A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Pregnancy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bradley Method students: Check your workbook



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 6th 04, 05:21 PM
Todd Gastaldo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bradley Method students: Check your workbook

WARNING:

In 1989, the Bradley Method Student Workbook in effect recommended closing
the birth canal up to 30% ("the Bradley Classic") (!!)

In 1991, after Bradley Method guru Jay Hathaway came to my home to learn the
simple grisly biomechanics of semisitting delivery, he assured me that his
Student Workbook would stop recommending "the Bradley Classic," closing the
birth canal up to 30%...

See Dear Mothering, Dear ICAN, Dear God...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/1166

Incredibly, in 1997, closing the birth canal up to 30% ("the Bradley
Classic") was apparently still being recommended in the Bradley Method
Student Workbook!

BRADLEY METHOD STUDENTS: Please check your workbooks!

The Bradley Method website has no email address published. I try copying
them via and also via someone who is apparently a
Bradley instructor




Here is what I wrote in 2002 when I learned Jay Hathaway's Bradley Method
was still apparently promoting closing birth canals in 1997...

BRADLEY METHOD FLAW - see the postscript...

snip

PS My thanks to Laurie ) for recently resurrecting that
1994 (!) Bradley Method thread...
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:...0mb-ck.aol.com

Anna Fiehler ) wrote on that same thread (in 1997!):

"The Bradley classes we took focused on knowledge of the childbirth
process...My only gripe...the recommended delivery
position, semi-reclining. They do talk about squatting too, but almost
every tape and illustration in the book show the
semi-reclining position."
http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&...D691AD.1B8D%40
mathworks.com

END excerpt of Gastaldo's Oct. 27, 2002 post...

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/1691

The next day - Oct. 28, 2002 - I noted that Lamaze also promotes closing the
birth canal up to 30%...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/1692


Here is my 1997 post regarding the possibility that "the Bradley Classic"
may cause postpartum pelvic pain...

Search Result 19
From: Todd Gastaldo )
Subject: The Bradley "Classic" and PPPPain and adjusting babies' skulls and
spines...
This is the only article in this thread
View: Original Format
Newsgroups: misc.kids.pregnancy, sci.med, misc.kids.health
Date: 1997/09/08


Misc.kids.health, Sci.med and Misc.kids.pregnancy posters,

The Bradley "Classic" - reportedly no longer encouraged by Bradley Method
instructors - is a fetal skull squashing delivery position that may also
cause PPPPain. See below.

There is also, of course, pain before delivery. It is estimated that 50%
of pregnant women will suffer back pain during pregnancy; so it is good
to see that nurse-midwives (CNMs) Benetti and Marchese [1996] are going
beyond recommending heat, ice and drugs - they are recommending referral
to chiropractors. See discussion below.

PREVENTION of back pain...

Some women suffer SEVERE pelvic pain following delivery. I think there
may be a way to prevent much of this pain - just by preventing fetal
skull squashing... This I discuss further in the body of this post.

TREATMENT of back pain before, during and after delivery...

I should caution readers that I start out by discussing a small minority
of women who suffer SEVERE pain following delivery - some times for
years... I say "small minority" only because I am guessing. There may
be many and they may be suffering silently. The Norwegian women
discussed below say it is a "hidden problem." I would like to hear from
ANY women who have suffered as the following Norwegian women have
suffered...

IL Rist of the Norwegian Association of Women with Pelvic Girdle
Relaxation reported in 1991: "Invalidity is a shocking experience. You
cannot get out of your bed and you need nursing and help to everything
like making food and washing yourself. You have constant, intense pains
day and night, year after year..." [Rist IL (The Norwegian Association of
Women with Pelvic Girdle Relaxation). A fight against pains and
ignorance. Scand J Rheumatology 1991; Suppl. 88:17]

Similarly, MC Jensen, a founding member of the Norwegian Association,
reported in an abstract that from week 17 of her pregnancy "it became
painful to walk"; after which "the pains increased." After delivery she
remained in bed "with immense pains for 7 months." [Jensen MC. A
patient's story. Scand J Rheumatology 1991; Suppl. 88:17.])

