Kes

Sounds great, please both open on a Monday when Dish and Spoon and Duck egg are shut!

So Sorry Saffron and SW - I've got myself all confused! Serves me right for reading this on my phone while I was at work! I was actually referring to a post by Saffron, for some reason I thought it was SillyWoman (thus proving that I deserve her name more than her!) Saffron - yes it was the timing/scheduling comment: "in a straightforward vaginal birth, you lose the element of timing, i.e. the birth can't be scheduled. " I misunderstood you, to me it read as - with a c-section you can choose the most convenient time to have your baby, - with the implication that that is the only real benefit to a C/S and it is a pretty selfish one. I appreciate now that that isn't what you meant, but as someone who had an elective CS and has seen that sort of claim in the media many times, I'm clearly over-sensitive to it and was concerned that others would read it that way too. I really hope I've stopped being dim for today now - and sorry again for taking up time on the thread with a tangent!

Hi Saffron, Sorry I didn't make that very clear and I was only refering to SWs post not anything you said previously. I'm annoyed when the media portrays elective C/S as something chosen by women for the sole reason of their own convenience and was concerned that SWs post made it sound like that was the only benefit to a C/S. (I'm sure this wasn't SWs intention but I thought it needed clarifying - I then made it even less clear it seems!) I wasn't saying "focus on the gains" in the way I think you mean, It was just easier and quicker to say this is a good thing about C/S rather than this is something you loose if you don't have a C/S - if that makes any sense?? I did not say that a C/s garuntees a safe outcome, I said that in ***certain circumstances*** it would be the safest possible option. For example, transverse baby, placenta previa, etc. As you say there are no garuntees either way. I hope that is clearer now - and sorry for thhe digretion!

Hello, back again and again sorry I can't make the next meetup as I'll be in work. Quick point - and I know you were just using a quick example SW but I've seen various media articles that claim women have elective C/S just so they can schedule the timing of the birth. It annoys me. Switching to gains rather than losses, **dependednt on circumstances** the gains for an elective are likely to be be the reasurrance that you are doing the safest possible thing for you and/or your baby, the knowledge that you definately won't be having an emergency c section or any other form of intervention etc. Sadly no one can choose a straightforward vaginal birth so an elective alows some degree of control over complications.

Could James or Renata perhaps clarify this? Also, is there a specific definition of "summer born" Really greater flexibilty for all children would be the ideal. A friends son had to effectivly start school a year early, having been due in October and born very prem in July, he would have been much better off starting according to his due due when he'd had more time to catch up from the delays caused by his early birth. Other friends have children born in September (in one case because of being overdue) who are desperate to go to school and bored of nursery as all their friends have moved on. The August/september cut off is ridiculously arbitory but if all/many July and August born kids start a year later isn't there a risk that we just move the disadvantage to those born in June or May?

Been wanting to comment on this for days - but didn't want to spoil Saffron and Otta's fun with the names (I'm bored waiting for something at work now though) To go back a bit- Otta, I don't really think it's possible to understand someone else's experience of childbirth. Even if you are a women who has been through it. Every birth has a unique set of physical and psychological factors and I often find women are the worst culprits for comparing or judging each other. Sadly, just putting it behind you isn't possible for everyone, I wish it were. So I guess this group could be a big help to some. Sillywoman - again I find your opinion very interesting and quite different to my own. I feel like we are actually fed two completely opposite images of birth. The terrifying medical horrors of TV and film that you talk about and also the many many websites and groups that promote the idea that everyone can have a wonderful, easy, empowering birth if only you do x,y and z. In the bubble of middle class London the latter almost feels like the mainstream now. Of course in real life there are women at both of those extremes but far more fall somewhere in the middle. Personally I was never that worried by the TV dramatics as my Mum always mocked how unrealistic they were. If anything though this only made me more credulous of the easy birth view. I quietly suspected that most women who had C sections just weren't trying hard enough - right up to the point where the surgeon got to work on me! Had things gone differently I would probably have felt that my suspicions were confirmed and been unfairly judgemental of others. Right I've had enough now, no one else left in the lab, time to pack up!

