# Palin's Delivery and the 24-Hour Rule



## Turquesa (May 30, 2007)

http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/3735

This is the first time I've read a normal-birth unfriendly article on Women's E-News. The author blasts Palin for breaking the "rule":

Quote:

When a woman's water breaks, the rule is "get to the hospital now." If contractions do not begin on their own, the doctor will induce them. The baby must be born within 24 hours, because of the high risk of infection.
Wasn't the 24-hour rule debunked long ago???? I thought that they already *knew* that the infections were caused by multiple probing vaginal exams!









I tend to know what the evidence is, but I'm never in the loop about what is passing for "evidence" in some hospitals.









ETA: Let's _please_ say nothing on abortion or your pro-whatever stand on abortion or why you like or hate Palin or Republicans or Democrats or self-cleaning ovens or used car salespeople or whatever else. I'd like this not to suffer the same fate as too many other Sarah Palin threads, so thank you for keeping this birth-related







.


----------



## mntnmom (Sep 21, 2006)

Nope. In AZ my midwife said she was legally required to transfer if my water had been broken a certain number of hours(I don't remember exactly) and they would induce at 24. So apparently that is still the "rule"

And since when does having more than TWO babies make you high risk? I wonder where this lady is getting her info?


----------



## paquerette (Oct 16, 2004)

I think it has been debunked scientifically, but it's still the rule of obstetrics. Apples and oranges.


----------



## bvnms (Apr 29, 2008)

Everytime before this that I have been pregnant, that's what I hear. The only time my water broke on it's own was when I had Victoria and she was born about a half hour or so after it happened.


----------



## GooeyRN (Apr 24, 2006)

That was the rule 3 years ago when I had dd. I showed up last minute with ds b/c I did not want the pressure.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mntnmom* 
Nope. In AZ my midwife said she was legally required to transfer if my water had been broken a certain number of hours(I don't remember exactly) and they would induce at 24. So apparently that is still the "rule"

And since when does having more than TWO babies make you high risk? I wonder where this lady is getting her info?

I think it depends on your provider.

when I was in labor with ascylctic son I opted for a c/s at around 32 hours when labor stalled and stalled (My labor started with my water breaking and I went beyond 24 hours with no objections) I'm in AZ and I was allowed to go even longer if I had chosen. This was at TMC (Tucson Medical Center).


----------



## Jojo F. (Apr 7, 2007)

I started a thread asking about the "water breaking rule" and it really varies from hospital to hospital. Some say 12hrs, some say 24hrs, it all depends on their policy.

Some good points were made, like if you have PROM(premature rupture of membranes)- they want to keep the premature baby in as long as possible but if your water breaks and you are term all of the sudden the baby has to come out NOW







Doesn't really make sense to me.

I say stay home for as a long as possible if you want to avoid unnecessary interventions.

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...water+breaking


----------



## EviesMom (Nov 30, 2004)

Probably does depend on the provider. Mine broke with DS, and the midwife wasn't concerned unless solid contractions didn't start for 24 hours, as long as that happened she didn't seem worried about time of birth being in 24 hours. He was born I guess about 19 hours after my water broke.


----------



## swissmiss2584 (Dec 29, 2007)

my midwife said when her water broke on a thursday her doc told her that if her labor didn't start over the weekend then to call on monday. That was years ago. In the 70's!!!! I'm not sure which state or if it was in Germany. (she is German)


----------



## Robinna (Aug 11, 2003)

gotta say - what a peculiar article. I don't get all teh "big risk" big deal language in the article - she was having a baby - what, they don't have dr's in alaska? A woman imminently going into labour is not a ninny. If Palin got on the plane, she knew what she was doing (hellOOOO, not her first baby, either!!! ), and accepted the possible complications of doing so - the biggest of which wasn't real huge, it just meant delivering at a different hospital with (*gasp! * ) an OB she didn't know... what difference could that possibly make, I mean really? Waters breaking... yeah whatever. I'm also sure Palin was perfectly aware of how to handle PROM. If it were me, I'd be going, yeah, this happens every time I'm about to birth, could be any time in the next couple of days, I'm not going to stop my life for a leak when babe is kicking just fine... I hate when this sort of drivel gets spouted out there with such "authoritative tone". Makes me fear people will really believe it.


