Jump to content
IGNORED

Jill, Derick, Israel and the latest Dillard- Part 23


samurai_sarah

Recommended Posts

Just chipping in my two cents from a (UK) midwifery perspective...

Babies 'should' be born facing mum's back, with their chin tucked to their chest (we call it 'OA'), so that the 'occiput' (or back of the head) descends down the birth canal first. That doesn't always happen, for a number of impossible reasons that we might never know - the shape of the inlet of mum's pelvis is one, the shape and strength of the uterus is another, there's plenty more. However, in a malposition, they may present in a number of ways - a head not completely tucked in, a brow, or even a face. Here's an example. Even in babies who are simply 'back to back' (facing the same way as mum, rather than into her), labour can be long, slow and painful (although many back to back babies deliver perfectly fine in the end). With brow or face presentations, it's a section. Also matters for presentation - if baby is not head down, it may be transverse (side to side) or breech (feet down). Breech can be delivered vaginally by someone who knows what they are doing, but it is incredibly risky if you don't have someone trained in breech birth. Transverse is an immediate section.

Israel was transverse and breech, so not head down in the slightest. If she had had a proper midwife caring for her, or had been in a hospital, she would have been able to be have been examined, Izzy's position know from both abdominal palpation and internal examination and cared for adequately with proper foetal monitoring. In fact, Israel's position would have been known for potentially weeks if she had proper antenatal care. Abdominal palpation is something we learn in first year of our midwifery degree - transverse is a very easy thing to deduce. Personally, waiting as long as she did too solidifies the argument to me that she is no proper midwife, and those caring for her too - any midwife worth their salt knows when labour is lasting too long, and the itchy feet start to get to you. Here, we roughly expect first time mothers to progress at 0.5/1cm an hour for dilation, and 2 hours for active pushing (obviously with a little discretion so long as everything is fine). 70 hours of active labour would never happen and frankly, is cruel to both mother and baby. 

She has waited a good amount of time for having #2, and really, the risk of uterine rupture for a first VBAC is very low. But she should still have more professional and more adequate care than she had at Izzy's birth, be that at home or in a hospital. 

But I agree with the above re spinal vs general anaesthesia. GA sections are reserved only for true Cat 1/crash sections where mother is unable to sit for a spinal or baby/mother is too ill to wait for a spinal to be sited. Anaesthesia affects the foetus as well as the mother, and for a baby that is already compromised, GA is bad news. Obviously, the need for it outweighs the risk when it is an emergency.

 

Editing just to add that I've just re-read about his birth, and seen the bit about Izzy having an irregular heart beat. Again, any midwife worth their salt would have been monitoring properly and would have had her in hospital before 70 hours. I digress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 612
  • Created
  • Last Reply

When I went in to have my baby about three years ago part of the admitting paperwork included the epidural and c-section agreements. It was optional to fill them out, but it would save time if you wound up needing things later on. I signed everything because I just wanted that baby out. I did have the epidural and then had an emergency c-section after 25 hours of labor. I appreciated not having to deal with a bunch of paperwork in the midst of all that. There were one or two things I had to sign in addition for 'final' approval before the epidural, but I can't recall if I signed anything else before the surgery. My little guy just turned three recently, so it obviously worked out :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/25/2016 at 3:28 PM, missegeno said:

Given that we're talking about the person who thought it was so unusual to consider what she would do if Derick dies, and only did it because she lived in the land of falling shower racks, I think it would be a step forward if she thought through the risks associated with childbirth.

 
 

Seriously, it's scary how doctors seem to be the last resort for them, even if it's good they are willing/able to turn to modern medicine in emergencies. Given their cultural rejection of birth control and abortion, would they even be able to have extensive plans for if a pregnancy or childbirth becomes life-threatening? I don't think they've stated they believe in any exceptional situations for using birth control or having an abortion (such as the woman's life being in danger by getting pregnant or continuing a pregnancy), so I wonder how that would factor in. Of course, in practice, they might make completely different decisions than the views they espouse. Either way, I hope none of it is relevant and they're all safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ClaraOswin said:

I may have missed it but what is your profession and where do you live? Just wondering where this info is coming from. Thanks!

I'm a doctor. Got halfway through obstetrics training and switched to another specialty. Most of my medical career has been in Australia though I've worked in one other country.

Unsurprisingly given that I completely agree with what skybrink said. I wouldn't really be worried about a rupture with Jill, but her seeking out the sort of care she had with Israel would. If anything I'd be counselling her to consider a VBAC more than a csection if she wants a very large family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KelseyAnn said:

But my Dad's family converted to being Jehovah's when he was only 10. And when he was in the hospital, much later and as an adult, his mom wouldn't allow him to receive any blood even though my mom was telling the doctors it was fine to do so. 

Was he on record as being Jehovah's Witness? Was the blood transfusion necessary for life? The hospital may have wanted to avoid a law suit if they did not have clear consent and it wasn't clear who was actually next of kin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, VineHeart137 said:

I could have sworn I read somewhere that it's actually illegal in Arkansas for a midwife to attend a VBAC? Or am I remembering incorrectly?

