Log onto Squarespace
Archives
« Birthing Fat: Background | Main | Denialism »
Saturday
Nov142009

Dr. Amy’s Comeuppance

I swore I would never write about that woman again. She is the most hateful, angry and irrational woman to ever argue against homebirth/natural birth/un-CNM midwifery. 

However, in researching my Denialism post, I stumbled upon a blog entitled Science-Based Medicine, whose subtitle is “Exploring issues and controversies in the relationship between science and medicine.” Curious, I started reading and lo and behold, who else but Dr. Amy was regurgitating her homebirthdebate posts. I rolled my eyes, skimming the first post and then moved down to the comments. 

I sat upright. The science-minded blogsters began tearing her theories/posts/comments apart. As someone said, it was like Christmas. Over and over, her writings were demonstrated to be much more opinion than science-based fact and, the most recent post from her has (at last count) 194 comments that spank her for her hatred of natural birth (which they force her to define scientifically over and over again) and her extremely interventive beliefs, a few of the members having had Hypnobirthing births or empowering births, pushing her against the wall in a way none of us have ever been able to do. (I find almost everyone frustratingly gives up trying to explain things to her.)

 I cannot exclaim my glee in seeing her opinions questioned so deeply by people she thought were going to embrace her. If scientists can see her craziness, there is hope that she will eventually exhaust herself and vanish from sight. 

One can only hope.

 

References (1)

References allow you to track sources for this article, as well as articles that were written in response to this article.
  • Response
    Response: marketing online
    - Navelgazing Midwife Blog - Dr. Amy’s Comeuppance

Reader Comments (36)

Awesome. XD

I avoid her stuff like the plague, the sheer willful ignorance makes me want to puke.

November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterStassja

Good for her for trying, though.

I have never been a big fan of SBM. The topics are interesting but my impression formed a year ago was that it had a definite hegemonic air about it… a lot of research scientists and medical professionals getting together for some mutual heavy petting, privileging one type of communication and engaging in debate for the sake of the debate itself.

I enjoy a good philosophical discussion, but I eventually tire after about 20 minutes of reading people’s attempts to prove their superiority by intellectually pinning each other down and farting on each other’s head. I usually prefer watching (voyeuristically) others try to reach some kind of mutual understanding or acknowledge merits in other’s points of view rather than square off as opponents. It depends on the topic, I suppose.

The most recent post you referred to had one fairly sickening comment from an SBM contributor bragging about how she tamed an irrational, hysterical laboring woman who was “overreacting” to her pain.

# Harriet Hall on 12 Nov 2009 at 2:05 pm
I had an American patient (a WASP) in early labor who was screaming and overreacting. I lost my cool (the one and only time in my career), yelled at her, and insulted her. Sort of like administering a verbal slapping to get her attention. She calmed right down, stopped screaming, and had a nice normal labor and delivery. I was afraid she would report me to the hospital commander, but instead she came to my office afterwards for the sole purpose of thanking me for helping her get control of herself. I’m not proud of what I did, but it sure worked! I’ve often wondered if there was any “nice” way I could have accomplished the same thing. It’s hard to sit down and reason nicely with someone who is hysterical and out of control.

Here's a question... who the fark would try to have a "nice" conversation with a laboring woman during a painful contraction?

November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJill--Unnecesarean

:-)

November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterKathy

Not trying to, but let's see if I make you ill, too, Jill.

Client had a 20+ hour labor (that was so active we were there) where she seemed to do really well... very little whining or complaining (and yes, women do - *I* am the biggest whiner of them all in labor).

She gets pushy and, as is typical, I don't do a vaginal exam, but it is obvious she's readying for, and then in, second stage. She starts balking about pushing. Is the baby's head in a funky position? Does it hurt? No, she says, she just doesn't want to push. After an hour or so, I do an exam and the baby is inside her vagina about an inch in. If I pulled her vagina apart just a little, we could see the baby's head. Even if *she* didn't want to push, her body was.