----------



## Turquesa (May 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jojo F.* 
I started a thread asking about the "water breaking rule" and it really varies from hospital to hospital. Some say 12hrs, some say 24hrs, it all depends on their policy.

Some good points were made, like if you have PROM(premature rupture of membranes)- they want to keep the premature baby in as long as possible but if your water breaks and you are term all of the sudden the baby has to come out NOW







Doesn't really make sense to me.

I say stay home for as a long as possible if you want to avoid unnecessary interventions.

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...water+breaking









And normally I'm a good girl about searching old posts and archives. I can't believe I missed that RECENT discussion!







: Thanks for linking me that way. Those posts, like the ones in this thread, have helped answer my question.


----------



## hollycat (Aug 13, 2008)

you know, ive made all these arguments to the people who are outraged as well... but privately i wonder. the baby was a month early, so she was dealing with preterm labor, the flight was seven hours. thats not a drive to a birth center, thats not a homebirth, thats a flight. you cant get off of.

i support other womens rights but i would not have done it myself, to me, to the baby, or to a full flight of people.


----------



## MeepyCat (Oct 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Robinna* 
gotta say - what a peculiar article. I don't get all teh "big risk" big deal language in the article - she was having a baby - what, they don't have dr's in alaska? A woman imminently going into labour is not a ninny. If Palin got on the plane, she knew what she was doing (hellOOOO, not her first baby, either!!! ), and accepted the possible complications of doing so - the biggest of which wasn't real huge, it just meant delivering at a different hospital with (*gasp! * ) an OB she didn't know... what difference could that possibly make, I mean really? Waters breaking... yeah whatever. I'm also sure Palin was perfectly aware of how to handle PROM. If it were me, I'd be going, yeah, this happens every time I'm about to birth, could be any time in the next couple of days, I'm not going to stop my life for a leak when babe is kicking just fine... I hate when this sort of drivel gets spouted out there with such "authoritative tone". Makes me fear people will really believe it.

The biggest issue I have with Palin getting on a plane after her water broke is that, if labor had progressed more quickly, they'd have had to make an emergency landing someplace to get her to a hospital. That's a lot of inconvenience to a lot of people. I don't see why staying in Texas to deliver the baby was so out of the question.

There are some additional risks with a Down's Syndrome child - many people with Downs have heart defects, and those can require immediate care post-partum. Most of these, however, are detectable via ultrasound, so Palin should have known in advance whether her baby was likely to need such treatment. I presume she knew the baby didn't have that kind of heart problem, otherwise it wouldn't make sense for her to give birth at the Wasilla hospital with no NICU.


----------



## PassionateWriter (Feb 27, 2008)

i go w/ my own policy. no way am i going to a hospital..i dont care who has such rules and whether they are 24/36/48 hours.









but to each her own.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PassionateWriter* 
i go w/ my own policy. no way am i going to a hospital..i dont care who has such rules and whether they are 24/36/48 hours.









but to each her own.









this is what i thought too before I ended up there
sometimes plans change and you end up somewhere you never thought you would.

just sayin'..


----------



## PassionateWriter (Feb 27, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
this is what i thought too before I ended up there
sometimes plans change and you end up somewhere you never thought you would.

just sayin'..










hey, its my policy. it doesnt mean that i wouldnt seek medical help in case of some REAL medical issue...but the fact that the clock has been ticking is just not enough of a reason for me. ive had 2 c/s's...so not like i havent been completely out of control of my own birth previously....but the clock is not a medical test i really rely on.


----------



## hollycat (Aug 13, 2008)

there is a big difference in not going to a hospital vs. getting on a looooong airplane ride in labor a month early carrying a downs child.


----------



## aurora_skys (Apr 1, 2008)

Do we even know for sure that she was in _active_ labor? For all we know it was just a trickle and her instincts/knowledge told her it was fine.

