I have been trying to find out who is responsible for the no VBAC policy in Warrensburg. In particular, I have been trying to get something in writing. Imagine my complete lack of surprise that I can't find someone willing to take a stand FOR this policy. I am getting quite a bit of run around. I have been told that women who have had previous c-sections are not "allowed" to refuse a repeat c-section because it is a life or death decision and the hospital does not need consent in those situations. I have been told that if a woman were to choose to try and make it to the city and end up having a baby on the way, she would have made a choice to put her and the baby at risk when she could have just had the c-section in town. Let's see, cut her open just because, or let nature take its course and only intervene in a true life or death emergency. I don't know about you, but I would choose the latter.
The best so far is that I heard from one doctor's office that this is a LIABILITY decision and not a patient safety decision! This sounds very close to the whole midwifery argument. Too much can go wrong too quickly, so only doctors should be at the birth, in a hospital, with an operating room and a scalpel at arms reach. GIVE ME A BREAK.
If this is true, and both VBACs and midwifes are too dangerous because anything can happen at a moment's notice, then why don't we legislate that all women have to have c-sections? After all, the doctors in general are saying that birth can cause problems quickly. If they can't care for women in low risk situations after VBACs, and if they can't support and offer care to a women should she be transfered from a homebirth with a competent midwife, how can they be trusted to deliver any babies, especially those of a first time mother?
As I keep digging on this issue, I'll keep posting about it.
Showing posts with label birth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label birth. Show all posts
Monday, November 19, 2007
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Warrensburg, MO and VBAC
I am overwhelming frustrated with the state of birth in Missouri, specifically Warrensburg. I found out today that it is certain that Western Missouri Medical Center will no longer "allow" women to have a vaginal birth after a Cesarean. If I were to become pregnant again, this would mean that even though babies 3,4,5, and 6 were unmedicated, vaginal births, just because babies 1 and 2 were surgical deliveries, I would be forced to have a major operation to welcome another child whether or not that particular pregnancy had any complications or not.
I have several questions about this policy, a few of which I have shared below.
1. What if I refuse to consent to surgery? Will you get a court order and tie me down before you slice me open?
2. Are you really going to practice the idea of informed consent? Are you going to tell me all the risks associated with a c-section vs the lesser risks of a VBAC?
3. Are you willing to back up this policy with current, reliable, non-biased research? The last discussion I had with certain physicians at Western Missouri Medical Center showed me that this current department did not follow current research when it came to breastfed babies and surgery.
4. Who is making this decision, and why am I having such a hard time getting a copy of a written policy.
There are soooooo many thoughts running through my head on this topic. First I need to arm myself with written policies, evidence, and the like. Next, I'm on a quest to right a wrong.
I have several questions about this policy, a few of which I have shared below.
1. What if I refuse to consent to surgery? Will you get a court order and tie me down before you slice me open?
2. Are you really going to practice the idea of informed consent? Are you going to tell me all the risks associated with a c-section vs the lesser risks of a VBAC?
3. Are you willing to back up this policy with current, reliable, non-biased research? The last discussion I had with certain physicians at Western Missouri Medical Center showed me that this current department did not follow current research when it came to breastfed babies and surgery.
4. Who is making this decision, and why am I having such a hard time getting a copy of a written policy.
There are soooooo many thoughts running through my head on this topic. First I need to arm myself with written policies, evidence, and the like. Next, I'm on a quest to right a wrong.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Now he's invading my dreams!
Lately I have had a recurring dream. It's not necessarily a great dream, but it is no where near what you might call a nightmare. I have been dreaming about myself and Senator Chuck Graham. Intrigued? Read on...
The dream starts with me being anxious and nervous. I'm at the capital building and my kids are no where to be seen. For some strange reason, even the baby is missing from this dream. I decide to stop by Sen. Graham's office just on the off chance that something I say or do might influence his behavior and he will just let SB303 come to a vote. I'm not hopeful, but I enjoy talking with Beverly, and I get a chuckle out of Ted sticking his head around the corner to see who is in the outer office.
I start talking to Beverly, who notices right away that my arms are empty and there are no children hanging on my skirt. We chit chat a little, and right on cue, Ted sticks his head around the corner and pops back into the inner office. I smile to myself and am about to leave when the unthinkable happens. Ted invites me into the inner office to have a sit down with Senator Graham himself!
