BBC News Site Today, Pregnancy and Obesity…

03-07-2007, 05:06 AM

BBC News Site Today, Pregnancy and Obesity…

I’ll let you read it for yourself… and then make your minds up!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6423649.stm

I’ve never read such balls in my life, excuse my language!

naomi123 · 03-07-2007, 06:09 AM

Thereis nothing in there that is news to me. Obese pregnant women do need higher levels of care. They are at higher risk for certain complications.

I was obese when I was pregnant, I suffered from gestational diabetes. It also meant it was hard to palapte me (ie feel which position the baby is lying in), in fact no midwife could tell me that my daughter was breech, I had to tell them because I could feel all the kicks were the wrong way round! I had scans every 2 weeks because of the GD and breech position.

I did not need a special bed for my c section because I was not over the weight limit for a normal bed, but it did take them 1 hour to put the epidural in before my c section (it normally takes about 2 minutes but I had back fat in the way).

Once I was discahrged from the hospital, I got an infection in my c section wound, again, much more likely in obese women.

So, all in all, although its quite depressing reading, it certainly rings very true for me. I am pretty certain that if I had been a normal weight, I would not have got GD, the breech position of my baby would have been able to been felt by midwives, and my c section would have been much quicker.

I am pretty sure I cost the NHS much more money than a woman of normal BMI during my pregnancy.

briggy · 03-07-2007, 06:42 AM

I think it is interesting that it was done at Teeside, where we have one of the highest rates of obesity in the country.

As naomi said it's hardly news that there are more possible complications and more cost to the NHS during the pregnancy of a woman with a higher BMI, however this applies to lots of groups, eg drug addicts, alcoholics, smokers

Another interesting point is North Tees hospital won't prescribe clomid to women with a BMI over 30 but, for example, Durham approx 30 miles away will

Sarah Louise · 03-07-2007, 06:56 AM

It maybe true in some cases that obese woman do need extra care while pregnant but I feel that this snip bit of information is just one article in a long line of fat bashing, it seems as though the media has won a battle with the whole smoking sager by stopping smoking in public places (which I do think is a good thing), and now they are onto their next crusade ..... to rid the world of fat people !!

gets off her sopabox !! ha ha ha

georgy · 03-07-2007, 07:00 AM

Oooops, I never saw this and I posted in the Rant section...maybe I should delete.

Anyhoo...I just think that they're stating the obvious. My wonderful Endo and I had a long discussion about this exact subject the other day and he told me pretty much what it says in that piece.

He is so supportive that he gave me the option of getting a gynaecologist involved and possibly starting clomid - as long as I know all the risks. But I said no - because I really don't feel fit or healthy enough to carry a baby and I'm not willing to take the risk of killing myself or a baby while I'm this fat.

Seems like common sense to me...I mean, if any of us obese women had a magic wand and were able to choose between being obese and having a difficult, potentially lethal pregnancy and birth process, or being slim and healthy and having a dignified pregnancy and a birth without 2 doctors holding your fat up while they get the baby out of your stomach...my guess is that we'd choose the latter. I certainly would.

03-07-2007, 07:50 AM

Sadly it all comes down to money here in the UK and that is frankly annoying… everyone knows people over are overweight are going to have a rough time being pregnant although I am sure some people sail through it with no complications.

Gestational diabetes can occur in women who are not overweight as well, I know two people at work a size 12 who both developed it.

Someone TTC who is overweight knows the risks they are not stupid… most overweight people who are seriously overweight BMI say 35+ would more than likely have problems conceiving anyway and no doubt upon getting help from there GP or hospital they would be told to LOSE WEIGHT…

I want kids, but I am overweight now, too overweight to have them so I won’t even try… I would like to think if I get to around 16 stone then I would TTC… I certainly won’t let anyone tell me otherwise and I am not waiting till I am a size 12/14 …. It’s a risk I’ll take, like all those people that opt for an elective c-section… (And there is a lot of that that happens now in the UK)

alex · 03-07-2007, 07:50 AM

I think this article is very true, and don't see it "fat-bashing", except perhaps for the headline, which almost certainly was written by a sub-editor who didn't write the rest of the piece. They give it a title like that because more people will click on "Obese mothers-to-be 'burden' NHS" than something like "Overweight pregant women require more tests and care".

I think people are really aware of the dangers of smoking nowadays (decades ago many women smoked during pregnancy, nowadays it's pretty rare), and obesity-related conditions will be the major funding challenge for the NHS in future.

APART from the word "burden" in the headline, which I've already mentioned, I see that the article is pointing out genuine health risks related to pregnancy and obesity rather than blaming overweight woman. Plus, those women who are overweight but don't suffer from PCOS may not be as aware of the effects on their health as we tend to be.

Alex

georgy · 03-07-2007, 08:03 AM

I don't 'get' how it comes down to money at all mazarin. It comes down to your personal health and safety, and that of your unborn child.

Sure, the emphasis, in this piece, seems to be the 'burdon' on the NHS and its staff - but they still make it clear that obese patients are putting themselves at risk.

By the way, my endo said that I was to come back in 6 months and when I'm 15 stones he'd consider our next step, but he said that I was still a high risk for pre-eclampsia later on in a pregnancy at that weight. Ideally I need to have a maximum BMI of 30 - which takes me in at 12 and a half stones - still 3 stones overweight, but with a healthier outlook.