I dont like the alarmist tone of that article. It sounds like the authors political views are inhibiting her ability to critically analyze Palins decision. I can understand why she wanted to go back home to deliver. The author talks about respecting a womans reproductive choices and then slams Palin for making the reproductive choices that she felt were best for her and her baby









A poorly written article with no sources to back up its claims... (such as the two plus babies = high risk pregnancy assertion? never heard that one before) It just sounds like the author is grasping at straws for ways to attack a political candidate. Not unusual, but to bring her baby into the arguement? Dirty journalism..







:


----------



## ~Megan~ (Nov 7, 2002)

Most hospitals do have that rule. I think most people think you _must_ deliver within 24 hours.

Natural birth advocates do know that its the vaginal exams that cause infections and that women can go more than 24 hours with broken membranes without fear. Its not well known amoung the mainstream though.


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Her body, her birth, her baby, her business. And I don't care if she is running for President of the Universe.


----------



## paquerette (Oct 16, 2004)

Was it "a month early" as in 32 weeks or a "a month early" as in 36 weeks? Convenient how 36/37 is term when OB's want to induce and section women for zomg! big babies and GD and because the big golf tournament is in two weeks, but if they want to demoralize someone's decision all of a sudden 36 weeks is "preterm".


----------



## TCMoulton (Oct 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aurora_skys* 
Do we even know for sure that she was in _active_ labor? For all we know it was just a trickle and her instincts/knowledge told her it was fine.


In an interview after Trig's birth Sarah Palin was quoted as saying that she knew that she was not in active labor when her water broke and that she called her Dr and cleared the flight with him. Since she had delivered 4 babies previously she felt she knew her body and that birth was not imminent. She didn't end up delivering Trig for 7-8 hours after she arrived at the hospital.


----------



## azjen43 (Feb 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RomanGoddess* 
Her body, her birth, her baby, her business. And I don't care if she is running for President of the Universe.


I gotta agree with this. And really, alot of the choices she has evidently made are different than what I would do, but they're HER CHOICES.


----------



## LemonPie (Sep 18, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RomanGoddess* 
Her body, her birth, her baby, her business. And I don't care if she is running for President of the Universe.

This.

Frankly, the author's sense of entitlement to Palin's private medical information is more astounding to me than anything else in that article.


----------



## aurora_skys (Apr 1, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tiger Lily* 
This.

Frankly, the author's sense of entitlement to Palin's private medical information is more astounding to me than anything else in that article.

yea, i thought that was weird too! when she was acting like she should be privy to _all_ palins details... if someone said that to the author i bet she'd be outraged, lol.


----------



## meowee (Jul 8, 2004)

So many people are bashing her for not racing to the dr... but she must recognize birth is a natural thing and nothing to freak out about. It's sad how judgmental people can be.


----------



## meowee (Jul 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *paquerette* 
Was it "a month early" as in 32 weeks or a "a month early" as in 36 weeks? Convenient how 36/37 is term when OB's want to induce and section women for zomg! big babies and GD and because the big golf tournament is in two weeks, but if they want to demoralize someone's decision all of a sudden 36 weeks is "preterm".









She was 36 weeks. I know people who have UCed at 36 wks.


----------



## grniys (Aug 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TCMoulton* 
In an interview after Trig's birth Sarah Palin was quoted as saying that she knew that she was not in active labor when her water broke and that she called her Dr and cleared the flight with him. Since she had delivered 4 babies previously she felt she knew her body and that birth was not imminent. She didn't end up delivering Trig for 7-8 hours after she arrived at the hospital.

Thanks for that extra info!


----------



## thixle (Sep 26, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meowee* 
She was 36 weeks. I know people who have UCed at 36 wks.

Thanks for that tidbit... I was wondering that myself... Heh, I'm 32 weeks now, so I've been telling people I'm 8 months pregnant when they ask







I would consider water breaking NOW to be preterm and _would_ go to a hospital fairly quickly _if I felt I needed to_... I'd probably wait a while if it was a little leak and see if it sealed up. Cause a little leak can seal up! At 36 weeks, with a little leak... pfff. And that's cool because that's _my choice_.

It's a good thing I'm not running for public office because last night, I was having fairly strong contrax 4-5 minutes apart for 3 hours, even after drinking water, laying down all that... I had hubby take me to the bar for a screwdriver- that little shot of vodka relaxed the contrax completely away







Hella better than laying in the hospital all night fighting off medical interventions!


