I thought back then they just cut a rabbit open and looked at it’s innards.
I think from the ultrasound alone the are supposed to be pretty accurate now. IIRC, they got the conception date of my kid spot on.
Thank you for the interesting links. The first one points out that all current methods of calculating due dates are highly notional and inaccurate:
Babies have their own clock and can come anywhere from three weeks
before this exquisitely determined due date till two weeks after.
The second one points out that labor is now routinely induced in more than 1 in 5 births, so even that window is basically a minimum error bar and not really scientifically valid.
in 2006, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, more than 1 in 5 births in the United States was induced.
This rate more than doubled from 1990.
I think inducing is nearly always a bad choice for a pregnant woman who has no complicating factors. Others disagree. I would caution everyone to try to find real data - especially from people directly in the line of ancestry - before listening to what hospitals, doctors and birth centers will say without providing real data.
@Mister44: No, that’s how we told the weather! Haruspicy was a fine art in those days.
Actually, it notes: “Two ultrasounds taken one month apart that agree with each other on when the due date is, yield a very accurate and reliable answer.” Also, two weeks is no where NEAR five in terms of due dates.
“I think inducing is nearly always a bad choice for a pregnant woman who has no complicating factors.” Unless you’re a ObGyn, you’re opinion on this isn’t very useful, so I think pregnant women are better off listening to experts, and getting several professional opinions if they’re unsure. I wouldn’t listen to a lawyer’s opinion on what do about the plumbing in my house. : )
1 Like
You really shouldn’t diddle your platypus.
I like how she gets bite-y when she’s happy.
1 Like
Fetal viability decreases RAPIDLY after a week overdue.
Labor needs to be induced ASAP. Forget going all natural and get your epidural at the earliest possible moment so you’re numbed if this turns into a C-section.
You may want to tell them you want a Cesarean.
“I think inducing is nearly always a bad choice for a pregnant woman
who has no complicating factors.” Unless you’re a ObGyn, you’re
opinion on this isn’t very useful, so I think pregnant women are
better off listening to experts, and getting several professional
opinions if they’re unsure. I wouldn’t listen to a lawyer’s opinion on
what do about the plumbing in my house. : )
I’m just going to wade in briefly to say that, over the last several months, I’ve seen a number of studies suggesting that your family’s experiences with late or early births don’t seem to have much of an effect on whether you give birth late, early or “on time”. Personally, I would MUCH rather base any decisions about induction on conversations with my doctor.
3 Likes
I am currently five months pregnant myself, and can definitely say that there has never been a situation I’ve been in where I’ve been less inclined to give weight to the opinions of non-professionals, although many of them seem to have one.
2 Likes
The quote from your article that I gave was specifically referencing the “highly reliable and accurate answer”. Highly reliable and accurate is up to three weeks early and up to two weeks late, using your own source.
But anyway, I’m an autodidact; I do my own plumbing, wiring, masonry, carpentry, and repair work - and if I trusted in doctor’s advice over my own judgement I would certainly be dead (of melanoma) and it’s very likely my daughter would be as well. Your mileage may vary!
@maggiek: I think the key intelligence is conversation with your doctor, whom you have presumably chosen because you have reason to trust. A conversation is two-way. You’re doing the right thing so far, and I’m sure that you will continue to use your own research skills and look at the real data concerning real outcomes instead of blindly accepting advice from Internet droogies. I hope you will also critically review your doctor’s recommendations; trust, but verify, is often a good policy.
@PrestonSturges: Not in the absence of other factors, which I have repeatedly stressed. You’re confusing causation and correlation. Yes, if a baby is naturally delivered exactly on its due date it is statistically far less likely that the mother is suffering from any number of problems, and it is statistically far more likely that the baby is healthy. That doesn’t mean cutting a healthy baby out before it would have naturally delivered is necessarily a good idea! I’m always surprised that is is controversial for me to say that the actual physical health of both mother and child should be the determining factors for artificially terminating pregnancy, rather than an estimated calendar date.
On the other claw, closer medical attention should be paid the longer the pregnancy continues, because the numbers you’re looking at are real - a problem pregnancy is less likely to fall on the predicted date, so doctors need to keep an eye out for existing or developing problems. No argument from me there.
Why are we arguing about pregnancy in a thread about AWESOME ADORABLE PLATYPI??? (I know this is not the correct plural form, but I don’t care)
I can’t wait to show this video to my (animal crazy) kid. He is going to want an immediate flight to Australia. And I’m inclined to give him one because HELL YEAH PLATYPUS CUDDLES. Look at its little hind legs going when it gets its belly scratched!!
