Born in the USA (48 page)

25
. See Enkin et al.,
Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth;
O. Hjalmarson, “Epidemiology of Neonatal Disorders of Respiration,”
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
7, supplement 1 (1991); and J. Lomas and M. Enkin, “Variations in Operative Delivery Rates,” in
Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth
, ed. I. Chalmers, M. Enkin, and M. Keirse (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989).

26
. Harer, “Patient Choice Cesarean.”

27
. Wagner, “Fish Can't See Water,” p. s31.

28
. J. Potter et al., “Unwanted Caesarean Sections among Public and Private Patients in Brazil: A Prospective Study,”
British Medical Journal
323 (2001): 1155–58.

29
. 
FIGO Committee for the Ethical Aspects of Human Reproduction and Women's Health, “Ethical Aspects Regarding Cesarean Delivery for Non-medical Reasons,”
International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
64 (1999): 317–22.

30
. For detailed data on childbirth in the United States collected by the federal government, including C-section rates, go to
www.cdc.gov/nchs/birth
.

31
. World Health Organization, “Appropriate Technology for Birth,”
Lancet
2, no. 8452 (1985): 436–37.

32
. Wagner, “Choosing Cesarean Section.” Also see Wagner,
Pursuing the Birth Machine
.

33
. F. Notzon, “International Differences in the Use of Obstetric Interventions,”
Journal of the American Medical Association
263, no. 24 (1990): 3286–91.

34
. Lomas and Enkin, “Variations in Operative Delivery Rates.”

35
. Sachs, Castro, and Frigoletto, “Risk of Lowering the Cesarean-Delivery Rate.”

36
. For a discussion of the process by which the World Health Organization in 1985 determined the optimal C-section rate, see Wagner, “Fish Can't See Water.”

37
. A. Betran et al., “Rates of Caesarean Section: Analysis of Global and Regional Estimates and Correlation with Indicators of Reproductive Health System Development,” presented at the International Forum on Birth, Rome, June 2005, and accepted for publication in
Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology
.

38
. L. Leeman and R. Leeman, “A Native American Community with a 7% Cesarean Delivery Rate: Does Case Mix, Ethnicity or Labor Management Explain the Low Rate?”
Annals of Family Medicine
1 (2003): 36–43.

39
. In an editorial in the
ACOG Clinical Review
, the then president of ACOG wrote, “The once significant differences in cost between cesarean and vaginal delivery are close to disappearing.” Harer, “Patient Choice Cesarean,” p. 18.

40
. I. M. Gaskin,
Ina May's Guide to Childbirth
(New York, Bantam Books, 2003), p. 234.

41
. An excellent review of normal labor pain and factors that influence it is found in Gaskin,
Ina May's Guide to Childbirth
, pp. 150–66.

42
. For reviews of the perception of pain in different countries, see I. Senden et al., “Labor Pain: A Comparison of Parturients in a Dutch and an American Teaching Hospital,”
Obstetrics and Gynecology
71 (1988): 4; B. Jordon,
Birth in Four Cultures: A Cross-Cultural Investigation of Childbirth in Yucatan, Holland, and the United States
(Montreal: Eden Press, 1983); and Gaskin,
Ina May's Guide to Childbirth
, pp. 150–53.

43
. 
Goer,
Thinking Woman's Guide to a Better Birth
, pp. 125–48.

44
. There are three excellent studies on the risks associated with epidural: B. Leighton and S. Halpern, “The Effects of Epidural Anesthesia on Labor, Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes,”
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
186 (2002): 569–77; E. Lieberman and C. O'Donoghue, “Unintended Effects of Epidural Anesthesia during Labor,”
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
186 (2002): 531–68; and L. Mayberry and D. Clemmens, “Epidural Analgesia Side Effects, Co-interventions, and Care of Women during Childbirth,”
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
186 (2002): 581–93. In addition, an excellent review and summary of the scientific evidence on the risks of using epidural block for normal labor pain is found in Goer,
Thinking Woman's Guide to a Better Birth
, pp. 125–47, 264–76.

45
. Lieberman et al., “Changes in Fetal Position during Labor and Their Association with Epidural Analgesia,”
Obstetrics and Gynecology
105, no. 5, part 1 (2005): 974.

46
. D. Chestnut et al., “The Influence of Continuous Epidural Bupivacaine Analgesia on the Second Stage of Labor and Methods of Delivery in Nulliparous Women,”
Anesthesiology
66 (1987): 774–80; C. Stavrou, G. J. Hofmeyr, and A. P. Boezaart, “Prolonged Fetal Bradycardia during Epidural Anesthesia: Incidence, Timing and Significance,”
South Africa Medical Journal
77 (1990): 66–68; R. Steiger and M. P. Nageotte, “Effects of Uterine Contractility and Maternal Hypotension on Prolonged Decelerations after Bupivacaine Epidural Anesthesia,”
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
163 (1990): 808–12.

47
. J. Eddleston et al., “Comparison of the Maternal and Fetal Effects Associated with Intermittent or Continuous Infusion of Extradural Analgesia,”
British Journal of Anaesthesia
69 (1992): 154–58.

48
. C. M. Sepkoski et al., “The Effects of Maternal Epidural Anesthesia on Neonatal Behavior during the First Month,”
Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology
34 (1992): 1072–80. Also see Goer,
Thinking Woman's Guide to a Better Birth
, p. 271.

49
. S. Boschert, “Anesthesiologists Defend Epidural Safety,”
Ob.Gyn. News
, July 15, 1998, p. 20.

