Which hospital to choose?

[lorraineliyanage]

I have recently found out I am pregnant and have been offered two options of hospital to give birth: St Thomas' or King's College. Can you anyone tell me about their experiences at either of these hospitals? Not sure which one to pick!

[Asset]

Gave birth in both of them as a matter of fact. St Thomas's 12 years ago and it was fine, left to our own devices unil last hour and then just a midwife present. Left 6 hours after giving birth so can't say anything about aftercare.

King's 4 years ago and it was okay too although personally I thought the place was pretty filthy. I stayed overnight and could not wait to get out, not much care given while I was on the ward either. Both hospitals thought I was weird for not letting them bath the babies after the birth but didn't insist. Neither did they insist I had any of the injections they wanted to give me either.

Not much help I know.

[*Bob*]

We were impressed by Kings and had no complaints - certainly as far as the important part went.

The 'ward experience' afterwards left a little to be desired but I don't know how you could improve on that part unless you go private.

[Pickle]

I had a baby at Kings last January, and am booked to have another there in June! I thought they were great. I had complications, meaning I spent 3 nights in the labour ward prior to giving birth... nothing was a problem for them, they made me comfortable, were happy for my husband to be there at all hours and were generally really nice. Birth itself was fine - lovely midwives and we also got given the option of having a student present (which I highly recommend, as the student will stay with you the entire time).

I stayed in the ward afterwards for 2 nights. The staff there are busy, so it's hard to get attention - but in my case I was quite happy to be left to my own devices.

We had a few follow up appointments which we were also impressed with.

[blinder999]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We were impressed by Kings and had no complaints -

> certainly as far as the important part went.

>

> The 'ward experience' afterwards left a little to

> be desired but I don't know how you could improve

> on that part unless you go private.

this is exactly how we felt about St Thomas's six years ago - the ward was awful, and Mrs Blinder99 couldn't wait to get out, but trying to get hold of a doctor to do the final checks took days.

Last year, second child was born at King's - it was a bit better on the whole. I think we'd go for King's given the choice.

[ratty]

My wife gave birth at Kings on 20th Sept. Very very impressed. Midwife lead birthing ward which is excellent - take the tour when it is available (twice a week I think).

Overall we thought Kings was excellent!

Yes, the maternnity ward is a bit grim (6 beds to a room all with screaming new borns) but you can flee that pretty quick and get your little one home, dressed and off to the pub in no time!!

[Sandperson]

We've just decided to opt out of Kings and go for a home birth. It's our first, but to be honest, the level of care you get from the home birth midwife schemes in the area seems to outshine anything that a hospital has to offer.

[Fuschia]

Sandperson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We've just decided to opt out of Kings and go for

> a home birth. It's our first, but to be honest,

> the level of care you get from the home birth

> midwife schemes in the area seems to outshine

> anything that a hospital has to offer.

Hurry then, you need to book with the hb midwives (Oakwood, Brierley or Albany) by about 6 weeks pregnant to get on their list!!

[*Bob*]

Sandperson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We've just decided to opt out of Kings and go for

> a home birth. It's our first, but to be honest,

> the level of care you get from the home birth

> midwife schemes in the area seems to outshine

> anything that a hospital has to offer.

What about the level of care if there are complications? Yes I know they can 'whisk' you into hospital if need be.. but if you're waiting for the ambulance to turn up and then bumping over the speed bumps all the way to Kings you might just wish you'd opted to have all the medical backup you'll ever need right next door to the room you're giving birth in.

[susyp]

My doctor told me that everyone wanted to go to St Thomas's but it was really hard to get in - so that's the most popular. I've been to the early pregnancy unit at Kings though and found it excellent.

[Sandperson]

Baby due mid-April, opted for home birth mid December. Rang around and got on lists and were accepted by Albany at the beginning of Jan. Very happy! :))

As far as complications go, I think statistically you are just as likely to get complications in hospital and it's luck as to whether you get the right care. We are a ten min (max) drive from Kings and if we have to go to hospital the two (yes, I said two) midwives that are with you at home come with you to the hospital (as far as speed bumps go, I'd imagine that would be the last thing on your mind). You stay with the same midwives all the way through your pregnancy and get birthing pool provided as well as private anti-natal sessions.

My sister-in-law was in Kings and had a terrible time, in attentive midwife, birthing pool already in use...obviously this is only one persons opinion, but I really would look into home birthing.

[safesurfer]

my wife tried to have our first child at home, it didn't go to plan and we ended up in kings where our daughter was finally born by emergency c-section, lots of different midwives in & out , no continuity, not a great experience but a very happy ending. 2nd time around we opted immediately for kings and had a lovely experience with fantastic midwife who stayed with us throughout. excellent.

[*Bob*]

People always have differing opinions on what makes for a good birth experience. You go to the antenatal classes and hear chatter about making a CD of your fave music, a glass of champagne halfway through, dimming the lighting, wearing a special robe, incense sticks and massage oils.

We had only one priority: baby out safely. Once it all kicked-off the last thing on our minds was ambient lighting or indeed the lack of it. We had complications, potentially serious ones (unlucky.. but not uncommon) and all I can is we were bloody glad the surgical ward was only a bed-trundle away.

[Sandperson]

As I said, do some research at the end of the day it's your choice. I was just amazed at the provision for this which seems to be pretty rare. I will be sure to let you all know how horrible it was and how much danger I put my unborn child in.

Safesurfer, that doesn't sound like any of the home birth midwife practices I have come across. The midwives should stay with you throughout. Who were you with?