Contractions kept coming and the baby was doing fine, but mom was getting more and more adament about not pushing. I tried to reason with her, telling her how very close her baby was, how once the baby was out, she didn't have to push anymore. We could see the baby's head at the introitus during a contraction, so I had hope the baby would just come out on his own.

But, after this second hour, she was not only adament, she became hysterical. And the baby stopped progressing. She would collapse inbetween contractions where I tried to explain/cajole/reason and eventually took the "take charge" role. (In discussing it afterwards, she needed to be yelled at, her words; she had just gotten out of the Army.)

A side story was she'd invited her Healthy Child home health nurse to the birth - her first ever. The nurse was bored shitless during the labor, leaving a couple of times to go home, but was now back for this pushing debacle. The nurse was getting agitated by my client's screaming and as my client began screaming to go to the hospital, that they would get the baby out, she (my client) did a sort of fainting thing (I felt it was a panic exhaustion), but the nurse picked up her phone and called 911.

When the police and the fire people and EMS arrived, it was obvious that baby was *right there*, so they sat back and watched as I tried my last valiant efforts to bring the baby, still at the introitus, out into the world.

Instead, she was EMS'd to the hospital where the doctor SCREAMED at her and she plopped the baby out. The story turns into a nightmare, including her being sutured without a tear and without lidocaine and more. The mom doesn't know what came over her and totally knows I tried every trick in my book, including all but yelling at her, so doesn't hold me responsible, but it really is one of the worst birth stories I ever tell.

As a provider, we find ourselves in positions we never expect to. It isn't that I forgive the nurse for screaming at the woman, but sometimes the most bizarre treatment turns out to be the one that works the best. I believe a baby would be terrified to be born in hysteria; a calm mother is definitely preferable. It doesn't always turn out that way, though.

And I do NOT mean an anesthetized mother... I love expressive, loud, howling women who are interactive with their labors, but there is a distinct difference between howling and hysterical. Hysterical is not a good place for most people... not a lot can get done when someone is in a panic... but can affect another baby when it's in a pregnant woman.

This birth still makes me nauseated because of what happened in the hospital. I wish, with all of my heart, I'd had THE ANSWER to get the baby out. I know she does, too.

November 14, 2009 | Registered CommenterNavelgazing Midwife

thought you'd enjoy that. know i do.

November 14, 2009 | Unregistered Commentermommymichael

Whew. That’s a hell of a story. And fortunately anomalous.

Like you say, as a midwife, you know what is within the range of normal in terms of behavior in labor and what would border on… I don’t know, panicked or excessively resistant? I know you, too, have heard story after story of women who were berated or mistreated by hospital staff for being too loud or “hysterical” (I really despise that word in this context) during an unmedicated labor, shamed into getting an epidural or just being told to shut up because they didn’t want to hear the sounds of a perfectly normal labor.

Plus, I’d say there’s a big difference between, “Your baby is right there and has been right there for hours… PUSH. NOW.” and deliberately insulting a woman in order to be able to have a rational conversation with her. I guess I'm open to the idea that yelling at someone as an authority could have a calming effect on them... maybe a simple conditioned response for someone who'd been in the Army. I've heard stranger things.

November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJill--Unnecesarean

That's so awesome!

November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJoy

Yeah I'm sure it really helps survivors of sexual violence (who often have HUGE problems with pushing, often do not disclose/may not recall their abuse, and often have NO IDEA why this is happening to them) to get screamed at by some harpy doctor or midwife or other "professional" while she is in labor. REAL helpful.

November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterLily

If *you* were the midwife, Lily, how would you help the woman?

November 14, 2009 | Registered CommenterNavelgazing Midwife

I have to say, though, that I learn A LOT from Dr. Amy's blogs, from her posts AND the commentary that follows. I'm particularly enjoying the SBM commentary because it regularly points out research and authors that are new for me and worth exploring. (And are not too shy to call her bullshit when it's there.)

I used to be a PhD student in a research science, and it is highly gratifying for me to see actual numbers and data instead of mere assertions. (I agree with the commenter before me, though, who said that the SBM style seems to be self-congratulatory and narrow-sighted, if that's even a word.)

