# Reasons to refuse a hep-lock?



## MyLittleWarrior (Dec 19, 2006)

I will be delivering at a University Hospital in about 6 weeks. Being a teaching hospital with lots of fancy-shmancy equipment, this hospital has a rebutation of being a little intervention happy (more so than your avarge hospital). I really don't have a choice on where to deliver, this is the only place my insurance will cover, and we can't afford anything else. While talking to my doula, who has worked with my OB and this hospital extensively, she mentioned that hospital policy is to always have an IV, and that they will do just a hep-lock if you insist, but arn't very happy about it. I was hoping to avoid haveing even a hep-lock. My doula is terrific and will back me up 100% with what ever I decide, but has warned me that this issue will be a fight from the get go. So my question: is it really that important to refuse a hep-lock? Is this something that I should put my foot down about, or is this a place that for the sake of a peaceful birth experience and nurses that don't hate me I should just let go?


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

*I* would put my foot down. But I would not birth in a hospital unless it was an emergency.

-Angela


----------



## Nan'sMom (May 23, 2005)

Not sure what I'd do...but I'm a homebirther as well. I think that I'd refuse though, since it makes it easier for them to give you drugs quickly and without your consent. Also make sure your doula says no residents...she can infer you have a history that makes you uncomfortable around people in this situation...or at least men.

Oh, and I think you have to get past worrying about people hating you. If they do, so what?


----------



## Goatriffic (Jul 9, 2002)

With my planned hospital VBAC I consented to a heplock because I decided it wasn't worth fighting over. It wasn't going to interfere with me moving around and was minimally invasive. I was going to fight them on lots of other things like continuous monitoring and eye drops so I figured I'd let them win one to make them feel better. I did have a decent experience and a successful VBAC but I have since gone on to have a wonderful homebirth and will never birth in a hospital again unless there was an emergency. At this point in my life I refuse to compromise when I know I have other options like homebirth.


----------



## LemonPie (Sep 18, 2006)

Personally, I would refuse it. To me it's all part of that mentality that sees you as a "pre-surgical" patient the minute you walk into the hospital in labor. They want you to have IV access and refuse you food and liquids "in case" you have to have a c-section. Why start out with the attitude that this _might_ end in surgery? It puts the laboring woman at a disadvantage from the start, IMO.
Jen


----------



## Nettie (May 26, 2005)

Like others have said, having one makes it that much easier for them to give you an IV if they decide there's the slightest "problem". I would refuse it and stand firm.

I birthed in a hospital and while they did try to talk me into it, my midwife told them she didn't think I'd need it. She and one of the nurses said that if there was a real emergency, an IV could be placed very quickly.


----------



## MyLittleWarrior (Dec 19, 2006)

All of this is kind of where I'm coming from. I guess I'm having more trouble convincing DH that it's important not to get a hep-lock. His thoughts are that it would be less stressfull to just let them place it, and then know that they would have to get past a 230lb football player of a DH to attach anything to it. He's all for the "no IV, non medicated, leave me the heck alone and let me have my baby" approach, but doesn't see the need to fight every battle tooth and nail. Again, he will support me with what ever I decide, but I want to make sure I'm picking the battles that are truely important.


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

IMO, if you MUST birth in a hospital, EVERY SINGLE fight is important. Give them an inch, they'll take a mile.

Give them nothing. Let them know this is your birth and you will have things your way.

It will be a fight.

That's why I don't plan to birth in hospitals. I don't want to have to fight in labor.

-Angela


----------



## **guest** (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alegna* 
*I* would put my foot down. But I would not birth in a hospital unless it was an emergency.

-Angela

gosh, yes. expecially not in a teaching, intervention happy hospital. this must be so stressful to you (OP)


----------



## thebarkingbird (Dec 2, 2005)

Quote:

IMO, if you MUST birth in a hospital, EVERY SINGLE fight is important. Give them an inch, they'll take a mile.










i gave birth to my 1st in a university hospital. having a hep loc just makes it so much easier for them to put the IV in and do you really want to have yourself or your DH fighting them in the middle of what might be a stressful situation? labor is totally natural and normal but it can require your full attention once things get rolling. i'd want to have the confrontation up front while my body was still going easy. also, maybe just offer to sign an AMA form if they push it. most people don't know what those are and it sends the message that you know your rights and that you've decided to take the **gasp** risk of birthing w/o needles in you unless you're having some kind of dire emergency.

remind your DH that he _could_ stop them putting IV's in while you're in the middle of active labor but would he really want to be talking to _them_ just then?


----------



## Veritaserum (Apr 24, 2004)

I'd refuse it because I hate needles in my hands or wrists or arms or wherever they'd want to put it. No thanks! There's a risk of infection whenever you break the skin and as others have mentioned it's easier to put drugs into you if you have that open vein--which is almost always not a good thing.







