St Thomas v Kings - help please!!

[mccahill15]

I rang the doctor and she asked whether I wanted to go to St Thomas or Kings - I haven't a clue!!! Also can't ask friends as can't tell them I'm pregnant yet! Any advice really appreciated!!

Are you low risk? Tommy's has a Home from Home birth centre that's meant to be great, although strict criteria for use. Kings is mostly labour ward, although they've recently opened a four bed midwife-led unit. If high risk, both are excellent for medical care. Where would be easier for antenatal care? Tommy's generally gets a very bad rap for postnatal - worse than Kings, although lots will come down to individual experiences and I've heard bad things about Kings too. Scans at Kings are the best. There's slightly more parking at St Thomas' if that will ever be a consideration!

Hi there mccahill15

We're just going to move this to a more appropriate topic for you, so you can get the best advice.

Best wishes

I opted for St Thomas and found out I can't get caseload care because of the postcode I live in, so that's another consideration!

I've had care at both and would say that you should just pick the one that's easiest to get to both for labour and appointments.

You should definitely check whether you'd be able to be in a case loading team at either, either direct with the hospital or through your GP. Case loading means you see the same small group of midwives through the ante and post natal stages, often in your own home, and a lot of the time they will also deliver your baby. It's continuity of care that is recognised as the gold standard of midwifery.

I had my first in Kings, and second at St Thomas'. They both had their pros and cons. Kings antenatal care was brilliant unfortunately can't say the same for their labour ward. Where as Tommys I felt neglected when it came to antenatal care but their labour wards and midwives there were amazing.... But go and visit them both and see how you feel because everyone's expectations and experiences are unique. Best of luck!

Very HONEST opinion and very personal to me.

I had my first in St Thomas hospital, I suffered from Eclamptic seizures as I was left to labour on my own and only checked every 6 hours.
My urine was not checked and neither was my blood, so my pre-eclampsia went unnoticed. Myself and my child almost died.
My notes then went missing, what a surprise.
This all happened despite arriving by ambulance, having a BP of 160/100 and the staff being told that I was unwell and had a headache.
I was in labour for 30 hours before the seizures, and was rushed for an emergency C-section. I spent a week in ITU after.

Given the choice 4 years later I went to Kings College, I had scans every 4 weeks, but did find very often they were running late and I didn't see the same consultant more than once. I found that Kings College at the time had better experience with pre-eclampsia and offered doppler scans.

Both have their pros and cons. St Thomas was newer and cleaner at the time, but Kings they couldn't do enough for me and I was very closely monitored.

I had c-sections at both hospitals, did not get any infection from either and was encouraged to breastfeed at both.

The birthing facilities at St Thomas were better, they just didn't have the staff to cope with me at the time. Cannot fault ITU at St Thomas- had one to one care and the views were amazing!

I'm not using either this time, but I live further away now.

I had my son at kings, they allow for partners to stay overnight in the post natal ward.
For me this was horrific I was in a small four bed ward surrounded my strange men. I felt too embrassed go to the toilet because I had blood all over my nightie.
When I did use the toilet after one of the partners he left a massive turd in the toilet.
When one of the midwives was in my cubicle one the med walked in and asked he saw his wife next.
When I went to get breakfast they were surrounding the food I felt to intimidated to get anything.

TheXxed

Not sure how long ago you used Kings, but when I had my DD partners were defo not allowed to stay, infact they were very strict with visiting hours.

Spring 2013

They definitely do allow partners to stay, I had my DD end of 2011. But for me this was a God send. I had some terrible postnatal treatment and would not have managed without my DH there.

But just to offset what I just said, things did go wrong upon my DD's birth and it was great being at King's as she was seen by a World specialist in paediatric orthopaedics within a couple of hours.

And just to balance out Number3's story ... my child DID die at King's on the antenatal ward, despite being high risk etc etc.

Just to say that things can go wrong at either hospital, depending very much on who's on duty. So make sure you're educated and make sure your birthing partner is knowledgeable and can act as your advocate.

I would make a decision based on whether you can get case load care and which is easier to get to from you.

Both are top notch hospitals.

TheXxed
Gosh not long ago then! Mine was 2007 so was different then.

Hmm not sure how I would feel about partners staying - i'm split on that one.
Personally wouldn't have OH there but understand others might.

Dildals so sorry to hear that, that is absolutely awful, and you are quite right, both are top notch, but also incredibly busy hospitals

back in my day Kings was filthy dirty and my friend got MRSA there, so I opted for St Thomas. The care we received there was fantastic for a high risk birth.
This is all a bit out of date though....

Dildals

Thanks ladies.

I have probably scared the shit out of mccahill15 now ...

Don't worry mccahill15 - I am sure my and number3's story are the statistical anomalies ...

My statistic - only lady to have suffered from Eclampsia in St Thomas Hospital for many years.

FYI it hasn't put me off - expecting number 3 in July!

Seriously? You're joking right? Isn't eclampsia pretty common?

I am newly pregnant now and very much trying to figure out how to put all the safeguards in place to this not happening again!

Dildals I had eclampsia, it's pre-eclampsia which is common.

Eclampsia is the rare and very dangerous aftermath.

Still something any midwife worth their salt should know about! (You're in the 1.4% stat according to Wikipedia :-) )

The whole thing was a mess.

I called the labour ward to say I was in labour but had a really bad headache and buzzing sound in my ears. They told me to take paracetamol and call an ambulance, so I did. The paramedics told the midwifes at the front desk my BP was high, also due to previous spinal surgery I was clearly not meant to go in the birth centre, but they put me in there and left me there - for hours.

I was at the hospital in labour for 30 hours, not once was my urine checked.

At the point of seizures I kept telling them I didn't feel right, I was being constantly sick and my arm was shaking so bad I kept hitting myself in the face with the gas an air (probably looked quite comical!)

My face was very swollen too, but by that point I was so confused I had no idea what was going on, then I had seizures.

They were very quick to act, I cannot fault that. I seized for 2-3 minutes so baby was born flat, I was put asleep for my c-section and have no recollection of what happened until the next day when I woke up very confused and with swelling on my brain.

I wouldn't wish it on my worse enemy but I am very grateful we were both ok.

My son was special education needs until he was 8 or 9 but is now fine apart from some very minor coordination issues.

With my second pregnancy I was watched like a hawk and medicated, same this time.

I have been left with a permanent heart issue which means I have persistent high blood pressure when untreated despite being relatively young, not overweight and healthy. I usually take beta blockers (cannot take them in pregnancy) so am on aspirin and methyldopa. So far so good!