That Woman

[ailbhe]

Now she hopes my section is planned for 39 weeks or later, as statistically babies born by c/s earlier than that are 80% more likely to go into special care.

I answered

As gestation in my family is 37 weeks *as* term, and labour started then last time, it will be planned for term according to my medical history, not random statistics. I *have* thought about this, you know.

Was I very far out of line? She did mean to be helpful.

Comments

[artela.livejournal.com]

You were a lot more polite than I would've been - I'd've told her that you've been through birth before and that you have planned everything to the nth degree with your medical people and that she shouldn't spout off about stuff she obviously knows nothing about :-)

[clanwilliam.livejournal.com]

You were way too polite. I'd have told her to go and fuck herself at that point, I think.

[angua.livejournal.com]

You took the words right out of my mouth.

[flybabydizzy.livejournal.com]

You were very mild with her.
I'd be tempted to actually forward it to friend with teeth.
She should have had better manners first time, should have learned from your reply that there was a medical need for the c section, and bloody well apologised! Qualified obstetric care in this country may not be wonderful, but it is generally more relevant to the case than some stranger on the internet

[clare-s.livejournal.com]

nope - she was out of line, you are not.

[mrs-warwick.livejournal.com]

I think you were very polite. My response would have been along the lines of 'mind your own bloody business'.

I was shocked by your earlier post, about the original email she sent. I hope I would never presume to offer unsolicited advice to someone of whom I knew as little as she knows of you (iykwim). My response then was 'bloody cheek', and it still is.

[rmc28]

It doesn't read to me like "meaning to be helpful". It reads more like "trying to push a general agenda without bothering to find out about the individual".

You were not out of line.

[ailbhe]

I'm not quoting her emails, because I can't bring myself to make private email public. She *has* offered me genuinely useful information as well as the agenda; she was, at least before I answered back, planning to send me a video of a c-section so I know what I'm dealing with (I will make Rob watch it first in case it's an offputting one, I think).

This is all a bit hard. I'd seen videos of vaginal birth and diagrams and descriptions and all the rest of it loads of times before I even hit 18, let alone before I got pregnant. I had a good idea of what to expect, and I knew what was going on, more or less. But this, I have no idea, really. I don't even know what body parts are involved; they weren't in my biology book when I was 14.

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

I don't mean to be unkind to this perfectly innocent person, but with what you've said about her, I wouldn't put it past her to get you a video of a botched and/or overly problematic C-section.

But yes, Rob watching first is... a good plan.

[totkat.livejournal.com]

She was (probably) trying to be helpful. She, as a midwife, (probably) wants to make sure that you are aware of the statistics and (probably) hopes to help you understand the (statistical) risks that you may not already know. She (probably) wants to help make sure that you have as healthy a baby, you and birth as possible. She (probably) doesn't know your or your family's medical history. She (probably) doesn't know you either. She (probably) doesn't know that you have thought about it already. Pointing it out to her as you did was perfectly fine. You weren't out of line, but then again I think neither was she.

[ailbhe]

Except that she's doing it as a layperson, not as a qualified health professional of any sort, yeah. It's like me randomly emailing strangers who are asking for advice on bottlefeeding.

[totkat.livejournal.com]

Aaah, for some reason I got it into my head that it was an actual midwife. In that case, stuff her, she's not a pro and hasn't been trained or had experience.

[ailbhe]

She's a very well-educated layperson, mind - but the midwives on the list remember my case, as it's unusual and shocking enough to stand out in the crowd. You probably thought she was a midwife because I mentioned that it's a midwifery mailing list.

[firecat]

Your response was not at all out of line.

[sidheag.livejournal.com]

No, you were in line.

[barakta]

You are politer than I would have been. I'm not sure telling you that after 39 weeks is better in a sneering tone is helpful. What are you supposed to do say "I got told by some random person who claims to be a midwife over teh Interweb that you have to do my C-section after 39 weeks cos of some stats". If this woman knows that, then I am sure your professionals do too, and have made their decision based on actual experience rather than a protocol!

In fact why is this woman presuming to give you such personalised medical advice on the Internet anyway? All the good medical professionals I have EVER seen online always make it very clear that they will not give personal advice - or anything which could be construed as such. They will provide general information, have opinions (often strong ones), point people at resources that might be helpful. But they will NEVER give anything which even suggests that an individual should do anything other than seek professional advice from their OWN caregivers.

[barakta]

Ah, read comments and realised she isn't even a midwife.... *headdesk*

My point about random strangers on teh Interweb stands even stronger. She isn't even a trained medical professional. There's a reason there are training programs, experience levels and mentoring systems in medicine. Some things can't be taught, it is about knowledge becoming more like instinct.

No matter how good a layperson is, the fact remains that they are a layperson and are likely to have a narrow understanding. As someone who runs a medical/deaf support community I am very clear that I am not a doctor, nurse or audiologist and as such my advice should never be taken more seriously than that of their medics.

[barakta]

And I rarely meet an audiologist who I like or respect, but that still doesn't change the fact that I don't know as much as them about general audiology.

[ailbhe]

Yeah, the midwives on the list are very good at general information and about the only personal advice any of them have given me is that a section is clearly indicated in my case, which is reassuring as it's a very pro-homebirth, pro-unassisted birth mailing list (where unassisted means the midwife is there, but not doing anything - the mother delivers her own baby). And lots of general information, including book recommendations.

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

The road to Mummy Hell is paved with good intentions.

[nicolechan.livejournal.com]

You weren't out of line at all... she apparently has a thick skull.

[porcinea.livejournal.com]

Ah, yes, "mean to be helpful". The road to hell, etc.

You were much nicer than I would have been.

[grumpoldusenaut.livejournal.com]

The only criticism I would have is that you were far too polite to this person. But then I don't much like fundamentalist fuckwits regardless of the subject on which they like to believe theirs is the one true way and everyone else is going to hell.

Your medical history makes it pretty bloody obvious that if you do not have a planned C-section you will almost certainly be having an unplanned one. And the risks are lower on the planned version. Planning it for the timescale which your medical history suggests is appropriate is the rational thing to do.

(My views on C-section? Vaginal is better except when it's not. And as my 5'7", heavily built, broad-hipped sister had to have an emergency C-section on her first time because the baby was too damned big and wasn't going anywhere after 36 hours, I ain't telling *anyone* that obviously they could have a vaginal easily if they were only willing to try.)

[ailbhe]

Hello, who are you?

[ruth-lawrence.livejournal.com]

As a person with no choice but to frequently engage with health services: no you were *not* out of line.