Oh for heavens sake some HVs are so unhelpful - seriously if you can face it complain about this, new mums don't need to be stressing over nothing! grrr For what it's worth I've had 2 big babies (similar parental height issues to you!) both were were the same sort of size at 10 weeks. With the first I worried that I wouldn't be able to produce enough milk for the full 6 months but actually it was fine and she regularly went for 8 hours at night from 12 weeks. The second has reflux (I feel your pain!) and wanted solids at 5 months but again no real milk supply problem other than during growth spurts. For bottles, with both of mine I've given them a little bit from a bottle at the end of a breast feed at least once a week. Which has worked really well and I was able to give a full feed from a bottle when needed/when I just really want to go out!. Perhaps may be worth a try as the baby won't be desperately hungry so may be more relaxed about trying the bottle? Good luck and ignore the HV, nod and smile and walk away...

I don't know about early inductions but where premature labour looks likely then they routinely give steroids when a vaginal birth is likely too.

If you are sure you can get into that school then you have nothing to loose by putting it 6th on the list. You could then put a few others that you would prefer but don't think there is any chance of getting into higher up. There is always a tiny possibility that the more popular school may suddenly have a bulge class or something and you could get in and if not you still get a place at the less popular school.

That's a good point about partners being heard Saffron. I found I was in an odd state and completely incapable of speaking up for myself once I was well into labour. By the third day if the midwife had recommended be-heading me I'd have agreed and thanked her politely for it! Very important to have a partner who can step in. simonethebeaver I looked into doulas for my second but most seemed to be keen helping people achieve a natural birth, so I didn't really feel they would be right for me. and of course not an option financially for the majority of people anyway.

Hi SW, sorry meant to reply before now but it's been one of THOSE weeks! I think you're right that I am assuming it's the same as natural birth. I've only ever come across phrases like "empowering" "positive birth experience" etc, being used by natural birth advocates. Although personally I found my elective C section far more empowering than my (admittedly failed) attempt at a midwife only water birth. It was also a few phrases in the article you link too that gave me the impression that the organisation was anti-medicine. The writer says she "escaped the NHS" and talks about women saying they were or weren't "allowed" what they wanted. I don't think it's helpful to make women expect conflict with doctors especially as most won't see an Obstetrician unless there is some kind of problem. Of course your group is free to take a broader view and I wish you well with it. I guess my concerns come from my own experience of getting lots of positive messages about natural, empowering birth experiences and then being treated very unpleasantly when I "failed" to live up to expectations. I've heard people say that pregnant women should only ever listen to entirely positive stories about lovely natural births, or else fear will become a self fulfilling prophesy, but I think that that risks leaving many horribly unprepared for what may happen. Personally, I'd say that straightforward natural birth is a positive thing, but so is having all of modern medicine as a backup. If nature has screwed up and, for example, given you a baby that's just too big for your silly bipedal pelvis then stuff nature we have the skills and technology to come out of it all just fine - which has to be positive! Anyway, I hope that makes sense in where I'm coming from and perhaps offers a slightly different viewpoint for you. I'm afraid I really can't see me making it out of an evening any time soon to actually come to your group, I've just gone back to work after baby 2 so all is chaos here at the moment! K

Saffron - I think that would be a great idea. I've only had chance to have a quick look at the links so I may have totally the wrong idea here but the groups sound quite anti-doctor? Isn't there a risk that women will be taught to expect conflict before they've even talked to a doctor? I know there is a massive problem with Ob/Gyns in the US insisting on too many interventions but that really isn't my experience here (if anything the opposite was true for me), and however positive and prepared you are sometimes things just don't work out and you do need medical care. I just worry that only talking about positive experiences can leave women horribly unprepared if that's not what they get.

My 4yo has had a gro clock for a couple of years now. It has stars at night that slowly dissappear then the sun comes up in morning. No sound alarm but she knows when its (our definition of) morning.

Schools don't know what order you put them in. If you put school A first that will only stop you getting into B if you get a place at A. If you don't get a place at A it will make no difference to getting a place at B. Bessemer should really know this, I guess it's possible they don't or that they want lots of people to make them first choice so they look more popular?