----------



## Qestia (Sep 26, 2005)

My water broke--at trickle--at 35 weeks and I went into my doc--after wrapping up things around the house. I think I was panicked because it was so early. But as it was, labor didn't start on its own so I got to have a lot of fun interventions. This time if it happens again I will know a 35 weeker is not, for me, a huge emergency (DS was 6 lbs, my current ob said my baby now is a good size and they wouldn't try to stop labor) so I will stay at home and let labor progress on its own--but--I wouldn't get on a 7 hour plane flight.


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

Quote:

In an interview after Trig's birth Sarah Palin was quoted as saying that she knew that she was not in active labor when her water broke and that she called her Dr and cleared the flight with him. Since she had delivered 4 babies previously she felt she knew her body and that birth was not imminent. She didn't end up delivering Trig for 7-8 hours after she arrived at the hospital
.

That's interesting to know. I've been a bit baffled to see her absolutely slammed by some folks I know are otherwise all for a woman knowing her own body and making her own birth choices.

It seems to me that after having 4 previous babies, having had a close eye on the baby because of the Downs Syndrome, and actually being the one living in her body, and the information above added to that, the choice she made was not such a horrifically dangerous and stupid thing as some want to make it out to be.


----------



## azjen43 (Feb 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tiger Lily* 
This.

Frankly, the author's sense of entitlement to Palin's private medical information is more astounding to me than anything else in that article.


Yep, I agree with this, too. I think the author is way off base.


----------



## dlm194 (Mar 23, 2005)

I actually found this article depressing. I've learned so much about birth on here and about empowering women when it comes to their births. This article just had an agenda against Palin and I'm afraid it comes off as "Make sure you never ever do anything like Sarah Palin. When your water breaks, rush off to the hospital and be a good little girl and do whatever the doctor tells you because the doctor knows best." It goes against so many things we preach around here. We KNOW our bodies and we can trust out bodies to birth. Quite frankly, I think a woman having her 5th kid can trust her instincts. Yes, there are fine birthing facilities in Texas but Palin knew where she wanted to birth - in a place she felt comfortable. Why is it a stretch to believe she knew her body would hold that baby in until it she was in a comfortable and supportive place. I feel like it's actually a step backwards for us and I wish the author found something else to criticize her about rather than drawing attention to this.







And the whole idea that the author is entitled to Palin's medical records is absurd. The other thing that made me mad was the statement that Palin was using a family doctor and NOT an ob (like this was another risky and irresponsible move). Imagine if Palin had used a midwife??? Or even worse, what if she had a homebirth?

I feel like i want to shout at the author, "If you don't agree with her political views, attack that! Not her ability to trust her body to birth."


----------



## Serenyd (Jan 6, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RomanGoddess* 
Her body, her birth, her baby, her business. And I don't care if she is running for President of the Universe.









:


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

Quote:

I feel like i want to shout at the author, "If you don't agree with her political views, attack that! Not her ability to trust her body to birth."


----------



## chandasz (Apr 13, 2005)

Here-- there are several hospitals that have a 6 hours from BOW breaking to labor... Crazy


----------



## AmieV (Mar 31, 2005)

I believe the actual ACOG standard of care is that labor must BEGIN within 24 hours, not be delivered...not that anyone follows that.







:

I agree with those who are outraged at this journalist thinking her medical records should be public. I can't stand Palin and it makes me want to vomit to think of her as VP, but for a million other reasons than when she headed to the hospital after her water broke or how many friggin' kids she has. The irony of this is astounding too. A supposed feminist is going to go after her for this? Are we going to subpoena all presidential candidates' medical records to make sure we agree with how they're managing their PERSONAL health decisions?

and ditto absolutely everything dlm194 had to say. For this author to call herself prochoice is amazing too. Apparently you're only in charge of your own body when you want to have an abortion, after that it's time to submit to the medical authorities?

I just think this muddies so much for people. There is PLENTY to go after Palin for on a purely political level. No one needs to stoop to this level. It's very anti-woman.


----------



## hix (Mar 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cappuccinosmom* 
.

That's interesting to know. I've been a bit baffled to see her absolutely slammed by some folks I know are otherwise all for a woman knowing her own body and making her own birth choices.