Again, correlation is not causation. There’s no reason to believe that the outcome could have (or should have) been changed by inducing labor. Plenty of people you know were born two weeks past their due date. Plenty of stillbirths have been on time or premature.
But you know, @WearySky is right. Let’s not drag down the tone here… how about you and I wish Maggie and Geth and their children the best of all possible worlds, full of awesome adorable platypotopuses? We can argue about other stuff some other time.
Point to the data. In Australia it is standard to doctors to recommend induction for first time pregnancies two weeks after the due date. It seems strange they would wait this long if what you are claiming is true.
Completely anecdotal and not at all helpful.
[quote=“Medievalist, post:29, topic:12514”]
I’m an autodidact; I do my own plumbing, wiring, masonry, carpentry, and repair work[/quote]
It’s great that you’re an autodidact, I’m all for people learning skills that they can use and master. On the other hand, I’ve much more faith in the scientific peer-review process than the listening to the advice of one autodidact that contradicts the scientific peer-review process.
Oh well why not just let pregnancy continue indefinitely? Clearly, they see the need to wrap up the pregnancy at that point. Ok, so there’s risk there of continuing the pregnancy versus the negligible risk of inducing labor.
Why not be more aggressive? I don’t know, maybe because so many people are sold on the idea of having some sort of natural childbirth experience, which like everything else has to be some sort of competition. Oh, wait here’s some bullshit from Lamaze.
f your labor is induced (started artificially), it becomes a medical
event and proceeds quite differently from spontaneous labor. Unless
you or your baby has a health problem that necessitates induction, it
makes sense to wait patiently for your labor to start on its own. Even
if your due date has passed and you’re longing to hold your baby,
remember that nature has good reasons for the wait.
Of course, they’re not going to tell you what these “good reasons for the wait” might be except I guess scorn from the other people in the Lamaze class. As long as people are complaining about bullshit medical advice, there’s a steaming pile right there. .
I’m not interested in strawman debates. I never once suggested labour should be continued indefinitely, nor did I bring up pain-relief or anything else of the sort. All I asked for was some evidence to back up the claim which you made, and I quoted. Where did you get your one week figure? Does viability begin declining slowly 3 days after the due date then quickly speed up? 5 days? Etc?
If you’ll notice I’m being just as critical of the other person you’re arguing with, precisely because they to are making bold claims without providing the slightest bit of evidence to back them up.
My advise to anyone regarding pregnancy and child birth is to speak to doctors. If they’re at all worth their salt they will keep up to date with current peer-reviewed scientific data.
@PrestonSturges, @anon73192581 - there are pregnant ladies in the room. They have already stated that they are in consultation with medical professionals, and while I don’t know either of them personally, in Maggie’s case at least (meaning no disrespect to Geth) I think can say that she’s not going to blindly follow any order her doctor gives her without using her own brain first.
Not all my children are adopted. Speaking as a parent, I think it’s inconsiderate and rude for people (especially unrelated male people) to talk about what can or might go wrong with a pregnancy, and relate their own personal horror stories, and offer unsolicited advice, when there are pregnant women in the room. They are already aware that an infinite peacock tail of probability springs forth from the present moment, and I don’t believe it’s appropriate for strangers to focus on the subset of possible futures that are unpleasant.
Therefore I am not going to continue this conversation at this time; my apologies to you gentlemen. In some other venue I will be happy to defend my positions and argue until we’re all blue in the face or in total agreement, but here I’m just going to say that I wish everyone here the best (and indeed most likely) outcomes.
And also, PLATYPUS.
Well if at 2 weeks past due doctors feel there is a risk and they need to intervene, why not accept the negligible risk of inducing labor before something bad and predictable happens. This is a child we’re talking about here, and there’s going to be another 20 years of decisions where the parent can do obvious things to keep their child safe or say “Fuck it, let’s roll the dice.”
I wouldn’t have related those anecdotes except you’re here doing your usually contrarian blather that you bring to every subject. I always like the people who have seemingly unlimited time to spend on the computer talking about their kids rather than actually spending time with them. Go give your kids their raw goats milk.
Firstly, in every case it is different and thankfully ultrasound and other
tests can measure the risks. My (still new) daughter was induced a week
before her due date, at medical advice. Thankfully she is and has always been
perfectly healthy, although if we’d waited longer that might not have been the case.
However, you honestly don’t think that your line of thought hasn’t already
been considered with the two weeks being standard? i.e. there is negligible
risk until some point after 2 weeks past due in most cases.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