There's no easy way to do this, it hurts me to say it because I just desperately want to be slim and pregnant, but if we stay fat and are 'lucky' enough to get pregnant then we're taking a massive risk.

naomi123 · 03-07-2007, 08:04 AM

Gestational diabetes can occur in women with a lower BMI but it is much more likely in women with a higher BMI. It is all about reducing risk and looking at trends. Sure, everyone knows of somebody that smoked 20 a day and lived til they were 90. but equally there are people who have never smoked in their life who get lung cancer. You cant base stuff like that on anecdotal examples. It is much more likely that if you have a higher bmi that you will get GD. Fact!

Personally, I wont wait until I am size 12 until I ttc, life is for living, but I do think I have to be aware of the risks that having a plus size pregnancy will pose, and that article just summed them up.

RE: Elective sections. I had an elective section, and the point of having an elective section, is to REDUCE risk to both mother and child. My daugher was a 9lb breech baby and I had GD. (Actaully, if Im being pedantic, I didnt have an elective section, as I went into labour so ended up with an emergency section anyway, but I would have had an elective section had my dd not been in such a rush)

Anyway, I agree with the pp, I dont think the article was fat bashing, I think it was just pointing out genuine health risks to obese women during pregnancy. I hate fat bashing articles as much as the next person, but I think this article was just saying that obese women need more care in pregnancy (which is true)

03-07-2007, 08:10 AM

People are aware of the risks and they are common sense. There was an article a week ago in on the same news site about how people with Diabeties (particularly type 2) are not given adequate care before TTC or during pregnancy… shall we blame fat people for that as well because most type 2’s are overweight! Or does the blame lie with the NHS for now offering adequate care to people with Diabeties…

According to NICE guidelines someone with Diabeties Type 2 should have a review every 12 months; my mother is an insulin dependent type 2 diabetic and has been for over 10 years. Her last diabetic review at Hope Hospital was 24 months ago!!!!!!!!!!! She can’t be treated in Bolton because her renal care is done at Manchester so she has to wait longer to be seen. Her legs from where she injects insulin are badly bruised but does anyone care… NOPE!

She did finally get a letter for a review only last week, with an apology for the delay blaming the increase of Type 2 Diabeties on the fact they could not see her sooner! Of course it’s FAT people who are all Type 2 Diabetics so blame them… Not the NHS!

Oh and ironically my mother is stick thin a size 12 does not smoke and drink and has never been overweight … but she still got Type 2 Diabeties!

03-07-2007, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgy

I don't 'get' how it comes down to money at all mazarin. It comes down to your personal health and safety, and that of your unborn child.

Georgy, it’s always about Money in the UK… the article is basically saying that FAT people are more of an expense to the UK in the terms of the extra care that they need to be pregnant…

It’s down to the individual person whether they want children or not and if they choose to take the risk, the same risk someone who is underweight, a smoker, a drinker would take…

If you choose to work in the medical profession then you need to be caring and understanding to people who have a weight problem regardless of whether you disagree with them choosing to have a baby or not… yes tell them the risk although most would already know them but don’t belittle them because it’s more than likely going to turn them to food for comfort!

You only have to look at the care in the USA because they pay compare to the treatment people in the UK get… hands up here if you have been nothing there is nothing that can be done for your PCOS if you’re not TTC! …

naomi123 · 03-07-2007, 08:19 AM

The thing is, regardless who whose fault the increase in type 2 diabetes is, the fact is there is an increase. So the NHS needs to make provisions for diabetes care and make sure they have enough services for everybody. I dont think it is anybodys fault, but its just one of those things.

03-07-2007, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naomi123

RE: Elective sections. I had an elective section, and the point of having an elective section, is to REDUCE risk to both mother and child. My daugher was a 9lb breech baby and I had GD. (Actaully, if Im being pedantic, I didnt have an elective section, as I went into labour so ended up with an emergency section anyway, but I would have had an elective section had my dd not been in such a rush)

Having an elective c-section for a breech baby is perfectly understandable and I see nothing wrong with that, for both the safety of the mother and the baby…

I was talking about elective c-sections to fit in with people’s lifestyles like the girl at work who had one because her partner was working away the weekend she was due! Sometimes people have to get there priorities right!

alex · 03-07-2007, 08:23 AM

I don't see that this issue of "blame" is relevant. The article is not shouting blame at overweight pregnant women, it's pointing out that pregnancies in obese women are likely to be higher risk, which is a simple fact.

Fat people ARE more of an expense to the NHS, what's controversial about that? Obviously they should get the treatment they need. But I don't see that simply saying that obesity is a financial challenge is in itself wrong.

We pay for the NHS through our taxes, and it's really easy to bash it. I'm the first to admit that the NHS is NOT perfect, but I'm very grateful to have it. Would I like to be on the US system, with a sky-high insurance bill, or worse, no insurance and unable to afford medical care at all? No thanks.

Alex

edited for typos

naomi123 · 03-07-2007, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mazarin

Having an elective c-section for a breech baby is perfectly understandable and I see nothing wrong with that, for both the safety of the mother and the baby…

I was talking about elective c-sections to fit in with people’s lifestyles like the girl at work who had one because her partner was working away the weekend she was due! Sometimes people have to get there priorities right!

But you dont get an elective section on the NHS just because you want one. There has to be a reason for it, and the above reason would not be enough. They dont do them lightheartedly I can assure you! There must have been somethng else going on for her to have had an elective section, or else it was done privately.