I'm about ready to pee my pants! I think, "Does he know who I am? Does he want to talk about midwifery or something else?" I steel my nerves and walk in. We sit down and he comments that many midwifery supporters have stopped by this session, and he thought it was only fair to hear one of them out. WHAT!?
I start out by asking him if he has read the bill in it's entirety. He replies, "No, but if it is anything like last years, I will continue to oppose it." (Side note: I really don't know if he has read the bill or not.)
"Why haven't you read the bill, Senator?" I ask.
"What's the point? Babies need to be born with a trained medical professional present, and a midwife trained by some internet course just isn't good enough," he says as he smiles stubbornly.
I shock him by saying, "Your right about one thing, a midwife trained by some internet course just isn't good enough." Senator Graham sits up a little straighter, almost like he thinks he has won. I continue, "Please read the bill and show me where the training required is just some internet course," I say as I hand him a copy of the bill. Hold onto your seats, ladies and gentlemen. HE READS THE BILL RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF ME!
I can tell he is getting irritated that he can't find anything to back up his internet course argument. I am getting a little excited and I am the one to sit up a little taller this time. "Senator Graham," I say ever so sweetly, "It seems to me as if the actual bill may be something other than what you thought it was. I have heard you debate the midwifery legislation on the floor, and if even one third of your points were true, I would work twice as hard against this bill instead of supporting it. I would be more than happy to run down your list of concerns and address them with facts and evidence. I'll even keep the touchy, feelly, emotional stuff to a minimum."
"You know, Mrs. Jurkowski, I'd like that," he replies. We sit there and discuss things like education, training, insurance, safety, and even cleanliness of a home vs hospitals. All in all, it was a very good discussion.
To keep this post from getting that much longer, I'll cut to the end. As I get up to leave, still feeling that he is totally against this bill, he asks to to stay just one more minute. "Mrs. Jurkowski, you have made your case well, but not well enough. I still think that babies should be born with physician in attendance."
I am feeling very dejected at this point, but at least I tried. "Well, thank you for your time, Senator Graham," I say as I start to walk out the door.
"Wait a minute, I'm not finished," he says. I turn around and he has this weird smile on his face. "You have made you case well, and while I cannot see myself supporting this bill, I do think that it is time I stopped holding it hostage and filibustering at every chance. If all it takes is for me to keep quiet for it to get to a vote in the Senate, than that's what I'll do."
My knees are weak and it is a really good thing there was a chair right behind me! "Are you serious, Senator? I mean, you aren't just saying this so you can get out there and talk about the germs toddlers carry and anyone taking an internet course again, are you?"
He smiles nicely and says, "You deserve a chance. I am still voting against this bill, but your persistence and knowledge of the issue, as well as the evidence you present has impressed me enough to make me discontinue my intense opposition to stop this bill at all opportunities."
I finally compose myself, thank him again, and walk out the door saying a quick goodbye to Beverly. I continue to walk down the hall, turn a corner and then allow myself to jump up and down for joy. Two seconds later, I am on my cell phone calling those who need to know that Senator Graham has said he will not oppose the bill coming to a vote because as you all know, good news travels fast!
The dream doesn't continue to the outcome of a vote in the Senate, but I wake up with a smile anyway!
Wouldn't it be nice if this dream would come true?
-deanna
The dream starts with me being anxious and nervous. I'm at the capital building and my kids are no where to be seen. For some strange reason, even the baby is missing from this dream. I decide to stop by Sen. Graham's office just on the off chance that something I say or do might influence his behavior and he will just let SB303 come to a vote. I'm not hopeful, but I enjoy talking with Beverly, and I get a chuckle out of Ted sticking his head around the corner to see who is in the outer office.
I start talking to Beverly, who notices right away that my arms are empty and there are no children hanging on my skirt. We chit chat a little, and right on cue, Ted sticks his head around the corner and pops back into the inner office. I smile to myself and am about to leave when the unthinkable happens. Ted invites me into the inner office to have a sit down with Senator Graham himself!
I'm about ready to pee my pants! I think, "Does he know who I am? Does he want to talk about midwifery or something else?" I steel my nerves and walk in. We sit down and he comments that many midwifery supporters have stopped by this session, and he thought it was only fair to hear one of them out. WHAT!?