Jensen's 1991 report further stated that "the association has increased
continuously and has shown that this is a comprehensive and hidden
problem in Norway"...

Yet, in the same issue of Scand J Rheumatology, Australian obstetrician
Alistair MacLennan ignored this "hidden problem" possibility and made a
puzzling reference to "the apparently high incidence of the problem in
Scandinavian women compared to other nationalities." Obstetrician
MacLennan offered no evidence that "other nationalities" had even looked
for the problem. (Jensen indicates in her abstract that it is indeed
necessary to look. She writes: "I was amazed and scared by the lack of
knowledge and understanding in the [Norwegian] public health system."
Perhaps the public health systems of other nations are similarly
afflicted.)

MANIPULATION to relieve severe pelvic pain

Jensen mentioned that manipulation helped her, i.e., she is now "in
pretty good health" and "the following kinds of treatment did
help...manipulating the pelvic [sic]...training in hospital
physiotherapy, acupuncture, autogenic training." [Jensen 1991]

U. Akre of Ullevå Hospital in Oslo, Norway also mentioned manipulation,
writing that, "In Norway, manual therapy is a system for examination and
treatment of dysfunctions in the musculoskeletal apparatus...based on
orthopaedic and osteopathic methods which have been further developed and
systemized by Norwegian physiotherapists...The choice of therapy is
determined by clinical findings." [Akre U. Training of the pelvic girdle
muscles. Scand J Rheumatology 1991; Suppl. 88:23.])

Akre [1991] wrote further: "50% of women experience backache during
pregnancy" and state that the pain "may theoretically have two
biomechanical causes...1. Hypermobility; and 2. Hypomobility with
subluxation in one of the sacroiliac joints...The treatment is different
in the two conditions."

As alluded to above, it is good that two CNMs, Benetti and Marchese
[1996], came to the conclusion that CNMs should make referrals to
chiropractors "when necessary"; but unfortuately, Benetti and Marchese
[1996] gave no indication as to WHY it might be necessary for
nurse-midwives to make referrals to chiropractors. [Benetti MC, Marchese
T. Primary care for women: management of common musculoskeletal
disorders. JNM 1996;41:173-87]

CNMs branching into the management of musculoskeletal conditions should
not restrict themselves (or their patients) to NSAIDs, heat and ice.
Benetti and Marchese note that NSAIDs - non-steroidal anti-inflammatory
drugs like aspirin and ibuprofen - are "relatively contraindicated in
patients with...pregnancy" [1996:173]. Oddly, although they mention
referral to chiropractors, Benetti and Marchese fail to mention spinal
manipulation.

To all pregnant women who are suffering spinal/pelvic pain, there are
practitioners of all professional stripes who specialize in adjusting
pregnant women. I am, of course, biased toward chiropractors. : ) (See
my signature file.)

ADJUSTING BABIES' SKULLS AND SPINES...

Menkes' Textbook of Child Neurology [1995] cites Hepner's 1951 report
that some facial nerve injury is evident in 6% of neonates, with the
injury resulting from pressure of the sacral "prominence" - or pressure
of forceps - against the facial nerve. [Hepner WR. Some observations on
facial paresis in the newborn infant: etiology and incidence. Pediatrics
1951;8:494-97]

Obviously, pressure from the sacral/tailbone tip being jammed up to an
inch into the fetal skull could do the same thing.

Dobson [1994], a chiropractic physician, suggests that most fetuses
traverse the outlet with the left side of their face pressed in
("slanted") by the sacral tip - and that cranio-sacral therapy in infancy
can help normalize the resulting "facial slant" apparent in so many
faces. [Dobson J. Baby Beautiful: A Handbook of Baby Head Shaping. 1994
Heirs Press, 2533 N. Carson St., Ste 1585, Carson City, NV 89706.]