Dr. Amy is obnoxious, condescending and she has an agenda. This much is clear. However, she does force me to look at the actual research and dig deeper into the facts to come to my own conclusions. I'm actually grateful for that. Sadly, I've found some misrepresentations and agenda-based recommendations in sources I used to trust (like Lamaze's Healthy Birth Practices), which was a huge disappointment, and has forced me to look and look again at the research, even at the research they cite.

She's making me think for myself. I don't agree with her, but I like the end result.

And I have to say thanks to Navelgazing Midwife, as she was the first to recommend that I start reading obstetrics and other blogs in order to get a deeper understanding of the issues surrounding birth. Thanks, Barbara!

November 14, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterRéka

In my first labor, I was not "hysterical", but I was deeply inside myself and unable to cope with the pain of intense contractions. I had planned a natural birth and the nurses were trying to make suggestions (walking, rocking chair, etc.) but I was not willing to listen to them. My midwife kept trying to coach me to breathe but I could only do it if she was IN MY FACE telling me how to do it each breath! I didn't need someone to YELL at me, but just get WITH me where I was and sternly direct me to breathe thru the pain. It really helped, but unfortunately, she was unable to continue to direct my breathing the entire time, and my husband and mother ( my "support" people) were either unable or unwilling to help me. I can understand the need to cross the line from convincing to in-your-face direction. Sometimes a little change in tone is all that is needed to capture someone's attention. Being firm is not the same as yelling in my opinion. I think it depends on the personality of the mother and the caregiver. I am 29 weeks with #2, and have hired a doula to help me stay focused, even if she has to direct me to breathe with each breath!

I am fascinated by the discussion regarding this Dr. Amy- she sounds a lot like my mother! I might click on over there to see what the fuss is about, it sounds like a fascinating, if one-sided, debate. I always think it helps to know what the opposition thinks!

November 15, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJen B

Well. That was certainly an interesting way to spend the last hour. Really, it was. Got a few good guffaws at silly ol' Dr. Amy, and saved this quote for future reference from "Plonit" :

"One doesn’t have to venerate the normal physiology of birth, nor think it is always safe and healthy, to realize that it does have a central place in any science-based discussion. In particular, I would go back to the statement of Enkin et al quoted up thread ““any interference with the natural process of pregnancy and childbirth should…be shown to do more good than harm.” and that “the onus of proof rests on those who advocate any intervention.” This is simply good evidence-based medicine, taking the physiology as the default and demanding evidence that specific interventions improve on it."

November 15, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJill

I just caught up on her first post comments section. IndianaFran has pointed out the extreme flaws (that seem intentionally one sided) with Amy's statistics.

November 15, 2009 | Unregistered Commentermommymichael

Réka,

What specifically about Lamaze's Healthy Birth Practices do you take issue with? I'm curious.

November 16, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJill--Unnecesarean

Have you seen this one:

http://dinosaurmusings.blogspot.com/2009/11/tweaking-tail-of-home-birth-tiger.html

While not WILDLY supportive, it is nice to see a doc telling the truth about Dr. Amy's 'statistics' there....

-Amy (and not THAT Amy!)

November 18, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterAmy

NM: re the patient who refused to push; what kind of psych-based questions, if any, do you think might have clued you in to her problem beforehand? I mean, was *she* surprised by her own fear, was it connected to abuse or a phobia/trauma--did she make any connections to her own issues as to why it was a problem for her?

She had such an extreme reaction, that my first assumption was that she had issues of that kind.

November 18, 2009 | Unregistered Commenteremjaybee

You know, we examined the situation from a thousand angles and she doesn't know why she was so scared. If she had sexual abuse in her history, she didn't know about it. Being a sexual abuse survivor, I like to think I can recognize many subtle signs of a woman who is a survivor and I didn't detect any from her. Of course, that doesn't mean she isn't and her psyche just pushed the knowledge very, very deep.