I start out by asking him if he has read the bill in it's entirety. He replies, "No, but if it is anything like last years, I will continue to oppose it." (Side note: I really don't know if he has read the bill or not.)
"Why haven't you read the bill, Senator?" I ask.
"What's the point? Babies need to be born with a trained medical professional present, and a midwife trained by some internet course just isn't good enough," he says as he smiles stubbornly.
I shock him by saying, "Your right about one thing, a midwife trained by some internet course just isn't good enough." Senator Graham sits up a little straighter, almost like he thinks he has won. I continue, "Please read the bill and show me where the training required is just some internet course," I say as I hand him a copy of the bill. Hold onto your seats, ladies and gentlemen. HE READS THE BILL RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF ME!
I can tell he is getting irritated that he can't find anything to back up his internet course argument. I am getting a little excited and I am the one to sit up a little taller this time. "Senator Graham," I say ever so sweetly, "It seems to me as if the actual bill may be something other than what you thought it was. I have heard you debate the midwifery legislation on the floor, and if even one third of your points were true, I would work twice as hard against this bill instead of supporting it. I would be more than happy to run down your list of concerns and address them with facts and evidence. I'll even keep the touchy, feelly, emotional stuff to a minimum."
"You know, Mrs. Jurkowski, I'd like that," he replies. We sit there and discuss things like education, training, insurance, safety, and even cleanliness of a home vs hospitals. All in all, it was a very good discussion.
To keep this post from getting that much longer, I'll cut to the end. As I get up to leave, still feeling that he is totally against this bill, he asks to to stay just one more minute. "Mrs. Jurkowski, you have made your case well, but not well enough. I still think that babies should be born with physician in attendance."
I am feeling very dejected at this point, but at least I tried. "Well, thank you for your time, Senator Graham," I say as I start to walk out the door.
"Wait a minute, I'm not finished," he says. I turn around and he has this weird smile on his face. "You have made you case well, and while I cannot see myself supporting this bill, I do think that it is time I stopped holding it hostage and filibustering at every chance. If all it takes is for me to keep quiet for it to get to a vote in the Senate, than that's what I'll do."
My knees are weak and it is a really good thing there was a chair right behind me! "Are you serious, Senator? I mean, you aren't just saying this so you can get out there and talk about the germs toddlers carry and anyone taking an internet course again, are you?"
He smiles nicely and says, "You deserve a chance. I am still voting against this bill, but your persistence and knowledge of the issue, as well as the evidence you present has impressed me enough to make me discontinue my intense opposition to stop this bill at all opportunities."
I finally compose myself, thank him again, and walk out the door saying a quick goodbye to Beverly. I continue to walk down the hall, turn a corner and then allow myself to jump up and down for joy. Two seconds later, I am on my cell phone calling those who need to know that Senator Graham has said he will not oppose the bill coming to a vote because as you all know, good news travels fast!
The dream doesn't continue to the outcome of a vote in the Senate, but I wake up with a smile anyway!
Wouldn't it be nice if this dream would come true?
-deanna
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Article inThe Daily Star-Journal, Warrensburg, MO
Following is an article written after I did an interview with the local paper. It even made the front page!
-deanna
Permission granted from Skye Cobb of The Daily Star-Journal to post in its entirety.
Local Woman Lobbies For Midwife Bill In Senate And House
By SKYE COBB
Star-Journal Staff Writer
A local woman is working hard to get a midwifery bill passed in the
Missouri State Senate and House.
Missouri Senate Bill 303 and House Bill 503 would create a Board of
Direct-Entry Midwives within the Division of Professional Registration.
This board would consist of three Certified Professional Midwives, one
physician, and one public member. Senate Bill 303 would allow the state to
regulate who is practicing with the power to issue licenses and to suspend,
revoke or deny the license of a direct-entry midwife.
Currently in Missouri it is a felony for a midwife to deliver a baby at
home and there are organizations, such as Friends of Missouri Midwives,
Missouri Midwives Association and the Show Me Freedom in Health Care
Political Action Committee who are attempting to give the choice of where a
baby is born back to the mother.
Deanna Jurkowski is lobbying at the capitol for the passage of this
bill, which would allow mothers in Missouri the choice of where their baby
is born.