Hi, I had a planned c section at kings almost exactly a year ago and was really impressed. I was seeing the consultant anyway and after I explained at my first appointment what had happened with my first (very difficult) birth he just agreed that I could choose vbac or c section this time and wrote that in my notes so I could decide nearer the time. his registrar told me I'd be fine to have a vbac but was almost apologetic about it and said he had to say that. I didn't meet the surgeon in advance but on the day he came to speak to me before I went into theatre where he also had a consultant with him. They were rather buisnesslike once we were in theatre but my husband and midwife ensured that everyone introduced themselves, that the screen was lowered as my daughter was born, and that my gown was arranged so that she could be placed on my skin within moments. The whole thing was so calm and controlled, incredibly different to last time. On the ward I ended up on the antenatal side as post natal was full so perhaps this alters how I was treated, the midwives there didn't have so many babies to fuss with! They were really nice though. I was more scared of this than the surgery after a really horrible experience at st Thomas' last time with night staff but the staff at kings were lovely. I would recommend making a note of when you are due medication and pushing the button a bit in advance as these things can be a bit slow and pain meds work better if you don't let them tail off between doses. But I really felt I was treated with care and respect. My husband did stay, he brought a camping mat for the floor, but then slept so soundly I had to resort to thrownng things at him to wake him up! When I was there they were trialing a system to get people home after only 1 night if the c section was pretty routine. Although I stayed 2 in the end and was glad of the moving bed! Have people bring you food though! It was rubbish and not nearly enough! K

SW - I found your last comment really interesting. You think that limiting yourself to things that have been scientifically proven would "severely restrict my choices and lead me to miss a lot of useful stuff that the world has to offer" My feeling is that the world has a lot of offer, but that I have only very limited time and money so I would rather use it on something that has been proven to be safe and effective. While there could well be things out there that work, there are also quite a few that have been shown not to but are still marketed and I just don't have the time to fully research everything for myself.

SW - I completely agree that not having any data on something doesn't mean it doesn't work. There doesn't seem to have been any real studies done on this so we can't tell either way. That wasn't my point though. I don't think companies should claim to have scientific evidence for their product if they don't. Even if profit isn't a major motivation they are still charging people (quite a lot) of money for a product/service. They should give accurate information about it so customers can make an informed choice. It would be fine to say that the seller believes it's very helpful, that it could have x y z benefits and here's a link to loads of other people who think the same thing and who've tried it and thought it worked. But that shouldn't be dressed up as "scientific evidence". I also think that anyone selling these sorts of things should be trying to prove they work and not just because they make money from it. If they really do work then they should be made available to everyone, not just those who can afford an extra significant expense at an already expensive time. With proper evidence there would be increased demand, the process could be scaled up and made cheaper, maybe it would even be offered on the NHS. If you really think something is that beneficial, do you not have a moral duty to prove it? Oh and I'm not the least bit eeewww. after my last baby was born the midwife brought me the placenta and we had a jolly good look at it. It was interesting, although not terribly appetising. I opted for a nice steak and some multivitamins instead, it was lot cheaper.

Been trying to resist the urge to post on here. If people want to do this, can afford it and think it helps them then that's up to them. I also believe that LauraMcdora genuinely went into business because she wanted to help people and not for profit. But the links to her "scientific evidence" for consuming your placenta just aren't very convincing. Scientific evidence for a medical treatments should be properly conducted trials published in peer reviewed journals. Other people writing articles or websites saying that something is true doesn't make it true, even if they have a medical title. Self reported experiences are likely to be very biased and research showing that there are lots of nutrients or stem cells in the placenta doesn't mean that those things would do any good when eaten etc etc It seems to me that this is actually one of the few cases where a randomised controlled trial could be done to answer a pregnancy related question. Get a whole lot of women (who don't mind doing it, that could be the tricky part) give half of them their own placenta genuinely encapsulated, the other half get fake placebo capsules, question them all later about their recovery, maybe do blood tests to check iron levels etc. Perhaps Lauramcdora and others who run these services could work with a hospital on this to actually get some really convincing data together and publish it in a proper journal. I'm sceptical about eating your placenta (as you'll have guessed) but I'm entirely prepared to endorse it if there really was good evidence. Hopefully hospitals would too if it really lived up to all the claims, then maybe it would be made available to everyone, not just those who can afford it. K

Ditto, I didn't wear one for my first pregnancy but second time around I had low BP and got quite faint at times so I did. Definitely helped me get a seat a few times and I think you always think you look more pregnant than you actually do to other people. I also always took it off once I was off the train, until I got so massive that it seemed a little pointless!

