Letting nature take its course is a new strategy.

I delivered a baby boy over 9 pounds, at my home, at 2 weeks post term, a relatively easy delivery, no anesthesia, and he and I were, and still are, healthy and fine, and I could sit on a hard chair within a day. No I am not kidding. The body knows how to do it, we have forgotten that. How else has the species survived all these years? Let nature be. Midwives are the best.

@ common sense: I think that the point was that by health care systems analyzing trends throughout the system (or nationally) instead of looking at just one practice - that when the numbers became more than 1-2 infants a year with adverse effects from induction - that the proof and that way of analyzing things is the "new" strategy.

I wondered how many posts it would take before some woman just HAD to tell her own birthing experience. Three! It only took three posts before we just had to hear these breathtakingly boring personal accounts. Ladies, restrain yourselves. You do not actually have to share your own stories with the world, fascinating though they may be. Actually, nobody's interested.

Actually Doc a lot of women are interested in hearing each others birth stories. I'm interested. I bet a lot of other women are interested as well. If you're not, then don't read them.

This article should emphasize that inducing labor early, even if for medical reasons, increases the risk that the mother will have to have a C-section. Inducing labor with pitocin, for example, causes frequent contractions which might not move the baby further down the birth canal.

Rather, the contractions may cause the baby to develop an irregular or slowed heartbeat (called "fetal distress") which often triggers the need for an emergency C-section.

It's important to weigh the seriousness of the mother's medical condition or other reason for induction against this increased risk, especially if the fetus is less than 39 or 38 weeks old.

ttmadison, excellent point! Natural labor works for a reason. It starts out slowly to help the baby move down AND to help expel fluid from the baby's lungs. Induced labor doesn't do the same thing. Plus, induced labor GUARANTEES an epidural! It's so painful because the contractions just SLAM you! It's not the gradual build-up that natural labor is. Epidurals is the leading cause of c-section because you have to lay in bed with you torso and legs numb, which means you do move very much, which leads to the baby getting "stuck". You need to move around during labor! Gravity works with labor. Plus, moving around helps with the pain, while lying in a bed makes it hurt worse. Home births are ideal for low risk pregnancies, since being in your own home helps psychologically for mom. It's less stressful for her, being in her own home, among her own things, being able to move around. Hospitals tend to stress people out, as a rule (since hospitals are a place for SICK PEOPLE!). Add the stress of giving birth and a hospital is less ideal. Plus, it's far safer than being in a hospital, since the germs are less dangerous (you are far less likely to pick up a staph infection or other really communicable disease.....hospitals are for SICK PEOPLE!) Really, we need to de-medicalize birth and only medicalize it WHEN NECESSARY. We need to have better training for childbirth and go back to treating it like a normal process instead of an illness.

@hollywoodunderground Being induced does not GUARANTEE an epidural. It all depends on your pain threshold.

A better, safer method: Norplant. Please. Please......

I had 3 inductions with no complications. The first was because I was a week overdue and the dr. didn't like the baby's heartbeat on the monitor when they did a non-stress test. As soon as the dr. broke my water to start the induction, I went into full-blown labor on my own with no Pitocin needed and was ready to push 2 hours later.

My 2nd child was induced at 39 weeks because my whole labor start-to-finish the first time around was only 3 hours, and we lived an hour away from the hospital. My OB felt that the risk of an unattended delivery on the way was greater than the risk of another induction. I did need Pitocin but had an uncomplicated 6 hour labor.

My 3rd child was completely an induction for convenience. I was again a week overdue and by that point, I'd had 2 successful previous inductions so the risk of it failing was very low. I didn't even get an epidural for it this time around.

Inductions aren't the horrible thing portrayed by certain natural childbirth activists. They may be overused in first-time moms, but I don't support a blanket ban on the practice.

@ holly....

Giving birth should be an experience...a wonderful one in a loving environment. The reason we can't have what you describe is because of lawsuits. Maybe one day we'll get there.

Crimsom wife: All three of your inductions were after 39 weeks...Please re-read the article, as they mention that as a 'safer' cut off. And, your three experiences have nothing to do with the rest of the world's health - although they are very important, human beings are all different.

By the way, two of your inductions were for post-dates, which is a medical indication...You need to read and think before you post something as an objective opinion.

And, no one here is supporting a blanket ban on the practice, as you say. We are asking MDs to think, use science, and do the right thing...And, I am asking you to think, read about the science, and comment on the topic.

As a former NICU planner, wholeheartedly agree. Not a place to be unless the baby is one of those 2-3 percent of high-risk pregnancies in a catchment area of 10k births. Nurse-midwives are far better than doctors when it comes to labor and delivery. Just think about it, the women is positioned for the convenience of the doctor, not the mother or child---ever hear of gravity? And these people went to medical school? Oh, that's right in the 16, 17, 18 Century's, midwives were hanged--- by good Christians---for being witches. Talk about the medical dark ages!!!!

Home birth is an option. Not for everyone, and be sure your midwife monitors regularly for potential risk factors. Low risk pregnancies don't really need medical intervention. Remember, medically attended birth has only been around for about 70 years. Our grandmothers delivered babies, their first and several more usually, without much help. How many of your ancestors died of childbirth? None of mine did that we know of, and no babies died postpartum either. Some did later of dysentery or whooping cough or diptheria, but not of being born.