Jurkowski said that midwifery is legal, or not illegal, in 40 states and
that by making it illegal and unavailable, it is increasing the number of
unattended home births that occur, often with no one there who knows how to
stop a hemorrhage or resuscitate a baby.
She said she has been working for three years to get this bill passed.
According to Jurkowski, the Missouri Medical Association is coming out
strongly against this bill.
"It's all volunteers," said Jurkowski. "We do not have a paid lobbyist.
We're a grassroots movement. We've been working diligently for the last
three years."
The bill has passed the House twice before and was blocked in the Senate
both times. This time Jurkowski said she believes it's getting farther in
the Senate because legislators know more about the midwife profession.
"We've gotten farther than we've ever gotten before," said Jurkowski.
"We've perfected the bill; now we're waiting on the roll call vote. Sens.
(Chuck) Graham and (Yvonne) Wilson have said they're going to filibuster so
we're just not sure what's going to happen from this point on."
She said that she has talked with Sen. Chris Koster and that in the past
he's been supportive, but this year he's been much more supportive.
"We're not sure but with enough work, we're pretty sure we could pass
the House again," said Jurkowski.
She is somewhat worried about a lot of new people in the House. She said
that getting this bill passed is not only about getting information out
there, but combating the misconceptions of what a midwife does.
"There are people who think that midwives will perform abortions and
that's not true," said Jurkowski. "All a midwife is there for is to provide
care during a normal pregnancy. They do prenatal care and the child birth,
check on the mother afterwards, but if anything comes up that is outside of
normal, they will transfer that patient to the hospital."
Jurkowski said that she has had an illegal home birth, but in Illinois,
not in Missouri.
"That child died," said Jurkowski. "But that child died because she had
a heart defect, she had surgery and something happened during the surgery."
In the subsequent investigation the doctor reported to the coroner's
report that the child had had a home birth and that it was a lack of
prenatal care.
"Well we could produce prenatal records, but we had to cross off all
identifying information about our midwife because they actually hunt down
and prosecute midwives in Illinois," said Jurkowski.
She said that right now if a mom chooses to have a home birth and
something goes wrong she has to call 911 and the midwife has to leave
because she'll be arrested and prosecuted.
"Women are choosing to take that risk anyway," said Jurkowski. "If this
bill passes it's going to license and regulate these midwives. We're going
to have a standard of care. They're going to be licensed. If something comes
up where there is a transport needed the midwife can go to the hospital with
the mother and she can relay all the information...It'll be safer for
mothers and babies."
She said that research shows that in a low-risk, healthy, normal
pregnancy a home birth is just as safe if not safer than a hospital birth.
Jurkowski stated that a midwife would be required to make a decision
whether a mother is healthy enough for a home birth; and that if they are
not, the midwife would not provide them with health care but send them to a
medical professional.
She said the other part of this bill regards collaborative practice
agreements, and that is where a midwife would have to have a doctor sign off
that he's going to be responsible for her actions and that is not going to
work.
This bill really focuses on Certified Professional Midwives, a
nationally recognized title and profession.
Midwives Continued from Page 1
"Certified Nurse Midwives are legal in the State of Missouri," said
Jurkowski. "They can do home births if they have a collaborative practice
agreement. There's only one doctor in the state willing to sign
collaborative practice agreements and he's not going to do it anymore. So
that means there's only one midwife doing home births in the State of
Missouri, legally."
She said that it sounds good in theory but that the doctor is putting
his license on the line for the actions of someone else.
"This bill says everybody's actions should stand alone," said Jurkowski.
"The midwives should stand alone, the doctors should stand alone, they're
only responsible for something they do."
If the bill passes, Certified Professional Midwives will be required to
go through the same training as in other states, with differences according
to the state.
The CPM credential is the only one that requires the midwife to have
training in out-of-hospital births.
Certified Professional Midwives are required to have 1,350 clinical
hours of one-on-one training with their preceptor plus their academic work,
which takes years of full-time study to complete, said Jurkowski.
They are also required to take the North American Registry of Midwives
(NARM) exam -- an eight hour written exam and demonstrate proficiency at 750
hands-on skills, before receiving their certification.
