Connie Banack, author and writer
I am so excited; I am now officially an "author"! I have been writing my entire life. Most of my writing has been in putting together articles, journaling (very cathartic, I recommend it to anyone), and for the ongoing projects I seem to volunteer for on an ongoing basis - and I love every minute. Though my first two books are not completed (one a fiction, the other a childbirth educator manual), the first of my four booklet series for Canadian childbirth professionals is completed and the other three are well on their way to completion. My ISBN numbers have already been assigned and my editor absolutely loves my work. My publisher, the Canadian Doula Association, is getting everything set up to market my books, providing a choice of one as a membership perk upon purchase of a new membership.
My childbirth educator manual is almost completed as well, a long labour of love in that it is coming together slowly but surely along with the entire certification program that surrounds it. The Global Birth Institute, my publisher for this manual, is very excited about the completion of this project and with it's completion I can focus on my next manual and certification program I am developing for them, for childbirth doulas.
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Birthing Choices
Today, Australian newspaper The Courier-Mail, reported Child laws invoked over birthing choice in which a mother who didn't show up for her prenatal appointment and cancelled her caesarean section booking was investigated by Child Safety Department after being reported by the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital. She had previously had two children by caesarean section and her physician felt she was risking her newborn. She was reported as per the newly enacted laws meant for pregnant women unwilling to take the advice of medical professionals not to attempt natural births.
Officers advised her to seek medical advise and deliver in a hospital. While they did not want to interfere with the right of parents to make informed medical choices, they had a duty to act on advice from authorities such as police or doctors if they believed an unborn child was at risk. The left after being told she would go to Caboolture Hospital. She subsequently gave birth to her daughter at the Caboolture Hospital naturally after seven hours of labour.
Though I applaud the new laws enacted to protect unborn children, at what cost is this to pregnant mothers? Will Australia follow the US's misguided lead of court-ordered caesarean section for the protection of the unborn? The newest study published in the NEJM is a study showing the risks of both elective caesarean section and vaginal birth after a prior caesarean. In keeping with this study, which does have a deep flaw in excluding all planned ERCS patients who present in labour and the subsequent lack of UR in this group, the risks of either option are very low. An elective caesarean section poses a greater risk to the mother (1.6/4000) while a VBAC does have an increased risk to the baby (1/4000), especially if the mother is induced (2/4000).
But we cannot ignore the other end of the spectrum, what about the rights of the newly conceived unborn? Why are they considered less precious than a full-term unborn where their rights are protected? When will the killing of unborn children early in pregnancy stop? Many questions that we need to consider in this so-called enlightened age we live in.
Today, Australian newspaper The Courier-Mail, reported Child laws invoked over birthing choice in which a mother who didn't show up for her prenatal appointment and cancelled her caesarean section booking was investigated by Child Safety Department after being reported by the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital. She had previously had two children by caesarean section and her physician felt she was risking her newborn. She was reported as per the newly enacted laws meant for pregnant women unwilling to take the advice of medical professionals not to attempt natural births.
Officers advised her to seek medical advise and deliver in a hospital. While they did not want to interfere with the right of parents to make informed medical choices, they had a duty to act on advice from authorities such as police or doctors if they believed an unborn child was at risk. The left after being told she would go to Caboolture Hospital. She subsequently gave birth to her daughter at the Caboolture Hospital naturally after seven hours of labour.
Though I applaud the new laws enacted to protect unborn children, at what cost is this to pregnant mothers? Will Australia follow the US's misguided lead of court-ordered caesarean section for the protection of the unborn? The newest study published in the NEJM is a study showing the risks of both elective caesarean section and vaginal birth after a prior caesarean. In keeping with this study, which does have a deep flaw in excluding all planned ERCS patients who present in labour and the subsequent lack of UR in this group, the risks of either option are very low. An elective caesarean section poses a greater risk to the mother (1.6/4000) while a VBAC does have an increased risk to the baby (1/4000), especially if the mother is induced (2/4000).
But we cannot ignore the other end of the spectrum, what about the rights of the newly conceived unborn? Why are they considered less precious than a full-term unborn where their rights are protected? When will the killing of unborn children early in pregnancy stop? Many questions that we need to consider in this so-called enlightened age we live in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)