:


----------



## Nan'sMom (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MyLittleWarrior* 
All of this is kind of where I'm coming from. I guess I'm having more trouble convincing DH that it's important not to get a hep-lock. His thoughts are that it would be less stressfull to just let them place it, and then know that they would have to get past a 230lb football player of a DH to attach anything to it. He's all for the "no IV, non medicated, leave me the heck alone and let me have my baby" approach, but doesn't see the need to fight every battle tooth and nail. Again, he will support me with what ever I decide, but I want to make sure I'm picking the battles that are truely important.

Things can happen really fast. Really really fast. And your husband might not react immediately. And they might misrepresent what is to go into an i.v. And you may be in no state to fight it yourself. I'd try to make him read and see the importance of fighting battles tooth and nail. Coach him and your doula on your birth plan and have them ready to fight on any and all deviations. It is your birth, no one should be trying to please some stranger by letting them do anything to you.

Most people are intimidated by medical personnel. Even my dh at my HB didn't stick up for me. It was littler things, like use of doptone when we had agreed on fetoscope, but still, it can be hard and IMO, support people have to go in with battle gear on.

Best of luck with everything and happy birthing vibes to you!


----------



## Nan'sMom (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MyLittleWarrior* 
I really don't have a choice on where to deliver, this is the only place my insurance will cover, and we can't afford anything else.

Have you asked HB midwives? Some will accept reduced fees or barters in cases of financial need. It may be worth asking!


----------



## stefka (May 27, 2005)

I refused it when DS was born and plan to do so again. The resident and the attending physician gave me a hard time about it, but ultimately couldn't put it in without my consent. I refused it partly because I'm terrified of needles and partly because it seemed like the first step toward enabling interventions that might not be needed. I actually ended up with an IV due to various complications. It took just a few seconds to get the needle in, so I'm even more convinced that a hep-lock would VERY RARELY matter in a life or death situation. When I was pregnant and making this decision, I couldn't get anyone to give me actual stats on how a hep-lock resulted in more positive outcomes, just the standard, "if there's an emergency, it saves time."

Oh, and I wouldn't make any choice for fear of the staff hating you. I'm all for being non-combative, and stating your decision in a way that doesn't imply that those caring for you are incompetent or uncaring, but you can be firm and friendly at the same time. If anyone gives you the impression that this will result in them providing less positive care, then ask that someone else be assigned to you. It's your right and responsibility to be the ultimate decision-maker on issues related to your health and well-being.

Good luck!


----------



## wednesday (Apr 26, 2004)

Absolutely not. Look, you don't want the hep-lock, right? I mean it's not like they're gonna somehow give you "credit" for not fighting that particular thing. They're not gonna be like, "We're not going to push for AROM because you were so cool about accepting the hep-lock." I think you have to start out firm with things you don't want because the farther along you are in labor the harder it's going to be to fight interventions...it's better if they already think you'll be difficult to persuade to accept pitocin, and you don't even have the hep-lock in, you have more of a position of strength then to just say you don't want to be augmented. Etc.

Good luck to you!


----------



## **guest** (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Nan'sMom* 
Things can happen really fast. Really really fast. And your husband might not react immediately.

i agree with this so much. there are some procedures that many drs won't even ask your consent for, because they are so "routine", and no one thinks twice. and everything happens very very fast. when i was 40 w pregnant with DD, my ob, who was before that day "hands off, lets allow nature take its course etc", did a vaginal exam and stripped my membranes. without asking. well, what she asked was "are you ready to have this baby?" well, doh, at 40 weeks of course i was. what i was supposed to say, that i wasn't? my husband was right there.

well, later she said she didn't really strip, but "swiped" and true, i didn't go into labour for a week, and we did write a letter and complained, and of all things considered that was a relatively minor thing, but the point is--they often don't ask, simply because they don't have experiences of patients not agreeing or challenging them, and things happen really fast.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

My hep-lock really hurt going in............they put it in a vein in my hand.


----------



## 4C-mom (Jul 1, 2007)

you shouldn't have to fight. Just say "no thank you". they can't hold you down and make you get it.

I had just a heplock and didn't find it bothersome at all.


----------



## kittie313 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *wednesday* 
Absolutely not. Look, you don't want the hep-lock, right? I mean it's not like they're gonna somehow give you "credit" for not fighting that particular thing. They're not gonna be like, "We're not going to push for AROM because you were so cool about accepting the hep-lock." I think you have to start out firm with things you don't want because the farther along you are in labor the harder it's going to be to fight interventions...it's better if they already think you'll be difficult to persuade to accept pitocin, and you don't even have the hep-lock in, you have more of a position of strength then to just say you don't want to be augmented. Etc.