The CPM credential process is overseen by the National Organization for
Competency Assurance - the very same one that oversees nurses, nurse
practitioners and nurse midwives credential process.
She said that another issue that comes up with this bill is insurance
and the fact that midwives are not required to carry malpractice coverage.
"No insurance group is going to cover them because it would be
astronomical," said Jurkowski. "Currently in the State of Missouri a
physician is not required to carry malpractice insurance. Hospitals may
require them to, but Missouri State Law does not require them to carry
malpractice insurance."
She said that physicians are not required to disclose to their patients
whether or not they carry malpractice insurance. They don't have to inform
the patient of their history, background, education or insurance.
"A midwife, according to this bill, has to disclose all of these things:
the risks, the benefits, her training, how many births she's attended and
whether or not she carries insurance, which is a good thing. That means the
mom is getting all the information and is able to make a well reasoned
decision."
She said that sometimes it feels like they're (legislators) saying that
women in Missouri aren't smart enough to make a good choice.
"If you're going to complain about something you've got to be willing to
make a stand to fix it," said Jurkowski. "That's why I do what I do. ...
We're not going away. We'll keep pounding the pavement until we get there.
... We need the support. I know there are a lot of medical professionals who
disagree, but my opinion is that by not having midwives legal in the state
and regulated by the state that it's harming mothers and babies. I think it
would be much safer for both mothers and babies and families in general, to
have this option in the State of Missouri."
On April 15 Jurkowski received an e-mail which included a link to a
petition asking Missouri Legislators to allow Certified Professional
Midwives to practice in Missouri.
After posting the link on her blog, and as of April 24, there were 787
signatures on it.
For more information or to help the cause please call Deanna at (660)
530-4310 or visit her Web site at www.deannajurkowski.blogspot.com .
The petition is located at
http://www.petitiononline.com/MOMW/petition.html .
-deanna
Permission granted from Skye Cobb of The Daily Star-Journal to post in its entirety.
Local Woman Lobbies For Midwife Bill In Senate And House
By SKYE COBB
Star-Journal Staff Writer
A local woman is working hard to get a midwifery bill passed in the
Missouri State Senate and House.
Missouri Senate Bill 303 and House Bill 503 would create a Board of
Direct-Entry Midwives within the Division of Professional Registration.
This board would consist of three Certified Professional Midwives, one
physician, and one public member. Senate Bill 303 would allow the state to
regulate who is practicing with the power to issue licenses and to suspend,
revoke or deny the license of a direct-entry midwife.
Currently in Missouri it is a felony for a midwife to deliver a baby at
home and there are organizations, such as Friends of Missouri Midwives,
Missouri Midwives Association and the Show Me Freedom in Health Care
Political Action Committee who are attempting to give the choice of where a
baby is born back to the mother.
Deanna Jurkowski is lobbying at the capitol for the passage of this
bill, which would allow mothers in Missouri the choice of where their baby
is born.
Jurkowski said that midwifery is legal, or not illegal, in 40 states and
that by making it illegal and unavailable, it is increasing the number of
unattended home births that occur, often with no one there who knows how to
stop a hemorrhage or resuscitate a baby.
She said she has been working for three years to get this bill passed.
According to Jurkowski, the Missouri Medical Association is coming out
strongly against this bill.
"It's all volunteers," said Jurkowski. "We do not have a paid lobbyist.
We're a grassroots movement. We've been working diligently for the last
three years."
The bill has passed the House twice before and was blocked in the Senate
both times. This time Jurkowski said she believes it's getting farther in
the Senate because legislators know more about the midwife profession.
"We've gotten farther than we've ever gotten before," said Jurkowski.
"We've perfected the bill; now we're waiting on the roll call vote. Sens.
(Chuck) Graham and (Yvonne) Wilson have said they're going to filibuster so
we're just not sure what's going to happen from this point on."
She said that she has talked with Sen. Chris Koster and that in the past
he's been supportive, but this year he's been much more supportive.
"We're not sure but with enough work, we're pretty sure we could pass
the House again," said Jurkowski.
She is somewhat worried about a lot of new people in the House. She said
that getting this bill passed is not only about getting information out
there, but combating the misconceptions of what a midwife does.
