caol b. said:
<<and what really kills me about this is mothers being told "your baby is
37 and 5/7 weeks" but the ultrasound machine supposedly says on it "error
factor plus or minus one week - ten days" - is this true? i haven't seen
one lately. but how could it be more accurate than that, and basing
inductions on that sort of speculation is awful.>>

personal anecdote here: I had no period between baby #1 and baby # 2 (gotta
love that advantage of bf) so the only date my doctor had to go on was an
ultrasound done at about 11 weeks. Supposedly the sooner they are done the
less the margin of error, but it still could have been a week out. So at my
due date I was 4 -5 cm dilated and my doctor was a little worried, to say
the least. "Gee, Marie, 911 is only a few minutes away" did not reassure
her. I waited two weeks past my date, despite dire predictions of worse
outcomes the longer you went past your date, and comments of how rupturing
my membranes would most likely start labour. No thanks. Margaret was born
on her own choosing 2 weeks after due date, about a 1 1/2 hour labour
(right after a LLL meeting, too bad she couldn't have come a few hours
earlier!)

I never understand the urge for inductions just because the baby isn't
following some predetermined timeframe. It just seems to open the door to
all sorts of problems.

Donna Hansen
Burnaby, British Columbia
mailto:[log in to unmask]

             ***********************************************
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