In a message dated 3/23/00 7:25:16 AM, [log in to unmask] writes:

 Referring to measuring fundal ht:

<< A lot of antenatal care
has just grown without any evidence that routine checks are clinically
useful - that is, we don't know if they reduce the level of pregnancy or
childbirth problems, or increase the safety of pregnancy and childbirth to
mother and/or baby. >>

I have been following this thread with interest, but felt all the good points
were already being made. This point, however, on which I agree with Heather,
raises the issue that I always come back to--what is the premise underlying
any particular practice, procedure or intervention? Here, it is the premise
that we need to increase the safety of pregnancy and childbirth. Increase
over and above what baseline level? Does this assume that they (preg and
birth) are inherently unsafe? As an LC, I am aware at all times that the very
reason we may be needed at all is b/c pregnancy and birth are so highly
medicalized. I try not to carry that medicalization into breastfeeding if I
can avoid it at all.
Jennifer Tow, IBCLC, CT, USA

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html