We re-played the experience in many different ways... my apprentice and I, the assistant and I, the three of us midwifery-types, the mother and each of us and the whole gang of us including her husband and mother-in-law. I *really* believe if the nurse hadn't been there, we could have gotten the baby out without the major drama. It was almost like the mom was "performing" (if that makes sense). She *was* out of her mind/body, but she seemed somewhat aware of those around her. Mostly my assistant and her terrified husband.

If a similar situation presented itself, I would have to act on the fly again, using the knowledge I have about the woman and her family. I don't think there is THE answer to either the past birth story or to any future one.

Sometimes birth is baffling.

November 18, 2009 | Registered CommenterNavelgazing Midwife

Jill:

Sorry, only now saw your question.

When I was researching induction for post-dates, I ran across Lamaze's healthy birth practices #1, about labor induction, which states the following: "...researchers concluded that there is no significant difference in perinatal mortality (the number of babies who die) between induction of labor at 41 weeks and expectant management (allowing the pregnancy to continue)."

They cite the following paper as evidence:

2009: Wennerholm Ulla-Britt; Hagberg Henrik; Brorsson Bengt; Bergh Christina
Induction of labor versus expectant management for post-date pregnancy: is there sufficient evidence for a change in clinical practice?
Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica 2009;88(1):6-17.

Well, I looked at the abstract for that paper (I don't have access to the full article, unfortunately), and while it is true that they found no difference in perinatal mortality, they DID find a difference in terms of C-section rates and meconium aspiration - in favor of the induced group. Meaning that after 41 weeks of gestation, more women ended up with C-sections that WEREN'T induced.

I was very upset by this, because there was NO mention AT ALL in the Lamaze article about the potential benefits of induction that were discussed in this article. They cherry-picked it to support their pre-existing argument against labor induction. The reason I was quite upset by this is because I had been "buying" their advice no questions asked, because it seemed like they were backing their claims up by solid evidence. Well, I no longer subscribe wholesale, and I check the original research myself in anything I'm interested in. That's all.

For me, on a personal note, I know that my major incentive in pregnancy was to avoid a C-section. I did come up against the post-dates debate, being 8 days overdue with my first. That's when I originally did this research, before I was even a doula, and I did manage to find this article in one of my frantic attempts to figure out whether I should succumb to the pressure to be induced or not. (I ended up going into labor spontaneously, thankfully.) Then I ran into it again after becoming a doula, after I was trying to make some sense of the actual science behind these recommendations. And it was actually Dr. Amy's insistence that one look at what the actual DATA says. So I think in this manner, she helps me. She makes my blood boil, but she makes me look it up for myself. The Lamaze is more insidious, because I agree with their recommendations, so I'm actually LESS likely to fact-check them. But now it's clear that I should.

November 19, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterRéka

I have to question the conclusions of the paper above. I too only looked at the abstract, but one thing jumps out right away. It's a meta-analysis -- they're combining results of several other studies, all of which are likely to have had slightly different methodologies. I was induced at 41.5 weeks (and had a C-section after two days on Cervidil d/t fetal distress, which diagnosis I questioned then and now as my son had decels only when I was on my back, but suffice to say the CNM really wanted me off her hands as I was hours shy of the magical 42 weeks and my cervix wasn't responding to Cervidil). I took a good look at the primary literature before going in, and across the board induction in a first time mother with a low Bishop's score (i.e., me) was associated with about a two-fold increase in C-sections. Many of the studies that show no increase in Ceasarean rate associated with inductions look only at mothers with a good Bishop's score prior to induction. So without reading each of the individual studies that went into that analysis as well as the full text of the reference itself, I'd be very reluctant to conclude anything. I do wish with all my heart that I'd refused that induction, though.

November 20, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJudy

Judy,

I don't know if that article addresses Bishop's scores, but would it change the outcome if it did? The outcome was that women who were allowed to go into labor spontaneously after 41 weeks ended up with MORE C-sections than those who were induced after 41 weeks.

I would love to see the details on the indications for those C-sections, it's true.