Good luck to you!

Boy if that ain't the truth about late in labor. My last, I went totally intervention-free for most of my labor at the hospital, only getting an IV for the GBS abx (I agree with them for my own reasons and will have them again) but when I stalled out for more than 2 hours at 8cm the OB suggested AROM and pit, and I was tired after an overnight labor with little rest so I just said "lets get this over with" and then ended up with narcotics for the contractions, meconium aspiration for my baby, a vacuum-assisted delivery, and baby stuck at the shoulders.







: I'm at my EDD today with #4 and plan on the IV abx again but via hep-lock instead, and I am nervous that may happen again although I have a feeling I won't labor overnight in a hospital this time, although I am delivering there................


----------



## **guest** (Jun 25, 2004)

DH reminded me of an anekdot we read, but we can't remember where, so maybe someone here knows the source. it basically went like this.

a paramedic husband and his pregnant wife were touring their hospital, and the issue of a mandatory hep lock / IV came up. their reason was--"in case of an emergency it is already in place".

the husband said: "i can insert an IV at night, under pouring rain, under an overturned vehicle, into a severely injured patient. you are telling me you won't be able to insert an IV into my healthy wife in this brightly lit room? this worries me."


----------



## blissful_maia (Feb 17, 2005)

You absolutely don't need a hep lock in a normal, healthy labor with no reason to suspect that something could possibly go wrong.

I would say this: "I don't want a hep lock in my arm/hand". If they ask you why, just say you refuse to submit to their pathologization of birth, that your birth is going to be just absolutely normal, thank you very much.

One of my favorite sayings is:

*Normal birth is not a retroactive diagnosis.*


----------



## jocelyndale (Aug 28, 2006)

We had a co-pay based on a percentage of the fees.

It was much easier to dispute a whole heckuva lotta "IV therapy" fees on the itemized bill when my husband informed Billing that I'd not had so much as a single saline lock placed. Several hundred dollars came right off the bill after they did their investigation into my records.

The hospital where I delivered did not push the IV issue--it was never brought up. (Kinda surprising given that it was an automatic charge.) Had it been, I'd have refused. My body reacts to saline locks with redness, pain, swelling, burning, itching. I've been told it's due to high IgE or histamine or something. I didn't want the distraction, nor the easy-entry pathway toward more intervention.


----------



## hipmummy (May 25, 2007)

I kind of wish I had gotten a hep lock. I birthed at a birth Center, but ended up throwing up for 12 of my 18 hours of labor. The midwifes don't do them which is great but by 17 hours of labour I need one. I was allowed to eat and drink what I wanted but I couldn't hold anything down. As a doula I don't encourager them and I also tell my clients to tell their OB 's that they rae terrified of needles and they do not want to even hear mention of one. It usually works.


----------



## KarenEMT (Aug 10, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annabanana* 
DH reminded me of an anekdot we read, but we can't remember where, so maybe someone here knows the source. it basically went like this.

a paramedic husband and his pregnant wife were touring their hospital, and the issue of a mandatory hep lock / IV came up. their reason was--"in case of an emergency it is already in place".

the husband said: "i can insert an IV at night, under pouring rain, under an overturned vehicle, into a severely injured patient. you are telling me you won't be able to insert an IV into my healthy wife in this brightly lit room? this worries me."

My DH said something similar to this to the nurses when I didn't want an IV with the labor/delivery of DS#2 - that if they couldn't get the IV quickly in an emergency, he surely could. He also was very easy to convince into a homebirth for #3 despite his interventionist type of mentality as a medic


----------



## blissful_maia (Feb 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipmummy* 
I kind of wish I had gotten a hep lock. I birthed at a birth Center, but ended up throwing up for 12 of my 18 hours of labor. The midwifes don't do them which is great but by 17 hours of labour I need one. I was allowed to eat and drink what I wanted but I couldn't hold anything down. As a doula I don't encourager them and I also tell my clients to tell their OB 's that they rae terrified of needles and they do not want to even hear mention of one. It usually works.

But this isn't an emergency. If you were severely dehydrated, you could have had an IV placed. This isn't the idea behind routine heparin locks.


----------



## wannabe (Jul 4, 2005)

I would refuse it because I despise needles, especially IVs, and it definitely makes me not want to move that arm. If you have it in the back of your hand it's even worse. They're just foul things. Have you had an IV before?

If you have to have one, make them use a local fisrt and put it in your wrist, not your hand. They're still nasty creepy things, though.


----------



## BoringTales (Aug 1, 2006)

Personally I wouldn't mind JUST having a hep-lock. Of course, with my last two I had full IV's, so a hep-lock would be a bonus compared to that!


