search:

Re: 42 weeks and still no labour...continued

From: MacBump (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:08:43 -0600 (CST)

>>meconium? I would gladly accept induction at 41-42 weeks
>Yes, but what people are not "getting" here is that ALL HEALTHY PRE-TERM
>BABIES COULD BE SUBJECT TO OTHER PRE-TERM RISKS. Who says that "your"
>baby or "my" baby will be just as equipped to handle life on the outside
>at 38 weeks as another person's baby?

Oh, and what I forgot to mention was that not only are a lot of women getting induced at 41-42 weeks now, but there is such induction-mania out there that lots are getting induced at 37-38-39 weeks "just so we can plan ahead". The Dr suggests it, and the mom agrees...without knowing the risks of induction. This is sad, I think, and reflects just how stuck our society is on the less important things in life like planning just exactly which birthday we have, or some other materialistic-type reason, rather than letting nature take its course if at all possible (at the very least, give the body the chance to go into labour naturally to 41-42 weeks rather than trying to "beat it to it" and doing it at 37-39 weeks!).



recommended search...
Google
OBGYN.net forums endometriosis zone Web
use when must restrict search to only the pregnancy & birth forum...
Enter search keywords:
Returns per screen: Require all keywords:
Return to [ Pregnancy & Birth Forum ] Report TECHNICAL Problems ONLY to: webmaster@obgyn.net
Last Updated: Thu Jun 18 13:54:43 2009

Women's Insurance Checklist from Auto Insurance Quote

home | medical professionals | women | industry | forums | international
e-mail | about us | advertising | our sponsors | contact us | disclaimer |

This information is provided for educational purposes only.
Please read the disclaimer. ©1996-2008, all rights reserved.
Do not reproduce without permission of MediSpecialty.com