November 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterRéka

Interesting. During my first VBAC, I was planning an HBAC and transferred to the hospital in transition (hindisight=20/20!) begging for an epidural. I pushed my baby out unmedicated within two hours of arriving, and sometimes I wish someone would have yelled at me at home telling me I could do it. Nobody did, and after gently trying to talk me out of it, everyone followed me right to the hospital...

November 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterLily B.

It's so hard, Lily, knowing where the line is. Sometimes being a midwife (care provider) is damned if we don't and damned if we do... depending on the woman and the situation. Trying to do exactly what every woman needs at every moment is challenging and as much as the woman herself re-plays it all, the midwife is doing it twice as much. What if you *were* yelled at? What if the baby came out and your feelings were SO hurt you were yelled at? What if you REALLY wanted an epidural and you were pissed they didn't get you to the hospital for one? It's just all so confusing.

I tell women I am there to serve them... as a witness, as a knowlegeable woman, to help them if things slip out of the realm of normal. The rest gets murky. How unhindered do women *really* want to be? How do we know ahead of time the woman is going to need some strong-arming? How do we know that if we get tough, she won't UC the next time because the midwife traumatized her and ruined her birth?

Rhetorical, I know.

November 21, 2009 | Registered CommenterNavelgazing Midwife

Induction with a good Bishop's score has a less pronounced to negligible effect on Caesarean rates, so yes, if only women with high Bishop's scores were included in an induction vs. expectant management study, it would increase the odds of seeing a decrease in Caesareans with induction at 41 weeks. Whether that decrease is because the babies were a little smaller or the placentas were a little younger or just because the providers were less "zomg, she's overdue, baby must be in trouble!" is hard to say, but for my part I really don't think the degree of fetal distress my son exhibited would have been considered grounds for immediate section had I been in labor at 40 weeks instead of failing induction at 42. The way the midwife reacted, I tend to suspect a lot of it was "well, she's just going to fail pitocin tomorrow anyway, why should I listen for the phone all night?"

Side note: While doing the aforementioned reading, I seem to recall running across a comparison of C-section vs. induction at post-term in which "randomized" meant that women with low Bishop's scores were sent straight to surgery while those with high Bishop's scores were induced. I don't think that word always means what they think it means, which is part of why we have so little good rigorous birth research. Take NGM's new obesity series: you can't double-blind for fat, so there's no chance of controlling for risk perception, which is going to further increase Caesarean rates in fat women and reinforce the perception. It's a positive feedback loop.

November 23, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJudy

If anyone is interested in the full text of the article, I can get access to it.

November 23, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJenne

Hmmmm you just can't know what every woman needs. I really think that good safe births are sometimes based on how much the mother knows about herself and about birth, combined with how much she shares and connects with the midwife. You midwifes do an amazing job, you give so much at such an important time.

Postdates conversation always send me spinning. I've grown two 43 week babies. I refused induction both times. First birth ended at 43w3d when I showed signs of pre-e with a 0 on the bishops score...straight to section for me. Second birth also ended at 43 weeks after 36 hours of on again off again active labor, baby was in correct position. One non reassuring fetal heart tone(110, can that even be called low?), guess she didn't know what else to do with me. VBAC banned hospital sectioned me.

I dream of some how getting as many post dates women together as possible with their charts and some midwifes to just talk about it all. I know it won't ever happen. It's strange being the exception......

November 26, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterSavannah

I'd sit and look at your chart, but here are my questions to you: are you fat? over 35? Get out in the sun for 30 minutes every day without fail?

I understand your choosing to refuse induction, but it would be the terribly exceptional woman whose cervix would budge with a Bishop Score of 0 while being that post-dates. I am willing to bet there is some biochemical glitch that keeps you from starting labor on your own (this is purely guessing since I know *nothing* about you except what you've said). It makes me nearly faint to think of you going that late and not being near delivery. Placentas have a shelf life (so to speak) and they do not sustain babies forever. In fact, it would be interesting to know your baby's weights, what they looked like at birth... were they more on the scrawny side? With loose skin? Were they peeling? How much and where? These answers cannot possibly give the cause or reasons for not going into labor, but I *can* tell you, post-dates babies can and do die from mom waiting to go into labor spontaneously; some women never do.