"There are people who think that midwives will perform abortions and
that's not true," said Jurkowski. "All a midwife is there for is to provide
care during a normal pregnancy. They do prenatal care and the child birth,
check on the mother afterwards, but if anything comes up that is outside of
normal, they will transfer that patient to the hospital."
Jurkowski said that she has had an illegal home birth, but in Illinois,
not in Missouri.
"That child died," said Jurkowski. "But that child died because she had
a heart defect, she had surgery and something happened during the surgery."
In the subsequent investigation the doctor reported to the coroner's
report that the child had had a home birth and that it was a lack of
prenatal care.
"Well we could produce prenatal records, but we had to cross off all
identifying information about our midwife because they actually hunt down
and prosecute midwives in Illinois," said Jurkowski.
She said that right now if a mom chooses to have a home birth and
something goes wrong she has to call 911 and the midwife has to leave
because she'll be arrested and prosecuted.
"Women are choosing to take that risk anyway," said Jurkowski. "If this
bill passes it's going to license and regulate these midwives. We're going
to have a standard of care. They're going to be licensed. If something comes
up where there is a transport needed the midwife can go to the hospital with
the mother and she can relay all the information...It'll be safer for
mothers and babies."
She said that research shows that in a low-risk, healthy, normal
pregnancy a home birth is just as safe if not safer than a hospital birth.
Jurkowski stated that a midwife would be required to make a decision
whether a mother is healthy enough for a home birth; and that if they are
not, the midwife would not provide them with health care but send them to a
medical professional.
She said the other part of this bill regards collaborative practice
agreements, and that is where a midwife would have to have a doctor sign off
that he's going to be responsible for her actions and that is not going to
work.
This bill really focuses on Certified Professional Midwives, a
nationally recognized title and profession.
Midwives Continued from Page 1
"Certified Nurse Midwives are legal in the State of Missouri," said
Jurkowski. "They can do home births if they have a collaborative practice
agreement. There's only one doctor in the state willing to sign
collaborative practice agreements and he's not going to do it anymore. So
that means there's only one midwife doing home births in the State of
Missouri, legally."
She said that it sounds good in theory but that the doctor is putting
his license on the line for the actions of someone else.
"This bill says everybody's actions should stand alone," said Jurkowski.
"The midwives should stand alone, the doctors should stand alone, they're
only responsible for something they do."
If the bill passes, Certified Professional Midwives will be required to
go through the same training as in other states, with differences according
to the state.
The CPM credential is the only one that requires the midwife to have
training in out-of-hospital births.
Certified Professional Midwives are required to have 1,350 clinical
hours of one-on-one training with their preceptor plus their academic work,
which takes years of full-time study to complete, said Jurkowski.
They are also required to take the North American Registry of Midwives
(NARM) exam -- an eight hour written exam and demonstrate proficiency at 750
hands-on skills, before receiving their certification.
The CPM credential process is overseen by the National Organization for
Competency Assurance - the very same one that oversees nurses, nurse
practitioners and nurse midwives credential process.
She said that another issue that comes up with this bill is insurance
and the fact that midwives are not required to carry malpractice coverage.
"No insurance group is going to cover them because it would be
astronomical," said Jurkowski. "Currently in the State of Missouri a
physician is not required to carry malpractice insurance. Hospitals may
require them to, but Missouri State Law does not require them to carry
malpractice insurance."
She said that physicians are not required to disclose to their patients
whether or not they carry malpractice insurance. They don't have to inform
the patient of their history, background, education or insurance.
"A midwife, according to this bill, has to disclose all of these things:
the risks, the benefits, her training, how many births she's attended and
whether or not she carries insurance, which is a good thing. That means the
mom is getting all the information and is able to make a well reasoned
decision."
She said that sometimes it feels like they're (legislators) saying that
women in Missouri aren't smart enough to make a good choice.
"If you're going to complain about something you've got to be willing to
make a stand to fix it," said Jurkowski. "That's why I do what I do. ...
We're not going away. We'll keep pounding the pavement until we get there.
... We need the support. I know there are a lot of medical professionals who
disagree, but my opinion is that by not having midwives legal in the state
and regulated by the state that it's harming mothers and babies. I think it
would be much safer for both mothers and babies and families in general, to
have this option in the State of Missouri."
On April 15 Jurkowski received an e-mail which included a link to a
petition asking Missouri Legislators to allow Certified Professional
Midwives to practice in Missouri.
