I spent all day today at the NIH VBAC Conference. You can catch the rest of the conference tomorrow on Webcast. My head is aching from listening to fourteen presentations, breaking only for lunch. It is also bursting with questions. Here are a few:
Why do doctors continue to talk about whether or not we should "allow" certain women to VBAC rather then supporting a woman's right to choose by offering access to VBAC and information on real risks of attempting VBAC or a repeat cesarean delivery?
Why do we call repeat cesareans ERCDs or Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery (when you have hospital VBAC bans or individual doctors who do not support VBAC, there certainly isn't much election involved)?
If successful VBACs are safer repeat cesareans and failed VBACs, then why aren't we talking about how to increase our rate of successful VBACs?
Why is it acceptable to talk about Obstetrical studies from other countries but not home birth studies from other countries?
Why can't we talk about the difference between VBAC rates based on birth setting (home, hospital or birth center)? (Instead we talk about university hospitals vs. private hospitals, vs. community hospitals etc.)
Isn't the fact that access to a "trial of labor" would lead to 9/100,000 fewer death a good reason to support VBAC? (From the presentation "Evidence-based Practice Center Presentation II: Maternal Benefits and Harms and Relevant Factors," Jeanne-Marie Guise, M.D., M.P.H)
Time for some ginger tea and honey. More tomorrow.