If that's true then wouldn't she have no choice but to go to a hospital?

I just did a quick google search and AR is 1 of 4 states  that will not allow a VBAC at home, well a VBAC at home to be attended by a Midwife. Which means if Jill has a home birth with even a certified midwife  (or what ever she is) it will be illegal in AR.  so unless she gets a midwife like whats her name who doesn't' care about laws she wont' have ANY even semi trained people there attending her birth.  That is terrifying, while I'm not keen on homebirths, I'm not one to poo poo on on others doing it as long as they have a trained midwife & proper prenatal care. Which we know Jill won't have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know of a girl (she was 15) who gave birth and her baby needed a blood transfusion and apparently, the baby's grandma was a match. She refused to do it, even though it could save that child's life because she was a JW. #prolifeonlywhenitsuitsyou

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HeadshipRegent said:

I know of a girl (she was 15) who gave birth and her baby needed a blood transfusion and apparently, the baby's grandma was a match. She refused to do it, even though it could save that child's life because she was a JW. #prolifeonlywhenitsuitsyou

As horrible as that decision was, it still goes along with avoiding drastic medical procedures because it goes against Gods plan. Same with being against abortions. Any intervention is an insult to God 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, VineHeart137 said:

I could have sworn I read somewhere that it's actually illegal in Arkansas for a midwife to attend a VBAC? Or am I remembering incorrectly?

If that's true then wouldn't she have no choice but to go to a hospital?

Not sure on the laws. But it wouldn't surprise me if that is the case.

I think I recall reading that where I live (not Arkansas), a REAL midwife cannot legally attend a home birth AT ALL. But the Duggars don't use what I consider to be a REAL midwife. So I suppose it's possible the weird type midwives they use may not have to follow much in the way of laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KelseyAnn said:

And just like Lori, Jill doesn't seem able to keep an eye on her damn son. 

Haha NONE of the Duggars would last a day in TWD. Jill, you think shower racks are scary wait til you see what a barbwire-covered baseball bat can do. ;)

Btw totally agree with ya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooh I was a back-to-back baby (mum referred to it as spine-to-spine) plus my mother needed stitches afterwards... My poor mother... 

I've said it before here (I think); I like the idea of a home birth but I'd be too worried about potential risks/something going wrong. Like if I needed an emergency C section or something. Not had kids but I feel I'd be open to any kind of intervention if needed. You can picture labour in your head... except you can't. You have no idea how it'll go. These dumbass Duggars make me despair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CharlieInCharge said:

When I went in to have my baby about three years ago part of the admitting paperwork included the epidural and c-section agreements. It was optional to fill them out, but it would save time if you wound up needing things later on.

This concept bothers me a bit, especially with the high rate of c-sections in the US.  I also signed consent for a c-section early in my labor because of the possibility things could head that way.  However, the paperwork was brought to me by a doctor who briefly went over the pros and cons of each procedure for which I was signing consent.  The idea of it being "routine" admitting paperwork is problematic because I think patients are more likely to ask questions if the doctor is there and makes an attempt at explaining things then if they have to ask for the doctor or wait for later. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder what the other 3 states are, cuz the Duggars are close enough to both Oklahoma and Missouri if Jill can't legally do a VBAC outside of a hospital in Arkansas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shadoewolf said:

Wonder what the other 3 states are, cuz the Duggars are close enough to both Oklahoma and Missouri if Jill can't legally do a VBAC outside of a hospital in Arkansas. 

If I remember correctly Missouri has pretty lax laws. So it is possible that they would go north a bit.  I did some looking and can't find anything saying that midwives can't do VBAC in Missouri. I found two in southern Missouri. 

http://homebirthbaby.net/experience/ this gal is a little cagey about where she's located but I am guessing Joplin which is a pretty long drive for them

http://www.familybirth.com/ this is in Springfield about an hour north of Branson depending on traffic 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, grandmadugger said:

If I remember correctly Missouri has pretty lax laws. So it is possible that they would go north a bit.  I did some looking and can't find anything saying that midwives can't do VBAC in Missouri. I found two in southern Missouri. 

http://homebirthbaby.net/experience/ this gal is a little cagey about where she's located but I am guessing Joplin which is a pretty long drive for them

http://www.familybirth.com/ this is in Springfield about an hour north of Branson depending on traffic 

 

Doesn't Jill's lost-her-license-in-Arkansas-because-a-baby-died midwife teacher/friend Vanessa pratice in Oklahoma (pretty close to the Duggars) these days? They seemed to be on the outs for a while, but Jill has been seen playing at being a midwife at Vanessa's again these past few months. So I could see Jill going to Vanessa's and having her (attempt to) deliver the baby at her home or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's hope to God Jill doesn't attempt a whole "oh I was going to go to a hospital, but then the baby came so fast" in an attempt to have a homebirth. We could have a repeat of Israel's labor. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, I didn't know VBAC's were illegal in AR homebirth. The Duhlards probably think they're above the law though. Maybe they'll get that baby catcher from Jessa's home birth to get around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just so weird to me that they seemingly turn their back on regulated prenatal and obstetric care. What on earth is driving this?  Michelle certainly had appropriate care back in the day. 