I find that as women get fatter, labors are more challenging to begin. Insulin issues can hinder the normal biochemical process that gets things going. Which is why I bring up the Vitamin D. More and more research is showing the role Vitamin D has in initiating and maintaining labors. I ask my clients to take 6000-8000 IUs a day... quite a bit more than the typical recommendation of 400 IU. Way more research really needs to be done, but it feels right to me.

Yes, I always love looking at charts and trying to read minds, trying to find the information between the chart and the mom's story (and they rarely are the same).

In your second pregnancy, did you do cervical ripening things? Did you do chiropractic? Acupuncture? Herbs? I don't ask to blame you if you didn't, but just wondering *how* far you went to get that cervix ready for labor. A woman who went as late as you did the first time, I'd be seriously begging you to do cervical ripening actions, starting at about 37 weeks.

Keep talking if you want... here is great, too. I look forward to the other comments from folks, too.

Oh, and 110 would not typically be considered a decel unless the baseline was about 160. One time would barely cause a blip on anyone's radar. Hope that helps a little.

Keep talking.

November 26, 2009 | Registered CommenterNavelgazing Midwife

How fun.....

Yes I'm overweight. A normal weight for me is 170 and I started both pregnancies around 220. I don't get out in the sun that much, not at all in the winter, I think I'm ganna hop on the Vit D supplementing fast! And no, I'm only 25 now.

First baby looked great along with my placenta, in fact the doctor balked at my dates after reviewing them. I assure you dates are good. Baby was plump 9lbs 11oz with some vernix when born, although not a lot. He wasn't peeling when born but did the first week of his life.

Second baby similar to her older brother 9lbs 1oz no peeling at all, don't remember much vernix. Both placentas healthy with little to no signs of calcification or age.

So, like you said yeah we did cervical ripening especially the second go round. EPO started at 37 weeks, regular visits to chiro the whole pregnancy, and acupuncture. Acupuncture started my labor I believe, I started contracting noticeably after a "induction" treatment 5 hours earlier. Midwife also swept membranes and stretched cervix several times, including during labor (that was HIGHLY uncomfortable by the way.)

As for her heart rate I know 110 isn't low. But she felt it was concerning my daughters baseline which was 160, she said before then she has never seen it below 145. I think she got scared honestly, and that's okay with me, nobody is perfect.

If my case interests you and you have time to look at my charts, let me know.

November 27, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterSavannah

Oh by the way were have been thinking insulin might be the culprit for a while but we cannot figure out how.

I show symptoms: dark pigment discoloration on my joints and torso, heavy persperation, acne.... seems like there is more but I can't think of them.

Anyway enough so that my reg M.D. looked into it and ran the tests as well as my GYN and my natropath. She said she know there is something that we are missing and wants me to see a homeopath for additional research.

I think the acupuncture set things in motion, I sometimes think perhaps more acupuncture would have kept them moving. It's like my body wasn't getting enough of some chemical to keep the labor going strong enough. I stayed at 8cm the last 17 hours.

November 27, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterSavannah

Savannah, did you read my Birthing Fat piece I have published already? I am putting the finishing touches on Part II: Hormones and think you will be interested in what I am sharing. Your case is *exactly* what I am talking about... Insulin Resistance issues that are not always diagnosed by lab tests. In fact, so few *are* diagnosed by tests, it isn't uncommon for women to be diagosed by symptoms alone.

I was writing more, but will save it for the Hormones piece. Keep watching; I'll totally address what you are speaking about here. And I *love* going through charts and sharing my knowledge and experience with moms. If you need me to get them for you, I am more than glad to do that, too. It's free for a care provider to obtain them... they often charge the clients whose care is documented in there! Email me at NavelgazingMidwife@gmail.com

And let's continue this discussion in the Birthing Fat post; it's much more relevant there.

November 27, 2009 | Registered CommenterNavelgazing Midwife

That is awesome.

