Effective
September 1, any non-medically necessary inductions and c-sections before
39 weeks are
banned. There are circumstances in which a medically necessary induction or c-section are warranted, but mothers who want to schedule because of work, or finding a babysitter for other children, are out of luck. Babies need that last week or two to fully mature and develop, and hospitals in Oregon agree!
It's interesting that there has to be an actual BAN though. Are c-sections and inductions that common? It's sad too, because so many mothers are willing to risk the health and safety of their child because they want him or her born on a Friday so the grandparents can watch the other children over the weekend.
How do you feel about this ban? If you live in Oregon, how does this affect your pregnancy and birth plan?
Recommend
Comments (18)
I do not think it is my place to judge how any other mother chooses to bring her child into the world.
I think that is AWESOME!!!
I think it is a healthy protocol. HOWEVER, this should NOT be legislated. It should be a part of the golden standard of care as defined by ACOG (American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology).
The law has no place determining medical care like this. Boo on Oregon.
Lets make this clear, though. Not all elective inductions and cesareans are being banned. Only the ones that are early. A little misleading.
Idk if my induction was totally "medically necissary" because I still waited 13 hours before they broke my water and NONE of my high risk specialty doctors were there. Next time Im hiding out until my water breaks at my feet.lol. I cant wait to tell my next doctors that Im not signing anything until it is TIME! My nurse actually said "Well we have a risk of the baby dying if they in there too long" I dont think staying a full 40 weeks will kill her! But we went in 5 days early and it was a bummer. Im no longer waiting for doctors to decide what is best for my unborn child.
@sarahsmurfette@xanga - well, you're in luck. I'm not sure where the poster got the info, but it was not a legal ban. All of the hospitals in the greater Portland metro area have signed an agreement not to induce labor early without medical indication, but there's no legal ban. I would never choose an elective induction anyway, so it doesn't affect me.
I know a mom who was induced early because her first son got to be to big for her to carry, and as a result he has had major physical problems because he literally didn't fit inside his very petite mother. I don't know if that counts because it was to prevent it from happening again, but it's an interesting concept.
"Seventeen Oregon hospitals — including all nine birthing hospitals in
the Portland area — have agreed to a “hard stop” on the elective
procedures, according to the March of Dimes’ Oregon chapter..."
"The Oregon agreement comes as the March of Dimes has been working on the
issue across the country. About six or seven other hospitals — in
California, Texas, New York and Illinois — have adopted the ban on early
elective deliveries..."
Quoted from this article on MSNBC
Okay, it may not be a legal, written in the law books ban, but an agreement. I will change the wording in the post so it's not lawmakers, but hospitals and the March of Dimes.
Thank you @ErinneC@xanga for making me pull up some more information. News stories all vary from source to source! :)
That's interesting.
My doctor told me she would induce me at 39 weeks. I just thought that was the norm. Shows how much I know...
there is always a way for the dr.s to find a way around this, Besides any dr. i have been to 5 kids later will not induce you befor 39 weeks anyway unless you or baby are at risk. The dr.'s didn't even want to insuce me when there was a medical reason to induce, even with a history of ful term still birth.
@Brilliant_Innocence@xanga - 39 weeks is the norm for dr.'s willing to induce you.. ;) they are trying to stop these 36, 37,38 week inductions, which is what ty, mckenna, and Becca where.
This is interesting, from an individual rights perspective. In general, I do not believe that legislation should bar an adult person from elective procedures. But, my view is that the law is there to protect our individual rights, and a mother's choice to induce so early could conceivably be violating the rights of the infant, who is definitely developed enough to survive outside the womb and therefore considered a person. So, on those grounds, I think that the law could be philosophically sound.
@wearywalden@xanga - @sarahsmurfette@xanga - I know that we have similar ideas about law and it's role. What do you think about the angle of an early (elective) c-section violating an infant's rights, and therefore being within the scope of government? I see from the above comments that this isn't actual legislation, but just hypothetically... I'm interested in both your opinions. I
@WaitingToShrug@xanga - My son was born about 3 weeks early naturally, he was small but was otherwise the picture of health. So I do not really think that the last couple weeks can be as vitally important as the legislation argues. I think the idea of a woman scheduling her child's birth is frankly silly and I would never do something like that myself but she has a right to decide what is best for her and her child. I mean that is what she is going to be doing for the next 18 years anyway. I don' t think the government has a right to tell you when, where and how you can have your baby and giving this up would be a step in that direction. Great questions, really got me thinking.
I'm on the fence about this. While I don't think it's really any of the government's business, I also HIGHLY disapprove of people who schedule a birthing like it was a regular doctor's visit. Let the kid come out when he's ready.
It's especially dangerous to schedule an elective induction before 40 weeks because a woman's due date can be waaaay off. I know of one woman who was induced at 39 weeks and her baby ended up being only 34 weeks developmentally. He was in the NICU for a month. My due dates are always about a week off because my cycle is of the 32-38 day variety (meaning I ovulate late, so the baby is a week younger than my "9-month-gestation period" would suggest).
I had one dr that told me to just wait for it to happen but the dr that actually delivered my child told me he would have induced me at 39 weeks. My daughter was born at 41 weeks instead because I was indcuded/
I got induced at 41 weeks and thats only bc I asked them to. I didnt wanna wait another week to do it
its about time they start doing something 90% of the time the drugs, inductions, and c sections and other interventions are unnessecery and potentially harmful, this is a major issue people need to be informed and not just nod at everything a doctor says.
I didn't realize it had been legislated...it was my understanding that the hospitals/medical groups had come to an agreement amongst themselves. I could be misinformed, though.
Scratch that, I hadn't read far enough down the comments to realize this has already been addressed. :)