After posting the link on her blog, and as of April 24, there were 787
signatures on it.
For more information or to help the cause please call Deanna at (660)
530-4310 or visit her Web site at www.deannajurkowski.blogspot
The petition is located at
http://www.petitiononline.com
Radio program
Back in January, the Vincent David Jericho show hosted a call in program about midwifery. Several of my friends participated in this program on KSGF Radio in Springfield, MO.
Check out the transcript.
Check out the transcript.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Do you trust your Doctor?
Does your Doctor trust you?
I read a birth story the other day. The woman mentioned that she was not only seeing a CPM, but she was seeing an OB as well. I believe the CPM knew she was seeing the OB, but the OB fully believed that this woman would be delivering her child at the hospital with the OB in attendance. The woman felt she needed to do this based on a previous medical history and wanting to have certain lab tests and screenings performed. (in another entry I'll get into why CPMs can't order tests – they aren't doctors and aren't practicing medicine!)
With patients not telling their physicians the whole story, is it any wonder that they don't trust their patients until they have really gotten to know us? I am thankful that I have a family physician that knows my family. I worry every time I go to the ER, or see a new physician that someone will think I am beating my children. My family physician has seen them in action and knows what little monkeys I give birth to! Our physician knows that when my 8 y/o comes in and says he fell off the ladder to his loft, he really did. I often wonder how believable the truth really sounds.
I remember having to “prove” myself to an OB. We moved to a new town when I was 5 or 6 months pregnant with my second child. I wanted a VBAC and the OB said all the right things, but in the end I had a 2nd cesarean. They said the baby's heart rate was too low. I had the same OB with my third child and again wanted a VBAC. This time I hired a doula. The baby's heart rate dropped a little during pushes (normal) and the OB said that since she knew from the past that I would let her do a cesarean if necessary that we could go a little longer than we did last time. WHAT!? Why make the situation sound worse to get your way? BTW, baby 4 was born at home, and because we moved to MO, and because we need to screen for a specific and rare defect, babies 5 and 6 were born in town at the hospital.
Why can't we trust one another to tell the truth and to tell the WHOLE truth? One reason is that as citizens of MO we have to go underground to find the best care.
If we lived in a state where midwives were able to attend homebirths, just think of the differences. A woman could decide she wanted a homebirth with a midwife, but she still wants certain prenatal screenings, etc. A midwife, who doesn't practice medicine, could send a woman to a physician along with records of prenatal care and the woman could get medical care from the physician AND the physician would have all the information. A woman, like me, could get a fetal echo cardiogram to rule out congenital heart defects. My baby and I could make an appointments for another echo once the baby arrived and I would have records of prenatal care. We wouldn't have the hospital threatening us if we didn't give up the name of our midwife, because it would all be above board and legal.
So many people are being hurt by the lack of above board homebirths attended by CPMs in the state of midwifery. It's not just the midwives who can't earn a living out in the open. It's the mothers, babies, fathers, siblings, and yes, even the doctors who suffer when we all can't be open, honest and trusting with one another about the best care choices and the best medical choices for those involved.
-deanna
Sunday, April 15, 2007
HOMEBIRTH PETITION - PLEASE SIGN!
-deanna
A woman's right to give birth how and with whom she chooses is on the line. There is a bill pending right now in the Missouri House and Senate that will allow for Certified Professional Midwives to legally practice in the state, similar to the laws of 40 other states. (Senate Bill 303 and House Bill 503) Midwifery is truly the OLDEST profession for women.
Currently it is not legal to practice midwifery in Missouri due to others wanting to control how women give birth. In fact it is a felony for a midwife to deliver a baby at home even with the consent of the mother!
All of the well designed medical studies show homebirth with a professional midwife to be equally safe to hospital birth for healthy women. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the American Public Health Association (APHA) recommend increasing the role of midwives, as does the "Healthy People 2010" project in conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
Whether you chose to give birth at home or in the hospital does not matter. It only matters that you support the option to be available for women. Please sign the petition on the link below and let your legislators know that you want them to vote yes for legal professional midwifery in Missouri. It is urgent that you do this immediately as time is running out!
www.friendsofmomidwives.org
www.missourimidwivesassociation.org
www.showmefreedompac.org
Click Here for the Petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/MOMW/petition.html
I received the following and wanted to pass it on. The link to the petition is at the end as well.