She seems to have a very odd, obsessive hatred for all things natural. I'm in the happy medium when it comes to natural vs. medical, but every time I read her stuff I leaned towards natural, out of sheer rebellion against her rantings. :p

December 12, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterMargaret

have you seen this news? she has "quit" SBM.....
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=3969

February 24, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterIndianaFran

Girrrrrl, I got me a post burning out my fingers because of your telling me this! It's all about woo... not necessarily about that woman. Thanks!

February 26, 2010 | Registered CommenterNavelgazing Midwife

Barbara,
I added Dr Amy to my blogroll to help me remember not to believe everything I read - from either side of the aisle. She makes me so angry though! I read her posts and end up feeling like she really hates. Like she wants to punish women and gets a kick out of their bad outcomes. Ugh.
I'm wondering: do you have other suggestions for anti-natural/home/un-medicated/water-/woman-centered birth blogs? Other voices who criticize or challenge that will help me develop a more complete picture of the debate?
I'm sold, really, and I know how I want to birth my children. But I am also wary of becoming entrenched in reading only the birthy things I agree with.
Thanks!

May 14, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJMT

"I added Dr Amy to my blogroll to help me remember not to believe everything I read - from either side of the aisle. She makes me so angry though! I read her posts and end up feeling like she really hates."

Yeah! WSS!

As much as Dr. Amy makes me see red, I've learned a lot from reading her blog, and don't take anything (from either side) for granted. But I told her that and she was still scornful and condescending, so.... bleh.

At any rate, on the 'not wanting to push thing' -- I did that with my second baby. I was trying not to tear (again) and spent about 20 minutes trying not to *help* my body's efforts. My MW and nurses were incredibly patient and gave me no pressure ( or guidance), but my MW encouraged me to feel for baby's head ... and I was SO disappointed at how high he still seemed, (to me -- dunno where he was, but he definitely wasn't crowning) that I just *shoved* him out on the next contraction -- head, body, placenta. Plop. Forget about not tearing. *sigh*

Maybe I'm someone who does benefit from a little more guidance and structure while pushing -- perhaps not being *yelled* at (though who knows?) Or maybe I would have benefited from some perineal support? Yikes.

May 19, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJamie

Looks like she's made a real habit of angering people all over the internet. I spent some time (why? who knows?) reading through a debacle on Open Salon last year, and commenters linked to even more threads on Reddit and some student doctor site where folks were trying to figure out what the heck is up with her. I guess eventually the birth blog world was getting too small for her. She openly admits she goes for a Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh approach. I wonder why. I mean, those guys get paid big bucks for their routines. I'm just so strangely fascinated by her and how she's intent on getting the most hits in the universe and annoying people across the land. Anyway, I agree that it is validating to see other groups getting just as fed up. If you're procrastinating like I was, you can find her easily on Open Salon. You will also find lots of members of that community going off on her. A key post where it went down is one of hers called something like "they killed my patient." There is a similar one called "she flushed the baby down the toilet" which is then quite brilliantly spoofed by a member called shaggylocks in a post with "rabid zombie" in the title (which was posted on Unnecesarean and sparked my wild procrastination fest on this). Enjoy!

June 7, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterRachel

Looks like she's made a real habit of angering people all over the internet. I spent some time (why? who knows?) reading through a debacle on Open Salon last year, and commenters linked to even more threads on Reddit and some student doctor site where folks were trying to figure out what the heck is up with her. I guess eventually the birth blog world was getting too small for her. She openly admits she goes for a Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh approach. I wonder why. I mean, those guys get paid big bucks for their routines. I'm just so strangely fascinated by her and how she's intent on getting the most hits in the universe and annoying people across the land. Anyway, I agree that it is validating to see other groups getting just as fed up. If you're procrastinating like I was, you can find her easily on Open Salon. You will also find lots of members of that community going off on her. A key post where it went down is one of hers called something like "they killed my patient." There is a similar one called "she flushed the baby down the toilet" which is then quite brilliantly spoofed by a member called shaggylocks in a post with "rabid zombie" in the title (which was posted on Unnecesarean and sparked my wild procrastination fest on this). Enjoy!

June 8, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterRachel

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>