----------



## Nicole77 (Oct 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2Bugs* 
To me it's all part of that mentality that sees you as a "pre-surgical" patient the minute you walk into the hospital in labor. They want you to have IV access and refuse you food and liquids "in case" you have to have a c-section. Why start out with the attitude that this _might_ end in surgery? It puts the laboring woman at a disadvantage from the start, IMO.
Jen

That is exactly how I feel about it. Though I am another who would never again birth in a hospital, barring an emergency.


----------



## mommysusie (Oct 19, 2006)

You know, I just had a totally different experience delivering this time around. The other times I delivered I had a heplock in the entire time I was in the hosp, but this time, even though I had a csection, I was completely needle free by the night.


----------



## DoomaYula (Aug 22, 2006)

Just remember that ANY needle poke is an opportunity for hospital germs to get in there, and hospitals are dirty and gross and full of germs. Women have gotten staph, bacterial meningitis, even lost limbs and died from hospital infections.

The theory behind hep-locks are "just in case." However, by that standard we should ALL have hep-locks 24/7 "just in case" I get plowed down while walking to the mail box.


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

I had one in my last labour (home birth) because I had a pph with my first and was concerned about a repeat. It sucked, and I will never do it again.


----------



## mysticmomma (Feb 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annabanana* 
"i can insert an IV at night, under pouring rain, under an overturned vehicle, into a severely injured patient. you are telling me you won't be able to insert an IV into my healthy wife in this brightly lit room? this worries me."


----------



## Novella (Nov 8, 2006)

I would refuse.

You've gotten lots of good perspectives on this already, many of which I agree with whole-heartedly. All of my kids have been born in hospital. I had a hep lock for the first only. After that, I decided the pain in my wrist was not worth the suspicious "just in case".

Yes: pain in my wrist. Even today (6.5-years-later) I very much remember how much the tip of that huge needle hurt inside my wrist (well, nevermind, I could feel the whole length of it and it was painful). I know some are thinking: Huh? She's in advanced labour in an fairly-unmedicated childbirth and the pain she's talking about is from the _needle_ in her wrist?!" But yes, surely!

I was fairly crushing my husband's hand and twisting his wrist in mine (learned to relax properly in later births, but that's another story). The hep-loc was extremely aggravating throughout this. Not only did this pain last throughout transition and pushing, but it was sore for about 4-5 days after the needle was removed and it felt like I had a callous on the inside of my wrist where the needle tip had been.


----------



## ASusan (Jun 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MyLittleWarrior* 
All of this is kind of where I'm coming from. I guess I'm having more trouble convincing DH that it's important not to get a hep-lock. His thoughts are that it would be less stressfull to just let them place it, and then know that they would have to get past a 230lb football player of a DH to attach anything to it. He's all for the "no IV, non medicated, leave me the heck alone and let me have my baby" approach, but doesn't see the need to fight every battle tooth and nail. Again, he will support me with what ever I decide, but I want to make sure I'm picking the battles that are truely important.

This is EXACTLY where I am (even the football-style DH, but my DH has a few lbs on yours, and he never played football for medical reasons). DH and I had a huge "discussion" yesterday about picking battles and putting on the birth plan ONLY what is MOST important. My struggle is that it is ALL important, because everything is linked to everything else. E.g., birth position is linked to episiotomy. He thinks I should leave birth position off the list...
I have already cut down the list A LOT.

A saline lock is something I gave in on. I refuse to have an iv infusion of fluids, but I will do a saline lock. My birth plan stipulates that it is to be used only if I become dehydrated.


----------



## sweettalker (Jul 19, 2007)

I would refuse too. A skilled nurse or other practitioner can insert an IV very quickly. As far as I know, very few emergencies during labor & delivery happen without any lead-up/advanced warning. So they can always insert an IV if it looks like things are going badly.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Nan'sMom* 
since it makes it easier for them to give you drugs quickly *and without your consent.*

I think getting a drug *without your consent* is an unlikely occurrence in a hospital. And if anyone ever does, you can sue them within an inch of their lives.


----------



## Baby Hopes (Jul 15, 2004)

Doctors and nurses do things all the time without getting informed consent. Most of the time it's just standard routine for them. Refusing the hep-lock at least puts you in a position of stopping some of that intervention before it begins.

Even a 230 lb football player is going to be a puddle of mush when the nurse declares "_you're wife is dehydrated, we need to get fluids in her now or the baby will be in distress."_

Without the heplock, you could insist on them bringing in some juice or water. But with the heplock already in place you've already lost some ground and the argument becomes more difficult.

So the saline starts, and then mom is now attatched to a machine. Her movements are further restricted. She becomes even more uncomfortable. The nurses make a big deal about her walking around with the drip going and then the monitoring belts come out to "_check on baby and make sure that everything is still fine_."

