I feel really concerned about all this interest in "natural induction"
(seems like an oxymoron to me), stripping or sweeping the membranes
(whatever it is called, it's still an intervention with accompanying side
effects) and other *interventions*! Are midwives not protectors? Don't
families come to midwives and prefer to stay at home for the birth of their
babies so they can avoid these interventions? Why would we want to sweep OR
strip membranes when we know that this can cause premature rupture and all
its possible side effects? Why not just go ahead and rupture the membranes.
It's the same; the results are just postponed a bit by stripping as opposed
to outright rupture. WHY would we want to induce?
I recently assisted at a birth where a mom was already in good labor and
progressing well, but evidently not fast enough to suit her impatient
midwife, who offered her cytotec no less, to "move things along faster"!
She didn't tell her what she was offering or what the side effects could
be. Now who does that sound like? What is happening here?!
We midwives need to sit back and take a good hard look at what we are
allowing ourselves to do. What makes us better than the medical pattern we
say we don't believe in, if we do things like this without true need, just
because we can do it, legally or illegally? Midwives, we are the only ones
who stand between home and hospital for families who want to birth joyfully
and without intervention. Are we going to stand for what we say we believe
in, or are we going to slowly move over and join the medical models that we
say is not the best way. Think about it!
-Anon.
Reprinted from Midwifery Today E-News (Vol 2 Issue 8 February 25, 2000)
To subscribe to the E-News write: enews@midwiferytoday.com
For all other matters contact Midwifery Today:
PO Box 2672-940, Eugene OR 97402
541-344-7438, midwifery@aol.com, Midwifery Today
|
|