no jelly at all on one portion of the cord. Two-vessel cords. (The two-vessel cords were usually diagnosed well in advance, the other issues not so much.) Plus, of course, lots of bad placentas.
Most of these problems are, individually, rare. But let’s do some hypothetical math. Let’s say the probability of any particular cord-related malfunction is 1 in 1,000. Now let’s say there are 50 different possible malfunctions, all of which occur independently. (Yes, these numbers are probably wrong, and the assumption of independence is definitely wrong, but just go with it to simplify the math.)
The probability that at least one of these malfunctions will happen to you is now 5%. Which still sounds small, but let’s take a pool of women who are slanted towards those with problems during pregnancy or birth, like a c-section or birth trauma support group.
Now, hearing bad-cord stories at every turn doesn’t sound so unreasonable, does it?
In the comments section, the author of the linked post is forced to admit that catastrophic cord accidents do happen. And yet she maintains that “the most important thing” is to keep the cord intact:
“Yes, if it is very tight and the vessels are compressed there is a decrease of blood flow and oxygen. If this is prolonged ie. for minutes this can result in a baby who needs resus. However, the most important thing is to leave the cord intact to assist with the resus. So in extremely rare cases it can be dangerous (I’ve never personally experienced this) but what is more dangerous is the cutting of the cord. Basically the biggest danger related to a nuchal cord is the way it is managed.”
As far as i can tell, it’s because cords are magic? I mean, if it’s my baby, i’d strongly prefer actual skilled resuscitation over relying on a possibly compromised, possibly no longer connected umbilical cord. (Had a partial abruption with my second son. But only just at the end, thankfully, and it didn’t affect him at all; he was a vigorous little thing.)
Because of the myth that the baby is getting oxygen ALL the time the baby is connected to the placenta. It shows a basic ignorance of fetal and newborn circulatory anatomy and physiology.
Precisely. Umbilical cords are magic, they draw oxygen and nutrients out of placentas that are detached, nonfunctional, or blocked off by cord compression. Unless the compression is a clamp, that breaks the magic.
Considering that many of the NCB crowd also preach AP for all, there seems to be something almost metaphorical about their fear of “cutting the cord”. (AP techniques can certainly work for some parent/child combos but it also is a great excuse for helicopter-mothers-in-training to explain why they can’t let their child out of their sight. The idea that any technique is the ONLY way to parent is highly suspect.)
It is also ironic that they don’t give a shit about the baby while it is in the uterus, where the only connection is the cord.
Ah, they think they are fey. Cold iron negates magic, and all that.
Let’s just work this out…
“So in extremely rare cases it can be dangerous (I’ve never personally experienced this) but what is more dangerous is the cutting of the cord. Basically the biggest danger related to a nuchal cord is the way it is managed.”
If you have a tight nuchal cord *3, which is apparent after delivery of the head and the shoulders don’t immediately deliver with the next contraction:
a) cord is being compressed and baby isn’t getting blood or oxygen through it
b) cord might be so short that the baby literally CANNOT BE BORN because it is tangled up in the cord
c) you’ve now got a shoulder dystocia with a nuchal cord…fun!
You have two options.
1) Don’t cut the cord. Try all SD manoeuvres. Hope.
2) Cut the cord, hoping that will allow you to get the baby out ASAP, knowing you can provide 100% oxygen via BVM and blood via a transfusion if necessary, but you’ll never get brain cells back again…
Nobody cuts a nuchal cord on the perineum for shits and giggles- you do it because you have to.
I’ve been at ONE of those hellish deliveries, and I’m so glad it wasn’t my call, but the OB cut the cord, and got that baby out in seconds…with no lasting damage done.
There was that midwife student that “forgot” to clamp the cord and cut it causing a huge neonatal blood loss.
Ugh. Placentas and cords. So uncontrollable. I think I’ve shared before that when my last was born, the L&D nurse asked me whether my dates might be wrong (they weren’t) because my placenta was “old and calcified and looked postdates” even though I was only 38+4 weeks. Baby was borderline growth restricted by the weight charts and much smaller than my previous who had been born even earlier. Also the “lollipop” appearance (normal size head but emaciated stick body). Why did my placenta go bad? I seemingly had no risk factors except for being borderline Advanced Maternal Age. Who the heck knows. It’s scary how risky even a “low risk” pregnancy in a healthy woman is. I feel we dodged a bullet as I had the sort of placenta that can lead to a stillbirth.
Nice table of DCC benifits.
Stupidity amplifier.
Thank you – that is a beautifully apt term.
Such a great description!
Which each echo in the chamber, the stupidity becomes more deafening.
“Nobody seems to realize that fetuses aren’t breathing through their
necks, so it really doesn’t matter if the cord is looped around it. It’s
not “choking” them as people envision.”