I received the following and wanted to pass it on. The link to the petition is at the end as well.
-deanna
A woman's right to give birth how and with whom she chooses is on the line. There is a bill pending right now in the Missouri House and Senate that will allow for Certified Professional Midwives to legally practice in the state, similar to the laws of 40 other states. (Senate Bill 303 and House Bill 503) Midwifery is truly the OLDEST profession for women.
Currently it is not legal to practice midwifery in Missouri due to others wanting to control how women give birth. In fact it is a felony for a midwife to deliver a baby at home even with the consent of the mother!
All of the well designed medical studies show homebirth with a professional midwife to be equally safe to hospital birth for healthy women. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the American Public Health Association (APHA) recommend increasing the role of midwives, as does the "Healthy People 2010" project in conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
Whether you chose to give birth at home or in the hospital does not matter. It only matters that you support the option to be available for women. Please sign the petition on the link below and let your legislators know that you want them to vote yes for legal professional midwifery in Missouri. It is urgent that you do this immediately as time is running out!
Click Here for the Petition:
Here is a link to find out who your MO legislators are. Put their names down on the petition if you can.
You will need your full zip code to find them. Here is the link to find out your full zip.
Please forward to anyone you know living in Missouri.
Thank you!
For more information, check out:www.friendsofmomidwives.org
www.missourimidwivesassociation.org
www.showmefreedompac.org
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Cost of heath care
We got a couple of bills in the mail yesterday. The bills themselves weren't surprises, but the amounts sure were.
My 14 month son had an ultrasound done to see if his testicles had descended. My cost? $400 for just the hospital. I have yet to get the radiologist's bill.
My 3 year old daughter had dental work done under general anesthesia at Children's Mercy South. Cost for the 3-4 hours? $8900. This does not include the dentist bill or the anesthesiologist's bill. I will have to pay $2000 of this amount.
My insurance has a $4000 out of pocket limit, and having a baby makes me pay it ALL. I can't even remember what the total bill was the last time we had a baby. Odin thinks between the hospital, Dr. and the labs they love to run, it was close to $10,000 for both me and baby. Personally, I think it was closer to $8000, but either way it's lots of money.
The last time I had a midwife attended birth my total cost for both midwife and supplies was under $700. BIG DIFFERENCE!
Midwives spend more time with their clients than a physician. The midwife is there during prenatal visits to educate the mother. A typical prenatal visit with a midwife lasts 2-3 times longer than a visit with a physician (although it may take longer at the Dr.'s office if you have a long wait!). A midwife spends as much time as necessary with a mother during her labor and birth. A physician spends little time during the labor and comes in to catch the baby at the end.
Here's the question: Why does it cost SO MUCH MORE to have a physician attended birth than a midwife attended homebirth?
-deanna
We got a couple of bills in the mail yesterday. The bills themselves weren't surprises, but the amounts sure were.
My 14 month son had an ultrasound done to see if his testicles had descended. My cost? $400 for just the hospital. I have yet to get the radiologist's bill.
My 3 year old daughter had dental work done under general anesthesia at Children's Mercy South. Cost for the 3-4 hours? $8900. This does not include the dentist bill or the anesthesiologist's bill. I will have to pay $2000 of this amount.
My insurance has a $4000 out of pocket limit, and having a baby makes me pay it ALL. I can't even remember what the total bill was the last time we had a baby. Odin thinks between the hospital, Dr. and the labs they love to run, it was close to $10,000 for both me and baby. Personally, I think it was closer to $8000, but either way it's lots of money.
The last time I had a midwife attended birth my total cost for both midwife and supplies was under $700. BIG DIFFERENCE!
Midwives spend more time with their clients than a physician. The midwife is there during prenatal visits to educate the mother. A typical prenatal visit with a midwife lasts 2-3 times longer than a visit with a physician (although it may take longer at the Dr.'s office if you have a long wait!). A midwife spends as much time as necessary with a mother during her labor and birth. A physician spends little time during the labor and comes in to catch the baby at the end.
Here's the question: Why does it cost SO MUCH MORE to have a physician attended birth than a midwife attended homebirth?
-deanna
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)