Osteopathic physicians Peta Sneddon and Paolo Cosechi describe cases
which illustrate the practice of osteopathy. Case #2 is Louis:
"Immediately after the birth Louis' head appeared flattened and
squashed...the latter treatments were aimed at lifting his frontal
bone..." [Sneddon P, Cosechi P. Discover Osteopathy. Berkeley, CA:
Ulysses Press, 1997]

The German physician Biedermann [1992] used spinal adjusting to treat 135
babies referred to him by a pediatric orthopedist; and recently wrote in
the medical literature that traumatization of suboccipital structures
occurs during birth, giving rise to manipulable lesions and various
conditions which he has observed to subside soon after manipulation of
those lesions. [Biedermann H. Kinematic imbalances due to suboccipital
strain in newborns. J Manual Medicine 1992;6:151-156. H. Biedermann,
M.D., Surgical Department, University of Witten-Herdecke, Schützenstrasse
9, W-5840 Schwerte, Federal Republic of Germany.]

According to Biedermann [1992], conditions which have yielded to a single
upper cervical manipulation include neonatal torticollis, opisthotonus,
asymmetric motor patterns, sleeping disorders, asymmetric development and
range of motion of the hips, fever of unknown origin, and loss of
appetite. Biedermann reports that manipulation and physiotherapy
complement each other, with about 50% of cases requiring physiotherapy
following spinal manipulation. ("[P]hysiotherapists," writes Biedermann,
"report consistently that the[ir] treatment is simplified after
manipulation.")

Biedermann [1992] also stated, "Prolonged labor and the use of extraction
aids are especially overrepresented" in cases of the syndrome he calls
kinematic imbalance due to suboccipital strain, or KISS. The birth
canal, he says, is "one of the most dangerous obstacles we ever have to
traverse."

Obstacles should not be place in birth canals. Women should be informed
IMMEDIATELY that - at home or in hospital - with or without a licensed
midwife - they can easily avoid obstetric tomfoolery that jams tailbones
into birth canals - into fetal skulls.

THE BRADLEY "CLASSIC" AND PPPPain - and possible PREVENTION...

Bridget remarked on something Suzanne Powell wrote:

In short, what Todd Gastaldo is saying is that sitting in a
semi-sitting or semi-reclining position causes your tailbone (in lay
terms) to be pushed forward into the pelvis. You can avoid this by
using alternate delivery positions or by using the above positions in
a birthing bed that has a "U" cut out of it (when the take the bottom
of the bed off).

He makes some valid points, but truthfully, how many of you actually
kept reading his novel length post?
Suzanne Powell


I stopped reading it in the first confusing paragraph. Thank you for
translating it into "English"

I guess this gives more support to the positons that Bradley recommends -
especially in early labor.


The Bradley Method makes a most peculiar position recommendation - fetal
skull squashing (the "Bradley Classic") - for the actual delivery. As
suggested above, this peculiar delivery position recommendation may also
cause severe postpartum pelvic pain (PPPP) in some mothers...

According to Dutch researchers Mens et al. [1996], "Maximal flexion of
spine and hips" during delivery might enhance the risk for peripartum
pelvic pain (PPPP). [Mens JMA, Vleeming A, Stoeckart R, Stam HJ, Snijders
CJ. Understanding peripartum pelvic pain: implications of a patient
survey. Spine 1996;21(11):1363-70.]

Unfortunately, Mens et al. don't state exactly what they mean by "maximal
flexion of spine and hips."

I suspect they may be referring to - and cautioning against - the fetal
skull squashing "Bradley Classic" delivery position where the woman sits
in maximal flexion - squarely (and only) on her buttocks/sacrum during
delivery? (Semisitting delivery is also recommended by ASPO/Lamaze.)