REALLY? She thinks that the general public thinks that babies are breathing through their necks hence the danger of nuchal cords? She’s so dumb and insulting everyone’s intelligence.
She judges people by her own level of intelligence maybe. Takes one to know one and all that…
Last night I was looking at an old post of Dr T’s where she exposed Ina May’s assertion that the cervix is a sphincter, which it is not.
Perhaps ignorance of basic physiology, or a readiness to be ‘educated’ in this version of alternative physiology is part of the key to what hooks people into this nonsense. Surely hearing things that are so clearly wrong would send some people out the door very early on in their relationship with providers of a so-called natural experience.
Except that many people are just as ignorant as these so-called “Health Care Providers” when it comes to anatomy and physiology. When I taught a “preparation for childbirth” course, I was astounded at the level of ignorance that many women who held advanced degrees showed about the way their own bodies functioned.
I don’t know any adults who “breathe through their necks”. To the extent that fish have necks, that would seem to be more likely in fish or reptiles with gills.
I don’t know about ‘breathing through their necks’ but there is certainly a lot of ‘talking through their butts’
The hubris is astounding. The same lack of basic health science knowledge is seen in the anti-vax and fructose-is-poison camps.
Do you have any good science-based resources on the fructose-is-poison stuff?it is driving me nuts, because the Interwebz Expertz(TM) seem to be spouting a lots of largely unsubstantiated crap, and it pees me off that Sarah Wilson’s super-self-righteous sounding “I Quit Sugar” books are #1&2 best sellers in Book Depository’s food category. Unfortunately, other than a blog rebuttal of the Sweet Poison YouTube video, I haven’t seen much about it from, well, sensible people.
One of the people that was discussing it on ABC radio some time ago was purporting that fructose is half sucrose, half glucose. That’s when I stopped taking it seriously. I have run across this, which seems to be plausible on first glance but I haven’t yet dug into it: http://www.theaustralianparadox.com.au/Fructose.php
Thanks for the link, will check it out. Surely the person meant that *sucrose* is half glucose, half fructose?! That is actually correct!
Sadly, no. They kept repeating the assertion that fructose is half glucose, half sucrose. I thought I had misheard the first time and listened more closely, ended up ranting rather fulsomely.
Ah, the Google Uni lecturer must have stuffed up 😉
Ooh, I just read through it – fantastic! Thanks so much for sharing!
The problem is, most sensible people aren’t thinking about fructose, because they’re too busy thinking about/writing about actual problems, rather than wasting time arguing with boogeyman-inventing fools who won’t listen anyway. So it is really hard to find stuff like that, yeah.
A quick Google brought up a few things, though.
http://www.menshealth.com/mhlists/food_myths/HFCS_is_Fattening.php
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
There are more but I’m not sure how many links can post, if any. I googled fructose science truth, if it helps.
Yeah, sorry I’m being lazy, because I’m supposed to be learning how to be a doctor rather than rebutting all the stupid on the internet!! I’ve read the second link before, it seemed pretty good. I figured I’d take advantage of the expertise here in the interests of time efficiency 🙂
I have screenshots of the comments, but they were taken on my phone and are in 7 individual photos.
Transfer the images from your phone to a computer and then upload to imgur.com and post when you have a moment 🙂
I emailed them to myself and to dr amy, but I won’t be at a pc until tomorrow.
My first reaction to reading the title of this post: “HAHAHAHA! Good one, Dr Tuteur!” Of course she won’t take responsibility. Responsibility is something that the women who were duped by the NCB movement and lost a child are supposed to take, not something the people pushing the ideology take.
How often does she do this? It’s ridiculous. And unethical. She would rather keep people in the dark, she’d rather they believes incorrect information, because she can’t admit when she is wrong. She did the same thing when Judith Rooks showed up on her thread discussing intrapartum mortality on TFB’s thread with the MANA study press release. TFB didn’t read the study. Just the press release. Not long after Judith Rooks shared the reality of how rare it is to have an intrapartum death in a hospital setting, TFB deleted the thread.
It is a perfect example that the home birth movement is not built on empowering women with information. It’s built on deceiving them. Time and time, TFB proves this.
She’s all about image over substance.
It is deception only if she knows she is disseminating misinformation. I think she really thinks she knows it all.
TFB can’t even take responsibility for purchasing nonrefundable airline tickets. https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=746011628795383&id=425699580826591&set=a.592384377491443.1073741825.425699580826591&source=46
Haha! OMG! You’re so right.
I mean normally, I’d probably tend to believe the consumer over an airline, but in this case…I sort of feel sorry for Delta.
Oh, I’ve been on flights like that, where a passenger was so difficult I felt sorry for the staff.
Hahaha. How embarrassing for her.
It takes more than that to embarrass her.
BTW- I used to work as a CSR over the telephone. If the customer was rude and using profanity, we could hang up on them.