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

I had all my kids in Guys and my daughter had her baby in St Thomas' last January. They are really good and now have a birthing pool.

Her friend had her baby in Kinds about 5 days earlier and said she would never go to Kings again. I have heard a few horror stories about Kings which is not exactly scientific, but I am not happy that my local hospital is now Kings and not Guys/St Thomas's and would beg the ambulance to take me North of the borough if I was ever sick enough to need one!

[*Bob*]

Horses for courses, Sandperson.. no finger-wagging was implied - that was just our experience.

[safesurfer]

sorry, to clarify, the endless parade of different staff began once we got to hospital! during the attempted homebirth we had regular attendance from the same widwife, no problem there (except the baby didn't want to come out!) good luck.

[lorraineliyanage]

Hmm, lots to think about. I'll go look around Kings and if I don't like the look of it, will check out St. Thomas', really hard to make the decision having seen neither of them. Thanks for the tips! x

[EDmummy]

Kings both times. First time was before the new wing was built. Baby and I left after 10 hours (despite many complications) because I thought I would have less chance of infection at home. Second time, new hospital wing, complications (10lb 4oz baby!!) again but the cleanliness, staff and support was stupendous - especially special baby unit. Have nothing but praise. Oakfield midwives both times supported through pregnancy and labour but when it came to the crunch Kings saved both of my babies. Bottom line is - the medical staff are first class in this country (my opinion I know but have had experience in other countries to compare), they want your baby to be born safely as much as you do. Cleanliness is an issue but you can always take your own dettol wipes, ensure staff wash their hands, wear flip flops in the shower (did with both of mine but didn't really need them second time around).

Many best wishes and I hope you make the choice that is good for you.

[lozzyloz]

In terms of both hospitals I'm sure they've both got excellent facilities. Had my last two at Kings (the first at West Middx). Both came into the world with unforeseen complications and the delivery staff were excellent. I've never known a maternity ward that wasn't too hot, too noisy, too crowded etc. The ward staff do seem to be overworked and under resourced and of course the food is crap. If you don't go private then get your other half to bring in food, drink and musical entertainment and MOST IMPORTANTLY an extra pillow from home. I'd recommend having a look around beforehand but at the end of the day it's the nurses, consultants and midwives that make the difference and you'll hear good and bad stories from both hospitals.

[flange]

an 'insiders' view: i've worked at both hospitals (not as a midwife). both are excellent places - if your baby needs care then they are both centres of excellence in newborns. if there are any complications then you are in the right place (either way). unfortunately, it is a sad reality that most hospital maternity units are just too overworked - thats' the NHS I'm afraid. albeit the staff that they do have might be excellent. unfortunately that's just the way it is.

i understand people who say that they swear by home deliveries and yes they can be great, but when they go wrong they can go very very wrong. i would honestly say that you should have your first child in hospital - you just don't know what might happen and you need the reassurance of being near help. trust me even if you're ten minutes from hospital those 10 minutes can be too long for a baby in trouble. that is just fact. even with the best midwifery care.

trust me when most people have a baby, the whole 'i want this...and this...' birthing plan goes out of the window. at the end of the day it doesn't really matter that much. you just want a healthy baby in a safe place. and in the vast majority of cases that is in a good hospital.

p.s. i have worked with some of the homebirth midwives and while some of them are excellent, some of them really do need to brush up. seriously.

i'm sure this post is going to ruffle a few feathers....

[flange]

sorry just realised my last post sounds a bit harsh and that's not my intention at all. in a funny mood today! i'm sure you will pick the right place to have your baby and wish you all the best! :)

[Scruffy Mummy]

The Albany Midwife Team based in Peckham is one of the most commended in the country and are always being held up as flagship examples of excellent midwife care. They have a very high percentage rate of home births and bascially say that women can opt for a home or hospital birth right up to when they go into labour - they are prepared for either option. They will assign you a team of midwife's and one of them is assured to be with you at the birth - it is excellent continuity of care.

I myself went for a homebirth - I didn't have the albany midwife team but had the community midwifes who were excellent. I had absoluetly no problems and the birth was relatively quick - 6 hours of labour. In my baby group there was a women who had a home-birth who had problems and there was one who had hosptial births and had problems. It didn't appear that there was a significant differiential between both in how fast they were rushed into emergency care - in fact, because the home birth couple had the same midwife's with them the whole time, they actually picked up there was a problem quicker than the one's in hospital, who were victims of the rushed, busy staff scenairo!

I did alot of research and was pretty confident that I made the right choice for me.

If you opt for a hospital birth, remember that there are always lots of medical students keen to see a birth - lots of people are abit unwilling to have them involved but a medical student can stay with you throughout labour and at least provide some continuity of care and/or support if things are abit hectic. My partners son is a med student at King's - he and his girlfriend (another med student!) witnessed the birth of my son (his brother) at home and it was a great experience for them!

[????]

Kings both times, no problems, natural births (i've got a brave missus, and that's just conception) , and back home within 5 hours....you really don't want to be hanging around the hospital as:

a) they are fucking busy so if all is well they just leave you alone afterwards and you're almost forgotten

b) the food is shit

c)er...ebola

If we do it again it's a home birth for us - To be honest I expect that there's not much difference so I'd go for Kings as presumably it's nearer

[flange]

whatever you choose make sure its an informed decision that you are comfortable with. and keep in mind that although most births go swimmingly wherever they take place, things can and do often go wrong (with potentially serious consequences) so being near help is not a bad thing!

best wishes :)