IMO, it's not worth it.


----------



## khaoskat (May 11, 2006)

Also, don't forget that if you go in, in the middle of the night, everyone is tired, and if your DH may fall asleep while you are stillin early labor...guess what, how is he going to intervene and prevent something you both don't want.

It happened to me....while we are 3/4 asleep, they came in and broke my water....they didn't even bother to wake either of us really.

Hence, I would not consent to a hep lock. Having that plastic tube/needle in your wrist/hand hurts like heck, and sometimes makes it difficult to move your hand or wrist because it can hit into the bone and cause pain.

Melissa S.


----------



## karlugato (Sep 9, 2006)

With my last baby, I had the hep lock and didn't really have any problems until after I birthed my baby. She and I were cuddling and very happy and I didn't notice that the nurse put in pitocin. I had asked what she had done and she told me she gave me pitocin to help stop the bleeding. They kept insisting that they give me pitocin throughout labor and I always refused. I was pretty aggravated with that nurse and had very bad afterpains but she was my third baby so I wasn't sure if it was because of the pitocin or just because that's what happens after you have that many.


----------



## bryonyvaughn (May 4, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sweettalker* 
...I think getting a drug *without your consent* is an unlikely occurrence in a hospital. And if anyone ever does, you can sue them within an inch of their lives.

Gee, I wish I lived in your world.

It happened to my daughter 1 1/2 weeks ago. All four medical professionals in the room at the time are lying to cover their individual and collective asses. Entirely too typical.

~BV


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sweettalker* 
I think getting a drug *without your consent* is an unlikely occurrence in a hospital. And if anyone ever does, you can sue them within an inch of their lives.

Nope. It's not unlikely NOR is it a win-able suit.

It's standard of care to give pitocin. So they do. Even without consent.

-Angela


----------



## Veritaserum (Apr 24, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sweettalker* 
I think getting a drug *without your consent* is an unlikely occurrence in a hospital. And if anyone ever does, you can sue them within an inch of their lives.

Well, the thing is, when a woman is admitted they have her sign a blanket consent form which basically says they can do anything they feel is "medically necessary" without even talking to her first. So they have consent already.

That is, unless, the woman doctors the form and writes "subject to my informed consent at the time" prior to signing. Or, if the nurse throws a hissy and wants her to sign the form "as is" the woman can do that and then after getting checked in she can hand over another paper saying "I hereby withdraw my consent unless I explicitly give my informed consent at the time a medical procedure is offered." They can't kick her out so they'll just have to deal.









I love that quote about the paramedic and IV.


----------



## SublimeBirthGirl (Sep 9, 2005)

THeoretically, if I were to go back to a hospital for a birth (IOW, if someone was holding a gun to my head







) I would refuse a hep lock. I've attended more than one birth where the mother said the hep lock was worse than the labor, it was annoying, painful, and ruined their concentration. Not to mention that hospitals are crawling with bacteria and you've just opened yet another way for them to crawl right in.

The question, IMO, is why accept one?


----------



## Jenlaana (Oct 28, 2005)

12 years ago I had a cesarean that changed my views on birth forever. It was a horrible and very demeaning experience for me.

Of every thing that happened in the hospital, the most painful was getting the heplock 12 hours prior to my cesarean...it was so painful that when I was having the surgery, the anesthesiologist was talking to me while the doctors were doing the cesarean and he asked me how he did w/ the spinal and I remarked on how it was nothing compared to the IV line I had been given in my hand. The only reason I remember the whole conversation as it was, is because the nurse who did the IV was IN the room, and the doctors made a comment to her about needing to take some lessons (in a joking way). She was very embarassed by it, but it was the gods honest truth. (and I hadnt realized she was there because she was down at the other end of the room, and with the curtain in the way, I couldn't see anything other than the anesthesiologist and my son's father, who were both right next to my head.


----------



## Unoppressed MAMA Q (Jun 13, 2004)

Hep lock?

Ew.

Seems like a leash on your power, or soul, of sorts, to me...

No thanks!


----------



## gretasmommy (Aug 11, 2002)

I trust my MW, and had a terrific birthing experience with G. I told her that I didn't want a heplock, nor any other interventions/medications, unless she felt at any point like I was endangering my health or the health of our baby. She was terrific about it. And I have no factors that would make quick insertion of an IV a problem at all.

This had nothing to do with needles, and everything to do with unnecessary interventions. In fact, I remember them attempting to draw labs from my arm while in active labor - and I couldn't hold my arm straight! I was too busy pushing (I arrived ready to push) and using my arms to pull on the rail. They came back later to draw them, and I helped the inexperienced tech do ti! We banked cord blood, so it had to be done, even though G was laready born and all was well.


