DH and I have two beautiful DC and we are considering a third. Beyond the financial implications, which we will consider (although you can never really afford children) the birth is an issue.
I had such a traumatic time with the completely unnecessary iatrogenic emcs of DS. I had an IOL due to suspected IUGR, followed by a placental abruption caused by my sensitivity to prostin, followed by an emcs. Don?t get me wrong, by the time I had the cs, it was necessary, but if it hadn?t been for the damned interference in the natural process in the first place, there would not have been the cascade of intervention. DS was actually born 5lb and half an oz, a very respectable weight. My treatment in hospital was, I guess, standard. I wasn?t asked before my membranes we artificially ruptured, they just did it. No-one introduced themselves or explained their role, people walked in willy-nilly, there was a shift-chance and people talked over DH and my head, and when talk of cs came up, no explanation of why was given. I was actually told it was for baby?s distress. Afterwards, in a room on my own, I was left for hours. No-one came when I pressed the bell, I waited for over an hour for help with changing DS, cleaning his sick etc. In the end I was getting up, 12 hours post-op, to lift DS myself to clean him, change his nappy, attempt breast-feeding (which did not go well at hospital, probably due to the drugs and my stress, and I was pressured into giving him formula as he was ?so small? and ?needed? to feed). I discharged myself early as I had my DH and mum staying, so one-on-one care for DS and myself at home.
After I came home, and had got over the physical side of the op, I then researched IUGR and came to the conclusion that I never should have agreed to the IOL. My dopplers had been fine, blood flow good and movements strong. Hindsight is, of course, a wonderful thing, which is why we hired an IM for what turned out to be a delightful and serene home water birth, obviously VBAC, with DD.
When pg with DD, our lovely IM came with us to our hospital appointments, and sat with us as we weathered the consultants dramatic predictions of maternal demise and infant mortality, scar dehesion or separation and uterine rupture (all of which I know are real and serious risks, but we compared it to the real and serious risk of crossing a road, the consequences of which can also be catastrophic) and she calmly pointed out we?d have one to one care, and she would not take any undue chances and would bring us in as soon as she noticed any problems. As it was, I bled a lot, and our IM was able to make an experienced, educated professional judgement that this was the way I laboured, as it was fast and furious, and kept a close eye on me. There were no untoward issues that arose from this. However, our IM said to us later, with our after-care, that had she been an NHS midwife, she would have insisted we go in as it is policy that anything unusual, like my bleeding, needs to go into hospital. I know, of course, that we could have refused to go in, but the stress obviously would have kicked in, fighting against the system at such a vulnerable time, and I just wonder if we?d tried to homebirth with the NHS alone would it have ended with another cs?
Does anyone know if the NHS still considers me high risk, and does the fact that I have successfully had my trial of scar/labour and no longer have an ?untried pelvis? make me any less high risk?
Would the NHS support another homebirth and would they consider the fact that I bled a lot in my last labour or just transfer me in regardless as it?s ?not by the book??
We just don?t know if we can afford an IM again, but I detest the thought of going into hospital.
What would you do/will you do/have you done?
A really rambling post that invites all comments, my mind is such a muddle on this! Please excuse spelling mistakes and parts that don?t make sense.