Norwegian physiotherapist N Bjørnstad similarly cautions against sitting
on the sacrum at delivery, but does not mention prevention of fetal
skulll squashing as a co-benefit:

"Birth positions recommended are...various sitting positions where sacrum
will not be locked against the bed...avoid unnecessary stretching of the
pelvic ligaments and locking of the joints." [Bjørnstad N. Obstetric
physiotherapy, observation and treatment (abstract). Scand J Rheumatology
1991; Suppl. 88:22-23. (N. Bjørnstad, Bjerkåsen 5, 1310 Blommenholm,
Norway)]

According to Bradley Method educator Stacey Yeaman, photographs of the
fetal skull squashing "Bradley Classic" may still be found in current
editions of Jay and Marjorie Hathaway's Bradley Method Student
Workbook.[Personal communication with Bradley educator Stacey Yeaman
1996.]

Ms. Yeaman told me she has not been emphasizing the "Bradley Classic" in
her classes because it seemed to her that it would be hard on the coccyx.

She seemed surprised to learn that the entire sacrum moves - if women
would only get off it. Obstetrician Robert Bradley, MD himself, Founder
of the Bradley Method, also seemed surprised to learn this. See below.

I have found that MOST Bradley Method educators ignore the Bradley
Classic. The Bradley Method is renown for its unmedicated birth record;
and I am not disputing that the FACT that Dr. Bradley stood fast against
routine birth medication amidst stiff medical opposition to his position.
Dr. Bradley and his army of child birth educators are to be commended;
and indeed, they are commended, indirectly, in the 1995 and 1997 editions
of Conn's Current Therapy. Details on this for any who ask.

A photo of the fetal skull squashing "Bradley Classic" may also be found
in Doris Haire's paper, "The Cultural Warping of Childbirth" where it is
termed "the physiological position for childbirth." (I responded to Ms.
Haire's promotion of fetal skull squashing - and CNMwifery over direct
entry midwifery - with an article titled, "Unwarping Childbirth," which I
sent via California Governor Pete Wilson to his Maternal and Child Health
Branch Chief Rugmini Shah, M.D.)

The grisly "Bradley Classic" also appears in Susan McCutcheon-Rosegg and
Peter Rosegg's Natural Childbirth the Bradley Way [NY: Penguin 1984], a
book prefaced and "highly recommend[ed]" by the now-retired founder of
the Bradley Method, North American obstetrician Robert A. Bradley.

Most recently, the grisly "Bradley Classic" appears in the 1996 edition
of Susan McCutcheon's Natural Childbirth the Bradley Way [NY: Penguin
1996] - again recommended by obstetrician Robert A. Bradley.

I mentioned Ms. Haire and the Hathaways above because Ms. Haire and the
Hathaways learned several years ago the grisly biomechanics of the
"Bradley Classic." Ms. Haire learned by phone and via surface mail; and
Jay Hathaway learned by driving from Los Angeles to Sunnyvale in
California for a personal demonstration on my living room floor, using
Hathaway's model pelvis.

In December 1991, Mr. Hathaway sat on my living room floor as I
repeatedly demonstrated the biomechanics of the Bradley "Classic" using a
model pelvis. Later that evening, Mr. Hathaway told me that he would
begin telling all his instructors that the Bradley "Classic" denies up to
30% of pelvic outlet area. Six months later, however, three of his more
prominent instructors still hadn't heard this information.

I contacted Mr. Hathaway again when I learned that he wasn't educating
Bradley instuctors as he had promised. (I learned this from Dr. Carolyn
Wheeler of Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, who regularly invited Mr.
Hathaway to speak to her obstetrics classes.) On the telephone, Mr.
Hathaway casually dismissed the importance of EXPLICITLY INFORMING women
that semi-sitting (the Bradley "Classic") denies fetuses up to 30% of
pelvic outlet area and indicated he wasn't interested in any further
discussion.

Since Mr. Hathaway had just obtained Dr. Moysés Paciornik's address from
me, and since Mr. Hathaway was simultaneously showing Dr. Claudio
Paciornik's video "Birth in the Squatting Position" (and attributing to
semi-sitting a squatting benefit), I decided to write and inform Dr.
Paciornik of Mr. Hathaway's peculiar
we-support-squatting-but-our-workbook-tells-women-that-semi-sitting-widens-t
he-birth-canal" philosophy.