----------



## sweettalker (Jul 19, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alegna* 
Nope. It's not unlikely NOR is it a win-able suit.

It's standard of care to give pitocin. So they do. Even without consent.

-Angela

A standard of care where? I wasn't given pitocin during my hospital births and I've assisted in probably 35-40 hospital births now, in 2 different states and 4 different hospitals, without pitocin being given without consent. Standard of care where?

And un-winnable? You know this for a fact? How?


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sweettalker* 
A standard of care where? I wasn't given pitocin during my hospital births and I've assisted in probably 35-40 hospital births now, in 2 different states and 4 different hospitals, without pitocin being given without consent. Standard of care where?

And un-winnable? You know this for a fact? How?

Standard of care to be given after delivery at every hospital around here. Very common in labor here as well.

Yeah. Un-winnable. I'd bet money on it.

-Angela


----------



## khaoskat (May 11, 2006)

It is very routine in a lot of hospitals to give a women a shot of pitocin immediately after delivery. A lot of times, you don't even realize what they are doing until after they have done because you feel the pin prick in your arm. They do this a lot in non-nursing mothers, or mother's who are not able to put the baby to breast immediately after birth.

The reason being is that it helps increase your contractions to expell anything remaining in the uterus, which will stop your bleeding faster.

And yes, it would be very difficult to win a lawsuit, because 1) You have to show the harm done by giving you pitocin; and 2) that giving you pitocin violated the Standard of Care in your community. A med mal case is not easy to win...because all the OB has to do is prove that they followed the acceptable standard of care w/in the community.

If you go the route of personal injury, you have to show what harm came from being given a commonly "prescribed" drug against your wishes...basically you have to show you and/or your baby received a bodily injury as a result of the injection of pitocin. Again, very difficult to prove, and even if you could, unless it was a very serious injury, you wouldn't get much if anything from the lawsuit.


----------



## mamatoElias (Aug 2, 2006)

I had a hep lock during my 4-month-old's birth. It had been a planned homebirth, but midwives here can't attend births after 42 weeks. I figured I'd be as cooperative as possible, thinking that if I didn't fight every little thing, the hospital staff would be considerate in return (and they were soooo good to my family and really listened to the things that were important to us, so maybe it worked). However, I'd probably refuse it if I were to birth in the hospital again. They ran fluids when my son's heart rate dropped down to the sixties (fine with me). But then after he was born they ran pitocin even though I was bleeding very little. I was shaking pretty bad after his birth and I commented that I'd done the same thing after my first son's birth (freestanding birth center- no IV). Then someone said it might be cause by the pit. I was like, "huh? What pitocin?" I may have been in labor, but at no point in time was I too out of it to consent. It wasn't a huge issue for me, but I felt they should've asked. And the IV itself was mildly uncomfortable.

I guess you just have to decide how big of a deal it is to you. Is it really worth putting up a fight about or do you have more important things to worry about? You are after all birthing at a hospital and IMO there are certain things that go along with that. I was just glad to have an unmedicated vag delivery with no episiotomy and to have my sweet healthy baby right on my belly- they didn't take him from me for even a moment. The rest wasn't so important to me. (Not trying to say it shouldn't be to you, though. Do whatever you need to do to feel good about your little one's birth!)


----------



## LemonPie (Sep 18, 2006)

Absence of a heplock won't necessarily prevent administration of pitocin AFTER the birth . . . I didn't have a heplock for last delivery (hospital NCB) and I was given an IM shot of pit after my daughter was born. Now, in all fairness to the staff at that particular hospital, they did give me a good chance to try to get my baby latched first. When she wouldn't latch (it was the beginning of a long 10 days of breastfeeding issues) I went ahead and let them give the shot.

That being said, it's a whole lot easier for them to just hang something on your IV pole without noticing than it is for them to give you an IM injection. But I've read stories where women were suddenly surprised to find themselves being given an IM shot right after birth without it ever once being discussed with them first.

Jen


----------



## wednesday (Apr 26, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2Bugs* 
That being said, it's a whole lot easier for them to just hang something on your IV pole without noticing than it is for them to give you an IM injection. But I've read stories where women were suddenly surprised to find themselves being given an IM shot right after birth without it ever once being discussed with them first.

That happened to me, at a freestanding birth center no less. They were like, "This is to help get the placenta out" as I got the injection. I didn't even know what it was until I got online later. Then I requested my records and yeah, about 15 minutes after the birth I received pitocin IM. I was pretty shocked that I was given a drug in that setting without my informed consent, but, well, I had other things to focus on by then and just let it go.


----------



## felix23 (Nov 7, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alegna* 
Standard of care to be given after delivery at every hospital around here. Very common in labor here as well.