It seems to me that after having 4 previous babies, having had a close eye on the baby because of the Downs Syndrome, and actually being the one living in her body, and the information above added to that, the choice she made was not such a horrifically dangerous and stupid thing as some want to make it out to be.


----------



## newclementine (Jan 23, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Turquesa* 
ETA: Let's _please_ say nothing on abortion or your pro-whatever stand on abortion or why you like or hate Palin or Republicans or Democrats or self-cleaning ovens or used car salespeople or whatever else. I'd like this not to suffer the same fate as too many other Sarah Palin threads, so thank you for keeping this birth-related







.

Ok here goes....
Don't really know about the 24 hr rule an don't really care. I can't believe that this information about Palin (or anyone!) has been deemed valuable. Did you read the part about how Palin didn't get the medical release to fly? I am definately not a Palin supporter, but as a woman (and a thinking human!) this really does not seem like relevant information to me. Let's try to debunk Palin's ability to be a VP with relevant information, like maybe foreign policy or whether or not she supports a separation of church and state and not her ability to know her body.


----------



## leila1213 (Sep 15, 2006)

I would definitely not be COMFORTABLE with a 7 hour plane ride under those circumstances...but she was going HOME (not flying away from home, kwim?). I would definitely wrestle with the pros and cons of getting on the plane vs. birthing in a strange hospital, FAR from home, away from family, and staying who knows how long afterwards, WITH a special needs baby. I am more incredulous at her going "back to work" (whatever that means) at 3 days PP, and the fact that DH took time off, but not her. I can see why she would do that, but don't necessarily think it's a wise choice. Still, HER choice. I don't like her, and I don't like politicians in general, but all this crap about her family is just a distraction from the real issues. I give John McCain a lot of credit for choosing her and all her backstory as a great way to get a lot of attention that has nothing to do with the issues.


----------



## TCMoulton (Oct 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *leila1213* 
I am more incredulous at her going "back to work" (whatever that means) at 3 days PP, and the fact that DH took time off, but not her.

Her son and husband went back to work with her 3 days after birth.


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *leila1213* 
I am more incredulous at her going "back to work" (whatever that means) at 3 days PP, and the fact that DH took time off, but not her. I can see why she would do that, but don't necessarily think it's a wise choice.

She was wearing her baby in a sling at work and breastfed it all day. Hardly outrageous stuff. That's what most women in the world have to do. Nature doesn't provide a 6-week maternity leave after birth.

Besides, I keep hearing all these comments that she didn't take time off. How exactly does one take "time off" from being Governor of a state?? It's an elected position and you're basically on the job all the time, even when you're on "vacation".


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

Quote:

She was wearing her baby in a sling at work and breastfed it all day. Hardly outrageous stuff. That's what most women in the world have to do. Nature doesn't provide a 6-week maternity leave after birth.
Yup. I was "back to work" on day 2 postpartum. The world, and more importantly, my family, didn't cease to exist, and our situation didn't allow me to stay in bed. Sling, breastfeeding, pack n play in the office...sounds like she was doing pretty much what I did, except that my work happens at home. I think it's awesome that she has a job that allows her to keep her baby with her the whole time, breastfeed on demand, and all of that.


----------



## MI_Dawn (Jun 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *azjen43* 
I gotta agree with this. And really, alot of the choices she has evidently made are different than what I would do, but they're HER CHOICES.

Yep.

And I'll fully support her right to make them.

AS LONG AS SHE SUPPORTS MINE.


----------



## Lousli (Nov 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *paquerette* 
Was it "a month early" as in 32 weeks or a "a month early" as in 36 weeks? Convenient how 36/37 is term when OB's want to induce and section women for zomg! big babies and GD and because the big golf tournament is in two weeks, but if they want to demoralize someone's decision all of a sudden 36 weeks is "preterm".









My 36 weeker was preterm. Fortunately, she had no breathing problems, but she had nursing issues from the beginning. She was just 5 pounds 4 ounces at birth and dropped to 4 pounds 11 ounces before starting to gain again. She was jaundiced and extremely sleepy. Lung maturity can still be an issue at 36 weeks with some babies as well.


