----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 8:25
PM
Subject: [ozmidwifery] Re: [C-Aware]
Randomised Controlled Trial on vbac v's cs (long)
Thank you Gail for your words of
support.
I can not stress hard
enough though how I don't want this to go to the media YET!
I think the media is a
tool that we can use but as a last resort: for e.g. if the trial goes ahead to
use it to warn women against being involved. What I am doing today is
writing a letter to the research team one last time to ask them to confirm a
few things. Even if they don't respond (which will be to their
detriment) I am then going to take it to the ethics committee that has
approved the preliminary trail at Adelaide's Women & Children's
hospital. I want to hit the ethics committee with every single argument
voiced by as many as possible...so I need people to write letters of concern
and get them to me within the next 2 weeks PLEASE!!!!!!!
In the mean time I am meeting with
the heads of OB and Mid at W&CH and also bringing this up at the ACMI SA
meeting.
I need as many people as possible
to really highlight just how unnecessary and unethical, uneconomical, etc this
trial is.
send them to PO Box 1013 Nairne
5252 SA
I am scanning the brochures and
placing them on the CARES web site and also going to see if I can get them on
the Birthrites and MC web sites also. I am slightly concerned that
they might have changed the information contained in the brochures (after our
scathing review) but as they have not supplied up dated ones (after repeated
requests) the information I have must be considered correct.
Those who want them sooner please
email me and I will send hard copies. I am writing a summary of the
trial and our concerns. Anyone who wants to access it can print it in their
respective newsletters or journals.
cheers for now
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 3:09
PM
Subject: Re: [C-Aware] Randomised
Controlled Trial on vbac v's cs (long)
I agree with Jackie, Jo. You're definitely in the right in
this instance. I had an opportunity to have a fairly close read of both
brochures last night, and gave it to Neil to read, too. We were both pretty
shocked by some of the info in them, esp. the one for prospective
participants. Some of the info is simply untrue! Their take on the risks,
for example: "For a woman who has a vaginal birth after a previous caesarean
birth there is a very small risk (1 in 150 or 1 in 250 is a very small risk
according to the brochure) of the uterus tearing leading to serious problems
for the mother, such as major bleeding and needing a hysterectomy" If anyone
can correct me please do, but I thought the risk of rupture during VBAC was
2 in 1000? Maybe I've got my info wrong?
I'm not even going to comment on the ethics of
'randomising' (which is a vastly different word to 'random' with a
completely different meaning BTW) 2000 women into two groups! There's been
plenty said about that already.
I don't think your concern with this study or your actions
against it are alarmist or hysterical (which is how the media usually
portray those of us without the dangly bits when it comes to natural birth).
>From what I can see you've strategised your plan of attack perfectly and
are going about it in a well ordered and competent manner.
Best of luck with it on your end.
gail.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, 5 February 2003
8:39
Subject: Re: [C-Aware] Randomised
Controlled Trial on vbac v's cs (long)
I am very protective of
CARES reputation and do not want to see it fall with the trial (if you
get my drift).
Understandably, Jo, that’s why every piece of
information that your group passes on to the bigger birthing community
needs to be checked and double-checked to be accurate – whether that’s by
email or through the media. As long as what you are saying is true, then
any mud thrown just won’t stick. Okay? Don’t let the big guys scare you,
it’s all a game to them.
Take care,
Birthing Beautifully,
Jackie
M.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.birthrites.org