Yeah. Un-winnable. I'd bet money on it.

-Angela

It's not common at the hospital here either. I've known plenty of women who have given birth at my hospital intevention free, one just last week. They asked her when she arrived if she wanted anything for pain, she said no, they never bothered her again. It may be common in your area, but it most certainly isn't the norm everywhere.


----------



## mysticmomma (Feb 8, 2005)

Read this. All the reason you'll ever need.

http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/gettingToYes.html


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *felix23* 
It may be common in your area, but it most certainly isn't the norm everywhere.

I realize it isn't the norm everywhere. However it IS very, very common in US hospitals.

I just happen to live in the middle of a medical mecca....

-Angela


----------



## Novella (Nov 8, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alegna* 
I realize it isn't the norm everywhere. However it IS very, very common in US hospitals.

I just happen to live in the middle of a medical mecca....

-Angela

I know this pitocin thing is a bit of a side-topic to the thread, but Angela is right.

From my knowledge of Canadian hospitals, it is "the norm". In fact, when my sister-in-law refused it, the nurse snapped "you have to, it's the law!" (It surely isn't and my stunned sister-in-law submitted at that point. She was later angry that the doctor didn't speak up in her defense. My SIL confronted the nurse about it. The nurse admitted she hadn't told the truth. Nice, eh?)

Pitocin to facilitate the delivery of the placenta is also a standard of care _recommended_ by the WHO. That further speaks to its widespread use. The WHO recommends it in consideration that in many developing countries, birthing facilities are ill-equipped to deal with post-partum hemmorhage. Of course, doctors in North America aren't too quick to point out that _that_ is the reason behind the recommendation. They are more likely to just tell you the WHO recommends it (if you dare to question/refuse the pit).


----------



## mysticmomma (Feb 8, 2005)

I was lucky enough to catch my nurse going for my iv following delivery. I was nursing bella, and saw her uncap a syringe and asked, "what's that?", she said, "just a little pitocin... you're losing a lot of blood." I looked at my mw and she said, you're ok... you don't need it... so I said, " no thanks, i don't give my informed consent to any pitocin." the nurse huffed something under her breath about me falling out from all the blood loss, but went away.


----------



## felix23 (Nov 7, 2006)

I guess I am really lucky I that where I live the hospital supports women in natural birth. The hospital birth place mission statement even states that birth is a unique, individual, and natural process and that they are there to support the mom and family. (That's not a quote, it's just what I can remember from reading it a million times while dd was in the NICU.) Even over 30 years ago when my mom gave birth she was able to do it intervention free at this hospital. At that time my mom was the only mom in the hospital that wanted to breasfeed. She said that the nurses were shocked, but didn't really bother her about it.


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *felix23* 
I guess I am really lucky I that where I live the hospital supports women in natural birth. The hospital birth place mission statement even states that birth is a unique, individual, and natural process and that they are there to support the mom and family. (That's not a quote, it's just what I can remember from reading it a million times while dd was in the NICU.) Even over 30 years ago when my mom gave birth she was able to do it intervention free at this hospital. At that time my mom was the only mom in the hospital that wanted to breasfeed. She said that the nurses were shocked, but didn't really bother her about it.











You are lucky. Incredibly lucky. There is not a hospital within a hundred miles of here like that.

-Angela


----------



## Nannysbaby (Apr 12, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annabanana* 
the husband said: "i can insert an IV at night, under pouring rain, under an overturned vehicle, into a severely injured patient. you are telling me you won't be able to insert an IV into my healthy wife in this brightly lit room? this worries me."









My SIL is an EMT and he would say that very thing! I love it!

When my DD checked in to labor and delivery for the birth of her first child she was determined not to have any interventions. Therefore, when they were admitting her and passing page after page of papers for her to sign, she asked very calmly, between contractions, what is this for? Her husband read the papers and she signed accordingly. I thought it was interesting that you actually have to sign, in advance, for an IV and and epidurals, among other things. She simply stated " I will not be needing that" and did not sign. I was like, "that's my girl!" It did not seem to set up an adversarial realtionship with her nurses. Hopefully, it wont for you either, especially if your DH is right there agreeing with you.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *felix23* 
Even over 30 years ago when my mom gave birth she was able to do it intervention free at this hospital. At that time my mom was the only mom in the hospital that wanted to breasfeed. She said that the nurses were shocked, but didn't really bother her about it.

I remember my mom telling me how she was the only mother that wanted to breastfeed too. She said it was like pulling teeth to get the nurses to let her have her baby! My mom was one tough cookie though and she always slyly grinned when she talked about that experience. BTW, that was in 1960. She also said she stayed in the hospital for 10 days! What is up with that? She had vaginal births! Amazing...