Urbn --

While I certainly agree with you that home birth is is many, many cases the best way to go, and that midwives are desperately underutilized in our society, there was a halcyon time, post WWII, when babies and mothers were nurtured and careed for beyond our wildest dreams, even in hospitals. When my eldest brother was born, 1948, mom & baby spent TEN DAYS in the hospital -- not for complications -- there were none -- but to allow mother & baby the time to adjust to this new life, to get the one accustomed to breast feeding and infant care, the other a good start, and both to bond. My mother always spoke of that time as one of the happiest in her life.

When I had my own son, after 41 hours of labor, 30 of it in the hospital birthing room, trying desperately to do it the natural way, the "right" way -- although Bradley method never once mentioned back labor nor how to relax under its unique stresses -- we had a whole 24 hours to recover before the insurance company -- not the hospital -- booted us out. Welcome to the brave new world of 1979. And my daughter-in-law had a whole 12 hours to recover, in 2006, with what I would consider "good" insurance. At this rate, home birth won't be an oddity -- the insurance companies will insist that we never even show up at the hospital!

Costs are going up, AS IS infant mortality. Inducing labor at 38 or 39 weeks is BAD? YA THINK???? If we don't get a public option in this country and get paper-pushing, cost-generating insurance companies out of the equation, we'll be a third-world country by the beginning of the next decade.

"How many of your ancestors died of childbirth?"

Actually, when I recently did my genealogy, I was appalled at the number of women whose death dates coincided with the birth dates of their youngest child. That's not 100% proof they died as a result of childbirth but given that the perinatal mortality rate for U.S. women in 1900 was something like 10%, I suspect that many of them did.

orney dem - TEN DAYS IN THE HOSPITAL???? I would rather eat my own head!!!! I hated three days in the hospital after my c-section with my first and I spent ten days with my preemie second child (seven days trying to prevent his birth, three post birth at twenty-nine weeks). I WAS IN HELL! Hospitals blow! It's not your bed and those beds are SO uncomfortable! And you are poked, prodded and generally disturbed on a regular basis. Uh, no thanks. I suggest sending mom home and having NURSES MAKE HOUSE CALLS to check on mom and baby! That way everyone is in a COMFORTABLE SETTING! Especially since so many postpartum wards make you SHARE ROOMS (Gross!) and this way you don't have to share a bathroom with a stranger! Plus, you don't have to deal with your roommate's visitors (mine would NOT leave!) At home, it's your bathroom, your bed, your things........and your germs! Hospitals are notorious for being the single most unsanitary places, no matter how hard they try. Again, it's a place for SICK PEOPLE!

As for the past, infant mortality rates shot through the roof when DOCTORS took over for midwives (when they found that there was money to be made delivering babies). They would go from attending SICK AND DYING PEOPLE to delivering babies and wouldn't WASH THEIR HANDS! It caused a skyrocketing rate of "childbirth fever". That, and they started using things like chloroform (it became popular among the wealthy) and chloroform is very dangerous. They would blame the deaths on childbirth.

I won't comment on their mothering abilities, but there is one thing you are definitely right about:

Many moms REQUEST induction and will doctor shop until they can find one to do it. Sometimes it's career reasons, sometimes it's because the father is being shipped overseas (military--want to see baby before leaving), or sometimes she's just tired of being pregnant (wants baby out NOW!).

You can still go to work when you are past your projected due date. Your co-worker will be nervous, but so what? Let 'em squirm. They can call a cab if your water breaks. It's happenned before.

I had my kids at home and My oldest daughter did too> All happy, normal, peaceful deliveries. Good luck to you! You will be glad you chose a midwife!

There are all kinds of differences between now and 20 years ago. Back then kids only got a handful of vaccines (5 injections by age 2 vs. 21 today). There hasn't been any well-designed, objective research on the safety of giving so many shots so close together to such young children.

The country's leading vaccine proponent, Paul Offutt, has made millions of dollars from developing vaccines, and just happens to sit on the CDC committee that makes the recommendation for the vaccination schedule. Talk about your conflict of interest!

I'm not anti-vaccination, but I do strongly believe in a delayed, selective vaccination schedule rather than the standard one. My kids will eventually get most of the shots, just spread out more. Chicken pox we skip entirely, and the Hepatitis B & HPV ones my kids can decide as adults if they believe their behavior puts them at risk for contracting those diseases.

I would like to see the coralation between induction and autism.

I wonder the same thing! Think about all those studies they did YEARS after when women took certain drugs while pregnant and their babies were born without limbs and whatever other severe health issues - and found that it was the drugs they took that did it!

I bet that doing a study like this will severely rock the boat and society really isn't ready for that kind of study. And, inductions help line the coffers of medical groups and why would they want to do away with a for sure money-maker/safety-net against lawsuits? But first, a scientist has to get the hypothesis that induction could be linked to autism, as well as grants to fund the research and that could take years.

The difference between the pain of labor contractions and the pain during surgery is that the former are intermittent while the latter is continuous. And not to mention that by the time most women really are in major pain during labor, they are in "transition" and nearing the end of it. I didn't wise up to that fact until my 3rd pregnancy.

Again, labor is an individual proposition and so is its pain. What is pain to one might not be to another. Crimson Wife: You are an expert on your pain, your labor, and your body. Your blanket statements about what is pain are correct but only for you.

Crimson Wife: So glad you are not a legislator (I hope you're not) because you seem to think that everyone is exactly like you! And, we are all different.

Go work on a Labor and Delivery Unit, then report back to me what you learned.

In my 18 years of full-time, clinical OB practice, I have NEVER met two labors that are the same and reports of pain are different as well. Crimson Wife, I invite you to join me for a few births and I look forward to the change in your comments.

Three births for you were similar, but they are all yours, only yours, and exclusively your experience. And, I am so glad they were so good.