Mr. Hathaway received a copy of my letter and immediately wrote to Dr.
Paciornik (copy to Gastaldo) complaining that, after all, he (Hathaway)
is in favor of squatting and even shows "Birth in the Squatting Position"
to all of the instructors he trains. Mr. Hathaway told Dr. Paciornik
that most of what Gastaldo said was true - but that he couldn't
understand (and resented terribly) that Gastaldo had compared him with
Williams Obstetrics co-author Norman F. Gant who told me he believes that
most women don't really need the extra room. More on this below.

Dr. Paciornik replied, gently reminding Mr. Hathaway that placing women
in the semi-sitting position does force the sacral tip into the birth
canal and possibly causes neurological damage.

Soon after, Mr. Hathaway stopped accepting telephone calls from me. (I
persisted in calling to insist that he should change the Bradley Student
Workbook to warn students that the Bradley "Classic" narrows the birth
canal. I also insisted that Hathaway issue a statement of clarification
to the thousand Bradley instructors who still hand out the Bradley
Student Workbook. As noted above, he reportedly included the Bradley
"Classic" in his new workbook...)

Through an assistant, Mr. Hathaway insisted that any further
correspondence on this matter must be in writing, and that any
correspondence with Dr. Bradley must go through his (Hathaway's) office.

I again urged Mr. Hathaway, through his assistant, to inform Dr. Bradley
of the pelvis-narrowing characteristic of the Bradley "Classic." A year
later (1993), a Bradley instructor gave me Dr. Bradley's address and
phone. That's when Dr. Bradley told me that he hadn't yet heard from Mr.
Hathaway on this subject.

As alluded to above, I noted in my letter to Dr. Paciornik that my
experience with Mr. Hathaway reminds me of my experience with Williams
Obstetrics author Norman F. Gant, M.D. When Dr. Gant called to thank me
for pointing out that Williams Obstetrics was erroneously using Borell
and Fernström to support a claim that the dorsal lithotomy position
widens the pelvis, I asked him whether he would now begin advising
obstetric students to encourage women to use alternative delivery
positions. "Most women don't really need the extra room," he said.

It astonishes me that Susan McCutcheon and Peter Rosegg heard nothing
about the grisly biomechanics of the "Bradley Classic." Ms. Haire, Dr.
Bradley and Jay Hathaway - all of whom were informed of the grisly
biomechanics - are acknowledged in Ms. McCutcheon's 1996 text.

Particularly noteworthy is the fact that obstetrician Robert A. Bradley
himself failed to notify McCutcheon and Rosegg. Surprisingly, Dr Bradley
himself was unaware that sacro-iliac motion occurs. He probably forgot
that, years ago, he had been in attendance in New York City when Dr.
Roberto Caldeyro-Barcia went over Borell and Fernström's work. Mr.
Hathaway, who videotaped the presentation, showed my wife and I the video
tape after dinner (after my demonstration to Mr. Hathaway on my living
room floor; see above) and told me that Dr. Bradley was in attendance
when Dr. Caldeyro-Barcia went over Borell and Fernstrom's work.

According to Dr. Bradley's preface to McCutcheon [1996], the Bradley
Method was preceded only by the late Dr. Grantly Dick-Read's childbirth
method. [Childbirth Without Fear 1944]

Bradley states he "had a wonderful visit" with Dick-Read - though he
"did have a little bit of trouble with...[Dick-Read's] assertion that 'a
little gas or medication wouldn't hurt anything.'" [Bradley in McCutcheon
1996]

Regardless of whether it was Bradley - or the Hathaways - who made a
"Bradley Classic" out of jamming tailbones up to 4 cm into fetal skulls;
it is a fact that Dick-Read saw nothing wrong with placing women
semiseated on their buttocks at delivery.

The Nov. 5, 1955 issue of the British Medical Journal carries a letter
from Dick-Read promoting semisitting delivery over the left lateral
position. Dick-Read believed the left lateral position and "exaggerated
lithotomy" to be "the result of short-sighted teaching of an unnatural
position." To make his point, Dick-Read invoked observations of
"coloured races" living in Africa, made by "100 collaborators, including
Government medical and administrative officers, missionaries, paramount
chiefs, and aged settlers who appreciated the novelty of this
investigation."