Just from watching the televised portions of the births and reading their posts, this doesn't appear to be coming from the Duggar men - or even from gothardism - but more from the women involved. Maybe promoting the informal home birth scenario is a result of Jill's involvement in lay midwifery?   Maybe Jill is (sorry) just too dumb/under educated to know better, yet they trust her to be their birth advice guru?

From what I've seen it just looks like women promoting/insisting on a diminished level of care for other women.  What a sad state of affairs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hoping that the fiasco that was Izzy's birth taught Jill something but I'm not sure. I would respect her if she went to the hospital and attempted a VBAC but I don't think she will do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is driving this? I believe it is ratings and hubris. I think they like to use their God hook to makes themselves look good, but it's the almighty dollar, not faith, that encourages them to take such stupid risks, like waiting for medical care.

Both Jill's and Jessa's labors were gasp-worthy dramas with moms and babies in distress, but thankfully all was well that ends well with a happy TLC ending. I don't think it occurs to any of the Duggar women that they were lucky--extremely, extremely lucky. 

Nothing bad ever happens in Duggarville. And when it does, it's merely a way for the Lord to personally take an interest in them--God is 'testing' them, and they must bravely 'walk through' bad times, because God has a special little lesson, just tailored for them. 

I recall one of Ben's sisters saying, after her first mission trip to CA, that this had all been set up for her benefit. Yes, God enjoys making pockets of poverty in the world so good little Christians like these may gawk and receive personal edification. She went on to add that she was safe, because nothing bad could happen to her unless God willed it. But he wouldn't, right? Because #Godlierthanyou and #Jesuslovesmemorethanhelovesyou. Man, did that girl ever bitch about the lack of hot water for showers--#ungratefultwat.

I so wish the leg-humping fans would open their eyes and see them for who they really are; there is a rotten core in those sickly sweet, marshmallow exteriors that they and TLC love to promote.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there are any birthing centers near her? I know that's a good "in between" option for people. There's one where I live and it's right by the hospital in case of emergency. I've known people who had good experiences there even if it isn't my cup of tea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, allthegoodnamesrgone said:

I just did a quick google search and AR is 1 of 4 states  that will not allow a VBAC at home, well a VBAC at home to be attended by a Midwife. Which means if Jill has a home birth with even a certified midwife  (or what ever she is) it will be illegal in AR.  so unless she gets a midwife like whats her name who doesn't' care about laws she wont' have ANY even semi trained people there attending her birth.  That is terrifying, while I'm not keen on homebirths, I'm not one to poo poo on on others doing it as long as they have a trained midwife & proper prenatal care. Which we know Jill won't have. 

Ugh I hope Jill is rational enough to go to a hospital. Even J'chelle had most of her births at a hospital because she was considered high risk (due to number of pregnancies, age and C-section) 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Season of life... said:

What is driving this? I believe it is ratings and hubris. I think they like to use their God hook to makes themselves look good, but it's the almighty dollar, not faith, that encourages them to take such stupid risks, like waiting for medical care.

I think it's definitely a ratings ploy and belief God will cover them. Could money be a factor too-- like saving money? It seems like they are still spending like they were pre scandal but if they did have a perfect homebirth with no complications that would be free compared to a hospital trip, right? Of course they're banking on no complications which is stupid but Maybe they would rather chance not having to spend any money then spend money preemptively. (And if that's their reasoning, it's very sad but not surprising to me).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been reading up on the experience stories from the midwife judith someone posted earlier. She delivered at least 2 pair of twins. One of those births the twins had a problem with the placenta. This would normally have been picked up by an ultrasound. But she is the type trust in god. If someone wants to homedeliver go ahead but  at least see a midwife who does an ultrasound. 

I sure hope Jill will choose wisely and go to a birthingcenter or a hospital but probally she wont :S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, carebaer said:

This concept bothers me a bit, especially with the high rate of c-sections in the US.  I also signed consent for a c-section early in my labor because of the possibility things could head that way.  However, the paperwork was brought to me by a doctor who briefly went over the pros and cons of each procedure for which I was signing consent.  The idea of it being "routine" admitting paperwork is problematic because I think patients are more likely to ask questions if the doctor is there and makes an attempt at explaining things then if they have to ask for the doctor or wait for later. 

At my hospital there was a new moms program which included five classes covering Birthing Techniques, Confort Measures, After-birth Care, Newborn Care and C-Sections. I attended all the classes (They have something like 80% completion overall) and that may have affected the paperwork I was given. My doctor was quite open about the options and possible outcomes. I do not think it played any role in the c-section being seen as routine. I just wanted to defend my doctor because he was wonderful and very considerate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • choralcrusader8613 locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.