Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't feel the need to blame anyone because I don't think that the c-section rate being high is a bad thing.
But you did...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdstyles
More women today are giving birth in their 30s and 40s, when risks of complications during pregnancy and childbirth significantly increase. Almost 25% of women of childbearing age are obese and thus at higher risk for conditions such as diabetes and high blood pressure.
Blame has a very negative connotation and I don't feel blaming anyone or anything is warranted in this case( as I have made perfectly clear from my previous posts). I was offering possible explanations(big difference, see definitions of blame versus explanation), as were you( mine are just as plausible as yours and vice versa). Semantics are important with blog posts since the written word is all we have to go on and there needs to be an understanding that words are more carefully chosen in this context.
Back to the OPs question. Hackensack, Valley, and Barnabas are all great places to have a baby IMO*
Wow. It is pretty amazing that an honest question about hospitals can turn into such a debate that is borderline ridiculous in the sense that people are getting so mean about it!
It seems like you can't say that the grass is green on the NJ forum without getting ripped apart.
Ok, here I go.... the grass is green and the sky is blue. I'm ready to be ripped to shreads!
i think it seems logical that at least some significant portion of it is that there is a belief out there that once you have a c-section, you can't have a vaginal delivery.that has to contribute in some part to the increase as well. but i don't have the data.
Just addressing this one sentence--belief by whom? The doctors themselves know that isn't true, and I'd hope they'd pass that knowledge along to their patients.
Ok, here I go.... the grass is green and the sky is blue. I'm ready to be ripped to shreads!
NO IT'S NOT!!!!!! Grass can come in different shades!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801
Just addressing this one sentence--belief by whom? The doctors themselves know that isn't true, and I'd hope they'd pass that knowledge along to their patients.
yeah, that's one of the reason the c-section rate was lower in the mid-90s. VBACs were encouraged for those that wanted them.
The "once a cesarean always a cesarean" maxim is actually about 100 years old. It goes back to a time when malnutrition and rickets would make it difficult for a small percent of women to deliver vaginally so when they needed a cesarean, chances are they always would. In the 70s and 80s, research showed the safety of VBAC (vaginal birth after cesarean) as a viable option. ACOG has guidelines encouraging VBACs. But many doctor would rather not deal with the whole "labor" process.
NO IT'S NOT!!!!!! Grass can come in different shades!!!
yeah, that's one of the reason the c-section rate was lower in the mid-90s. VBACs were encouraged for those that wanted them.
The "once a cesarean always a cesarean" maxim is actually about 100 years old. It goes back to a time when malnutrition and rickets would make it difficult for a small percent of women to deliver vaginally so when they needed a cesarean, chances are they always would. In the 70s and 80s, research showed the safety of VBAC (vaginal birth after cesarean) as a viable option. ACOG has guidelines encouraging VBACs. But many doctor would rather not deal with the whole "labor" process.
My doctor told me that they realized VBACs were feasible when indigent women who had had a previous C came into the ER in the late stages of labor and delivered vaginally. Thought that was interesting.
My doctor told me that they realized VBACs were feasible when indigent women who had had a previous C came into the ER in the late stages of labor and delivered vaginally. Thought that was interesting.
Ah yes.... the Leung study - a study of nearly 16, 500 mostly Hispanic women in LA from 1983-1992 who had c-sections. Over 11,000 of them had a trial of labor. 82% of them had successful VBACs. Only 106 ruptured (records were only available for 99 of those ruptures though).
90% of those had unknown scars (a large number were found to have classical or vertical scars which are the weakest scars - Mexico did a lot of vertical incisions). If a c-section was done, the type of scar was noted then. Of the 99 documented cases of uterine rupture, only 6 babies died. 4 of those 6 deaths resulted in babies who were in distress upon arrival in labor. This means that only 2 of those babies died while mom labored in the hospital and ruptured; if the 4 other women had been in the hospital and had been monitored, the outcome very likely could have been different.
So only 6 babies in over 11,000 VBAC attempts died. Again, these were largely poor women who just showed up at the hospital in labor. This shows that even in the worst case scenarios, you have about a 0.05% chance of a baby dying in a VBAC attempt. Kind of makes you wonder why some doctors are so adamantly opposed to the option to VBAC (plus the fact that 82% if them were successful!!!). I don't think VBAC should be forced on a woman but it should remain a viable and supported option. Of course lowering the c-section rate would probably be the best option overall....
Someone in my family who lives in Nutley just had a baby at Hackensack Hospital. The maternity ward actually has it's own building and the facilities are top notch. Highly recommended.
We found Hackensack Hospital filthy. The bathroom I had when I was there was so small that the toilet bowl was almost right under the sink. You had to contort your body while brushing your teeth. The corners of the bathroom had encrusted dirt. The MRI machine was caked with built on dust. That rolling contraption that they hang the drip bags on - looked like a Jackson Pollack painting, splattered with blood and chemicals of different colors. I have been to numerous hospitals, visiting and as a patient. Hackensack has grey mush that they call food. I don't care for the place, needless to say.
Oh, they are very good with caring for the public places that investors and board members see, but in the background they are just horrid.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
