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.
If the girl had gone to the closest hospital, is it believable that any doctor there wasn't capable or knowledgeable enough to deliver her??
As soon as she got there, could that hospital not then have arranged for an air lift for the babies ( and her if necessary)?
Even if the babies were born there don't you think that basic care could have been provided until a 'copter arrived?
Yes. My grandson was born at 34 weeks weighing 4lbs and having difficulties. He was delivered at the local hospital and then transported another 80 miles to another hospital with a NICU.
If the girl had gone to the closest hospital, is it believable that any doctor there wasn't capable or knowledgeable enough to deliver her??
As soon as she got there, could that hospital not then have arranged for an air lift for the babies ( and her if necessary)?
Even if the babies were born there don't you think that basic care could have been provided until a 'copter arrived?
Quote:
Originally Posted by old_cold
First, that's IF there was but more importantly, if you read the whole article or the report it's based on,it's about standard after birth care in many hospitals for even those not assumed to be high risk and the hospital she was referred to may have done no better.
Still less chancy than driving around the countryside and delivering in the car
From the article: "At 30 weeks pregnant, she went into pre-term labor, and when she arrived at her local hospital, her regular doctor was out of town. In what Kane calls an "extremely good decision," the on-call doctor transferred her to Pomona Valley, because of the risks associated with her five previous C-sections. . . Pomona Valley was prepared for her delivery. But just as important, the small, rural hospital where Kane delivered previously — also a member of the statewide collaborative — was quick to identify a problem it was not prepared for and send her to one that was."
The mom in the NYT story probably could have been delivered anywhere. The operative word is probably. Twin deliveries are considered high risk. https://www.verywellfamily.com/twin-...-risks-1960314 "Mothers pregnant with multiples are more likely to experience problems with bleeding before or during delivery. . . Cesarean section is more likely with multiples, due to unfavorable presentation (such as when the first baby is not head down) or complications, which means longer recovery for the mother after birth and a higher risk of complications during labor." (The mom in the story had a C/S.) "Prematurity may lead to a number of problems, including: Immature lungs, leading to difficulty in breathing; Premature babies may be put on ventilators until the lungs mature; Stomach and intestinal tract problems; Nervous system problems, including bleeding in the brain; Low birth weight; Feeding problems, including difficulty with breastfeeding."
I seriously doubt the hospital could have cared for the babies. Yes, they could have helicoptered them to a Level 3 (or whatever was required) nursery, but that's additional stress and time lost that could be crucial. I do agree the family could have planned better, and I think the NYT chose a poor example.
Obviously Alaska is an outlier in terms of typical US population distribution, but I live over a hundred miles from a hospital, and those miles seem a lot longer in the winter. There is a regional health clinic much closer, but they only handle routine checkups and minor illnesses/injuries. We're lucky to have that (it's some kind of grant-funded operation, I'm not clear on the details) so at least you don't have a day's travel every time your kid gets an ear infection or whatever. It's common practice to go stay in Fairbanks or Anchorage around the time a baby is due if the pregnancy is at all risky, but obviously this can be very expensive and inconvenient even for people who have disposable income and more flexible employment.
I expect the situation is similar in the parts of the US that have lower population densities and more big open space as well.
It's all very well to say "you shouldn't have a baby if you ducks aren't in a row" but it's not really reasonable to tell entire communities not to reproduce because our current corporate healthcare system doesn't find it sufficiently mega-profitable to operate outside urban areas.
It's all very well to say "you shouldn't have a baby if you ducks aren't in a row" but it's not really reasonable to tell entire communities not to reproduce because our current corporate healthcare system doesn't find it sufficiently mega-profitable to operate outside urban areas.
As the OP that's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that you shouldn't reproduce if you lack the resources to ultimately raise the baby.
It's all very well to say "you shouldn't have a baby if you ducks aren't in a row" but it's not really reasonable to tell entire communities not to reproduce because our current corporate healthcare system doesn't find it sufficiently mega-profitable to operate outside urban areas.
Its not about being mega profitable, many of these hospitals closing (probably most) are struggling to survive. They cant afford much of the equipment and specialization larger hospitals can and cant compete with them therefore the best plan is to merge with a larger hospital usually well within 100 miles. Most of these cities still have a doctor or clinic to take care of routine medical care just as your situation.
No one is saying entire communities should not reproduce but if an individual can not figure a way to financially or logistically get to the nearest facility for a high risk birth should they really be reproducing.
To be fair this article used the stories of these poor women to push their agenda.
The only one who appears to be "poor" is the woman who had the twins; she works as a home health aid for $8something per hour. There is no evidence that the woman who had a hard time finding a doctor, the one who was 26 weeks and having contractions, or the woman from Mexico are poor.
The only one who appears to be "poor" is the woman who had the twins; she works as a home health aid for $8something per hour. There is no evidence that the woman who had a hard time finding a doctor, the one who was 26 weeks and having contractions, or the woman from Mexico are poor.
Well the focus was on Abernathy. The newly emigrated woman from Mexico who speaks little English, I'm going to go with poor. Then the waiting room discussion about "where they would go next and how they would afford gas for weekly visits at distant hospitals when they barely had enough money to pay electric bills and rent."
And noting that 95% of patients were on medicare, medicaid or had no insurance. Probably most of the pregnancies/births were covered under Medicaid.
So I believe they were using poor pregnant women to stir up emotions. If it were all middle to upper class white women fewer people would give a second thought to them having to drive another 50 miles to a hospital.
No one is saying entire communities should not reproduce but if an individual can not figure a way to financially or logistically get to the nearest facility for a high risk birth should they really be reproducing.
I hear you. I don't think that medical facilities should be the key to reproduction; capacity to raise the children must be, however. Both emotional and financial. And the types of families discussed in the OP appear to lack such capacity.
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.