Gosh Clare I'm a bit unimpressed at your midwife recommending a home waterbirth VBAC. Supporting a decision you've already made is one thing but that really sounds like putting natural birth idealism above safety. Anyway, here is a link to a blog post I wrote early last year, just before I found out I was pregnant with number 2 (and after a not too great meeting with an obstetrician - not Kings btw). It contains links to two studies looking at the safety of VBAC v elective repeat C/S. http://www.southwarkbelle.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/is-planned-repeat-c-section-safer-than.html Also here are a couple more about how I decided: http://www.southwarkbelle.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/decisions-part-1-show-me-stats.html http://www.southwarkbelle.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/decisions-part-2-time-to-decide.html Hope it's ok to post those but I thought they might be relevant to the OP and those interested in studies on the subject.

Just to give the other side, I had an emergency c section with my first (huge baby, back to back, got stuck trying to do ventouse). I always thought I would want a VBAC next time until I actually got pregnant, I then changed my mind and had an elective c section. There is really no one correct answer to this but for me the elective was absolutely the right thing. I agonised over it for a long time but in the end these were my reasons: There is still some evidence that a repeat CS is slightly safer than a VBAC. It's a small difference and I wouldn't criticise anyone for choosing a VBAC in spite of it but for me safety is the issue that trumps everything else. If I had tried a VBAC I'd have had continuous monitoring (you can refuse but again with safety in mind I wouldn't have), this would mean I wouldn't really be having the natural birth I'd like anyway as it would prevent the use of movement, birth pool etc. Things which I found very helpful for managing pain in my first labour. Also - the only way to be sure you don't have an emergency c section is to have a planned one and I really didn't want another emergency one. So for me the elective made sense and as it turned out they found all kinds of scar tissue etc. from the first one which was done in a rush in the middle of the night. As this one was planned they had time to fix me up and although that made the immediate recovery harder I felt better after 6 months than I ever did in the 3 years between babies. I also really liked the sense of control that came with the elective. I was calm throughout and able to ask for eg. the screen to be lowered so I could see the baby born and my arms and gown to be arranged in a way that made it possible to have her skin to skin while still in theatre. Recovery is a definite down side, it was far far easier after a planned one when I wasn't also recovering from 3 days of labour, but I do still look with envy at anyone out and about a week after having a baby. It wasn't a major issue with my older child though as we prepared her for it and made sure there were plenty of people to help out. Good luck whatever you choose K

Glad to hear that the service is being kept, I only wish it were available to more people. It seems that you have to either live in a very specific area (Lanes) and /or want and be able to have a home birth (Brierly) to access this model of care. This sadly rules out a great many women who would really benefit from it.

Totally agree that it's good to have all the information and make informed choices. So long as the information is accurate, up to date and unbiased. (on that basis I wish I hadn't bothered clicking on the second link) To summarise the telegraph piece - 4 families claimed for compensation because they believed their child developed narcolepsy because of the swine flu jab. Their claim was turned down initially but new evidence suggests that the condition could have been caused by the jab so the government have contacted them about this (that's the u-turn). There could be about 100 other similar cases and it could cost a lot in compensation although there is an argument over if the condition is severe enough to fall under the government scheme. So basically, all routine vaccinations carry a very small chance of side effects. The government didn't think narcolepsy was one of those side effects but it altered it's opinion when presented with good evidence.

Hi, Has anyone had laser hair removal at the place on lordship lane? What did you think? Also (hence this being in family room) would they do it if you were still breast feeding? (obviously not literally breast feeding during the treatment!)

Thanks skegness and Jessie. I'm trying to keep it all as positive as possible with her, thankfully she seems to be very excited about the whole thing and not too bothered about specifics! I'm really not keen on the idea of moving her once term has started and very much hope I won't need to but it is possible and as she's my eldest, whichever school she ends up in will be part of our lives for a long time!