----------



## leila1213 (Sep 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TCMoulton* 
Her son and husband went back to work with her 3 days after birth.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *RomanGoddess* 
She was wearing her baby in a sling at work and breastfed it all day. Hardly outrageous stuff. That's what most women in the world have to do. Nature doesn't provide a 6-week maternity leave after birth.

Besides, I keep hearing all these comments that she didn't take time off. How exactly does one take "time off" from being Governor of a state?? It's an elected position and you're basically on the job all the time, even when you're on "vacation".

That's why I said "(whatever that means)" - because I didn't know. I _thought_ it was probably what you are describing, but didn't know for sure. Still, I don't know if I would have done the same thing, but that doesn't really have anything to do with whether I like her as a VP candidate or not.


----------



## Belle (Feb 6, 2005)

I certainly didn't rush to the hospital because my water broke on a Thursday afternoon and my daughter was born on a Saturday morning. Strangely enough, she had no signs of infection whatsoever. Since the only vaginal exam I had was about an hour before she was born. Nobody needed to be sticking their hands up my yoni because I already knew I wasn't in labor.

I think the author has no business whatsoever demanding access to her private medical records. I see no relevance whatsoever to her ability to perform vice-presidential duties because of some arbitrary "rule" about water breaking.

I don't agree with Sarah Palin's politics at all, but this article is reaching for straws to attack her. She knew what she was doing when she got on that plane. I wouldn't have wanted to give birth in a strange place either.


----------



## peainthepod (Jul 16, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RomanGoddess* 
Her body, her birth, her baby, her business. And I don't care if she is running for President of the Universe.

Couldn't have said it better. This article is yellow journalism of the worst kind, and very misogynist too. The author should be ashamed.


----------



## cathicog (May 7, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RomanGoddess* 
Her body, her birth, her baby, her business. And I don't care if she is running for President of the Universe.

Amen sista....you have said it best. Since when is it an issue how/where/when she has her children? Nobody questioned the Kennedys. I know Jackie wasn't considered a Presidential running mate, but she was...of sorts..


----------



## Jackies Ladybug (Jun 19, 2008)

i think i could trust myself to know if i could hold my baby in for the duration of a flight or not.
can you trust yourself to make it home to poop if you know you are uncomfortable with using a public restroom? i know my hubby can!









the cervix is just like any other sphincter we have quite a bit of control over it, just doesnt get a lot of practice in.

i think she made the best decision for her and no one can be criticized for that.

if she had given birth on the plane though, that would be a whole other discussion.


----------



## Turquesa (May 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jackies Ladybug* 
if she had given birth on the plane though, that would be a whole other discussion.

Perhaps but . . . if you go lurk on the L&D sections of nursing sites, you'll hear plenty of tales of doctors who don't arrive in time to catch babies . . . and nurses who are constantly getting blamed for it, (as if they could control everything with a stop-and-go timer.







)

My point is that though pretty rare, "oopses" do happen, whether it's a baby born in a woman's car or a doc who didn't get there in time. So even if Palin delivered on the plane, I still wouldn't be willing to crack the judgment whip on her.

Implicit in this article is the message that women are not capable of knowing their own bodies, but doctors are. So women just need to suck it up and let their docs take control.


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aurora_skys* 
Do we even know for sure that she was in _active_ labor? For all we know it was just a trickle and her instincts/knowledge told her it was fine.

I dont like the alarmist tone of that article. It sounds like the authors political views are inhibiting her ability to critically analyze Palins decision. I can understand why she wanted to go back home to deliver. The author talks about respecting a womans reproductive choices and then slams Palin for making the reproductive choices that she felt were best for her and her baby









A poorly written article with no sources to back up its claims... (such as the two plus babies = high risk pregnancy assertion? never heard that one before) It just sounds like the author is grasping at straws for ways to attack a political candidate. Not unusual, but to bring her baby into the arguement? Dirty journalism..








:

From my understanding it was just a trickle. I thought I heard that she was LEAKING a little bit. She had also consulted with her OB back home BEFORE she got on the plane.

And She was NOT actually in labor (having contractions)


----------