----------



## g&a (Dec 15, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mysticmomma* 
Read this. All the reason you'll ever need.

http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/gettingToYes.html

Thanks for the link to the article. That was fantastic.

g.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

I transferred from a FSBC to a hospital with #1 (long story) for Pitocin. At that point I had been in hard labor for 20+ hours and was exhausted, emotional, and probably dehydrated. I tell you what: they DID have a devil of a time getting that IV in. Actually, they did an extremely crappy job, to the extent that I actually screamed...and I hadn't screamed yet during the long posterior labor. The IV also infiltrated and my hand and arm were disgustingly bruised for at least a week afterwards. I assume the nurse hit a nerve, because I have tingling/numbness in a certain area of my arm and wrist to this day.

I don't know if this happened because it actually is hard to get an IV into a laboring woman--has anyone else heard this?-- or because hospital staff are incompetent. My MW was visibly pissed at the nurse.

Anyway, I did find the IV very annoying. I had IV abx during the labor at the birth center and we did not do a lock--they reinserted every time. I really think that was better, having since had the lock.


----------



## wednesday (Apr 26, 2004)

Getting sort of OT here, but it's really quite absurd that it's NOT the standard of care to give a novocaine injection before placing an IV. I've had it both ways (with and without novocaine) and it makes a tremendous difference. The novocaine shot is the tiniest little pinch, then you barely feel the IV business being set up. But I've had medical people try to tell me that getting novocaine makes it two jabs instead of one and it's beter to just get it over with







: Easy for them to say.

My SIL is a nurse-practitioner who did her master's thesis on pain management and she firmly agrees that too little is done to help people with the pain of medical procedures because the personnel don't want to take the time/bother.


----------



## Veritaserum (Apr 24, 2004)

WRT to IVs in an emergency and difficulty inserting, etc., the anesthesiologist is quite good at doing that sort of thing. So if the nurses can't do it or are doing a bad job, the mom/her partner can request someone from anesthesiology to do it.


----------



## SleeplessMommy (Jul 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A* 
My hep-lock really hurt going in............they put it in a vein in my hand.

If you get an IV, ask for it "above the wrist" ... much more comfortable I have heard. In the hand hurt for a week afterwards, worse than any other part of me.







:


----------



## ShadowMoon (Oct 18, 2006)

I birthed in a hospital and also had a doula that backed me up 100%. I wanted a completely natural birth...absolutely no interventions. She also told me that the IV would be a big fight but if I absolutely didn't want it I she would help me refuse. Well it turns out that it wasn't a big fight, my OB told the nurse I didn't want one as soon as I went into the room and that was that. Stick to your guns...get what you want....you'll be more comfortable with yourself and will show the hospital staff that you're not afraid to stick up for yourself. Peace~


----------



## bryonyvaughn (May 4, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
...Actually, they did an extremely crappy job, to the extent that I actually screamed...and I hadn't screamed yet during the long posterior labor. The IV also infiltrated and my hand and arm were disgustingly bruised for at least a week afterwards. I assume the nurse hit a nerve, because I have tingling/numbness in a certain area of my arm and wrist to this day.

You bet they did a crappy job!







:

You can try homeopathic _Hypericum_ for the nerve damage. Some call it "the Arnica of the nerves." It can have tingling, shooting, and throbbing pains improved for elevating the affected part. It's potentized St. John's Wort.

Think of slicing the end of your thumb [a nerve rich area] and though the cut heals nicely for days after it intermittently throbs until you stick your head above your shoulder like you're hitchhiking. That's a classic _Hypericum_ case.

Quote:

I don't know if this happened because it actually is hard to get an IV into a laboring woman--has anyone else heard this?-- or because hospital staff are incompetent. My MW was visibly pissed at the nurse...
Laboring woman has nothing to do with it. Competency levels can vary greatly across individual staff persons. As another mentioned generally anesthesiologists are generally the most skilled in finding a vein. That's who ERs will call in when they can't get a vein.

Obese folks can have curlier veins which are harder to access but a few skinny folks have that as well. Dehydration can make it more difficult but generally that's only a challenge in babies that have narrower veins to start with. I think the biggest problem in finding a vein is when someone has significant internal or external bleeding and the shallower veins have collapsed. That's when you'll see someone slapping the inner arm repeatedly trying to get enough blood to the surface to find a vein and place an IV. If that doesn't work quickly I think it's best to stop and go for the scalp, groin or neck. I've seen too many folks, once they start to recover, with a big bruise from their pits to wrists and from down their legs. I figure if their in such bad shape that their veins are collapsing they don't need more trauma.

Sorry for getting off into the gore. You obviously weren't such a case. If you were you would have lost consciousness and been automatic (and IMO warranted) cesarean.

~BV


----------