Dick-Read also invoked various ancients - including Aristotle who he
quoted ("The woman should lie on her back...between lying and
sitting..."), Soranus of Ephesus, and Shipral and Puah "the Egyptian
midwives to the Israelites."

Dick-Read continued his attack on the lateral position by noting proudly
that "the left lateral position was used and discarded by the great
American obstetrician, Joseph de Lee, who stated his reasons for
reverting to the dorsal position..." (de Lee was the fine fellow who
established episiotomy as a routine obstetric procedure.)

Dick-Read concluded: "My investigations throughout the past few years
show that the large majority of peoples of the world of all colours
employ for delivery the squatting attitude, with the body weight take
either on the feet, knees, buttocks, or lower back...Surely this galaxy
of opinion favouring the dorsal attitude thoughout the ages must have
some foundation of good sense and purpose. There is ample evidence of
this from obstetricians, midwives, and the women and mothers of our time
who have experienced both methods adequately to enable them to arrive at
a balanced conclusion..." [Dick-Read G. Position for delivery (letter).
British Medical Journal (Nov5)1955:1142-3]

Dick-Read's mention of midwives reminds me that prominent American
midwife Ina May Gaskin told me that she agreed with Williams Obstetrics
author Norman F. Gant, M.D. that "most women don't really need the extra
room." I had called Ms. Gaskin upon discovering in the journal Birth
that most of her births were done in the semisitting position. Ms.
Gaskin had just co-authored (with Meenan and Hunt) in the Journal of
Family Practice an article on a hands-and-knees method of handling
shoulder dystocia which for some reason (known only to Gaskin et al.)
would not be adopted by large hospitals.

Gaskin et al.'s comment about hospitals not adopting the practice of
opening the pelvis reminded me of Varney Burst's comment in her Sept. 24,
1996 letter to me that nurse-midwives would continue to encourage
semisitting in hospital delivery rooms - to "enlighten" those rooms.
(Attention Deborah Flowers, Midwife, 47 The Farm, Summertown, TN 38483.
I thoroughly enjoyed our telephone conversation. Please ensure that Ms.
Gaskin receives a copy of this Open Letter to Prof. Varney Burst.)

Although Gaskin apes this ill-advised medical practice (semisitting
delivery), she is on record in the medical literature using the same
radiographic study I use [Borell and Fernström 1957] - and the same
biomechanics - to encourage getting women off their tailbones when
problems occur.

The medical profession, by contrast, will likely NOT use simple
biomechanics in its hospitals [Meenan, Gaskin and Hunt J Fam Pract 199_].

Instead, the medical profession actually recommends placing women on
their tailbones when forceps become necessary. (The authors of the 1993
Williams Obstetrics cite a study in which 295 Residency programs in the
U.S. and Canada responded. 5% of the programs utilized outlet forceps,
with half reporting their use in 5% of deliveries and one third reporting
their use in 5% of deliveries or more... [Ramin S, Little B, Gilstrap L.
Survey of operative vaginal delivery in North America in 1990. Abstract
presented at meeting of Society of Perinatal Obstetricians, Orlando, Feb.
1992. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;166:430. Cited in Williams Obstetrics
1993.])

Even worse, in cases of breech delivery, obstetricians add a grisly step:
An assistant helps to impale the after-coming fetal skull on the sacral
tip. This is the "Mauriceau maneuver" illustrated in the 1993 Williams
Obstetrics. (Fig. 25-7) (It is interesting to note that, in addition to
this grisly breech delivery maneuver, the semi-sitting position itself is
credited to Francois Mauriceau (1637-1709); though he apparently
plagiarized the idea from Aristotle. [Dunn PM. Francois Mauriceau
(1637-1709) and maternal posture for parturition. Arch Dis Child
1991;66:78-9. Address: Prof. Dunn, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Road,
Bristol BS10 5NB])

An interesting Dick-Read coincidence: The "new/old" definition of
chiropractic that I got published in the 1988 27th edition of Dorland's
(reprinted in the 1994 28th edition) is quite similar to a definition of
natural childbirth penned by Grantley Dick-Read, M.D.

The "new/old" definition of chiropractic:reads as follows:

"Chiropractic: a science of applied neurophysiologic diagnosis...based on
the hypothesis that disease is caused by noxious mechanical, chemical and
psychic irritants...treatment is the removal of these irritants by the
most conservative means possible"

Dick-Read's definition of natural childbirth reads similarly:

"Natural childbirth means no physical, chemical or psychological
condition likely to disturb...the natural phenomenon or parturition."
[Grantley Dick-Read, M.D. quoted in Noble E. Childbirth with insight
Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1983:38]

Dick-Read's irrational "psychological condition" (support for
semisitting) creates a dangerous "physical condition" (fetal skull
squashing) which by its nature not only harms fetuses - but may also harm
mothers.

If Mens et al.'s "maximal flexion" delivery position is the same as "the
Bradley Classic"; then Mens et al.'s hypothesis that peripartum pelvic
pain (PPPP) is caused by "strain of pelvic ligaments" suggests a reason
they found a higher frequency of PPPP in a population of women subjected
to "maximal flexion." Women subjected to the "maximal flexion"/"Bradley
Classic" delivery position have their sacra pinned to the delivery table
as their legs and thighs crank down on acetabulo-sacroiliac lever arms
[Gastaldo Birth 1992;19:230] which, in turn, strain hormonally relaxed
sacroiliac ligaments in a direction exactly opposite what might be
considered a "normal" strain at delivery.

Interestingly, Mens et al. cited radiographic studies from the 1930s but
failed to cite Borell and Fernström's 1957 radiographic study, when they
referred to increased sacroiliac mobility during pregnancy as having been
"observed in an anatomic study and in radiographic studies."

Borell and Fernström's work is decades old but is still cited in the 1995
British Gray's Anatomy as evidence that "radiological pelvimetry has
become a refined technique" (p. 671).

British obstetrician Jason Gardosi, MD cites Borell and Fernström's 1957
work in the OB-GYN-List archive to support a point on which he and I
agree: Many cases of shoulder dystocia are caused by jamming the sacral
tip up to 4 cm into the pelvic outlet. See my posts in the OB-GYN-List
archive...
http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ob-gy...9707/0128.html
http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ob-gy...9707/0153.html

END Gastaldo's 1997 post regarding the possibility that "the Bradley

Classic" causes postpartum pelvic pain...

ONE LAST NOTE...

It occurred to me to revisit the Bradley Method when...

Heather (Proud mother of either Eowyn or George, who will be born sometime
in
September 2004) wrote:

"I do like the Bradley method quite a bit. I just didn't like the fact that
this instructor
was obsessed with Pregnancy aerobics....[S]he tells me I won't be able
to handle [birth] without the aerobics..."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...&output=gplain

Incredibly, the Bradley method used to be obsessed about a position ("the
Bradley Classic") that closes the birth canal up to 30%.

Most babies are deemed "healthy" after being born through birth canals
senselessly closed up to 30%...

But I wonder about the 4.6% of "healthy" term babies born with unexplained
brain bleeds...

I wonder about unexplained minor motor and perceptual difficulties found
later in life...

I wonder about the babies who are born with unexplained paralyses...

I wonder about the babies who are born DEAD - unexplained: Australian
obstetrician Norman F. Beischer, MD once guessed that 10 to 15% of
stillbirths were just fine right before delivery...

Most babies are born "healthy" - and allowing birth canals to open maximally
obviously won't solve all birth problems - but WHY are we letting OBs and
CNMwives close birth canals?

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ability grouping Nevermind General 71 November 11th 03 04:52 PM
Coach guide for Bradley Method? Stephen Pregnancy 1 October 20th 03 08:46 PM
Stop killing Innocent Puppies! (Petition) The Puppy Wizard General 0 October 10th 03 06:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.