50
. M. Wagner, “Episiotomy: A Form of Genital Mutilation,”
Lancet
353 (1999): 1977–78.

51
. Dr. DeLee's remarks are quoted from M. Chase, “Episiotomy, Once Routine, May Not Ease Delivery and Can Slow Recovery,”
Wall Street Journal
, March 30, 2000, p. A1.

52
. S. Thacker and D. Banta, “Benefits and Risks of Episiotomy: An Interpretive Review of the English Language Literature, 1860–1980,”
Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey
38 (1983): 322–38.

53
. 
World Health Organization, “Appropriate Technology for Birth.”

54
. Chase, “Episiotomy,” includes data from the Cochrane Library review. The Cochrane Library, produced by Update Software in Oxford, England, is the most scientifically respected and valid source of information on obstetric procedures. The best scientists from around the world evaluate the scientific literature and write reviews of the evidence for various obstetric interventions. It is available in nearly every medical library in the United States and comes out four times a year on computer diskette.

55
. Chase, “Episiotomy.”

56
. L. Tarkan, “In Many Delivery Rooms, a Routine Becomes Less Routine,”
New York Times
, February 26, 2002.

57
. 
Listening to Mothers
(New York: Maternity Center Association, 2002), the first national survey of childbearing women in the United States, was conducted by the Maternity Center Association (now called Childbirth Connection), 281 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10010.

58
. K. Hartmann et al., “Outcomes of Routine Episiotomies: A Systematic Review,”
Journal of the American Medical Association
293 (2005): 2141–48.

59
. A Swedish study found that when a mother receives three doses of opiates or barbiturates or nitrous oxide gas during her labor, her child is 4.7 times as likely to become addicted to opiate drugs in adulthood. This conclusion was replicated almost exactly in a U.S. study. The Swedish study is B. Jacobson et al., “Opiate Addiction in Adult Offspring through Possible Imprinting after Obstetric Treatment,”
British Medical Journal
301, no. 6760 (1990): 1067–70. The U.S. study is K. Nyberg, “Long-Term Effects of Labor Analgesia,”
Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing
29, no. 3 (2000): 226.

60
. For a review of how little is known about possible effects on the baby of ultrasound scanning during pregnancy, including one study suggesting possible minimal neurological damage, see Wagner,
Pursuing the Birth Machine
, pp. 86–92. The study suggesting possible minimal neurological damage is K. Salvesen et al., “Routine Ultrasonography in Utero and Subsequent Handedness and Neurological Development,”
British Medical Journal
307 (1993): 159–64.

61
. A. Saari-Kemppainen et al., “Ultrasound Screening and Perinatal Mortality,”
Lancet
336 (1990): 387–91; J. Newnham et al., “Effects of Frequent Ultrasound during Pregnancy: A Randomized Controlled Trial,”
Lancet
342 (1993): 887–91.

62
. B. Ewigman, “Effect of Prenatal Ultrasound on Perinatal Outcome,”
New England Journal of Medicine
329 (1993): 821–27.

63
. Newnham et al., “Effects of Frequent Ultrasound during Pregnancy.”

64
. H. B. Meire, “The Safety of Diagnostic Ultrasound,”
British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
94 (1987): 1121–22.

65
. 
R. Salmond, “The Uses and Value of Radiology in Obstetrics,” in
Antenatal and Postnatal Care
, ed. F. Browne, 2nd ed. (London: J. and A. Churchill, 1937).

66
. J. C. Moir, “The Uses and Value of Radiology in Obstetrics,” in
Antenatal and Postnatal Care
, ed. F. Browne, 9th ed. (London: J. and A. Churchill, 1960).

67
. A. Stewart et al., “Malignant Disease in Childhood and Diagnostic Irradiation in Utero,”
Lancet
2 (1956): 447.

68
. 
Lancet
366, no. 9482 (July 23, 2005): 283.

69
. The eight basic, required elements in informed consent are found in FDA regulation 50:25. The list of the most common problems found by the FDA when reviewing informed consent forms is in the FDA Information Sheets, which can be accessed at
www.fda.org
.

70
. The office in the federal government that deals with the abuse of people who are experimented on is the Division of Human Subject Protection of the Office for Protection from Research Risk (OPRR). OPRR is part of the National Institutes of Health, an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services. The quotation is from OPRR,
Guide to Good Clinical Practice
, vol. 3, no. 6, which can be accessed at
www.nih.gov
.

71
. For a fuller discussion of “checkbook science,” see D. Zuckerman, “Hype in Health Reporting,”
Extra
(the magazine of FAIR, the media watchdog group) 15, no. 4 (2004): 8–11.

72
. Enkin et al.,
Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth
, pp. 487–507.

73
. D. Petiti et al., “In-Hospital Maternal Mortality in the US,”
Obstetrics and Gynecology
59 (1982): 6–11; D. Petiti et al., “Maternal Mortality and Morbidity in Cesarean Section,”
Clinics in Obstetrics and Gynecology
28 (2001): 763–68; M. Hall and S. Bewley, “Maternal Mortality and Mode of Delivery,”
Lancet
354 (1999): 776.

74
. The data showing that the rate of C-section in the United States is nearly twice what it should be are found in Wagner, “Choosing Cesarean Section.”

75
. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
Safe Motherhood: Preventing Pregnancy-Related Illness and Death
(Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2001).

76
. Discussed in a
New York Times
editorial as reported in the
International Herald Tribune
, October 22, 2002.

FOUR. FORCED LABOR

1
.  Food and Drug Administration, Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) Data Base, reported on February 21, 2005.

2
.  
F. G. Cunningham et al.,
Williams Obstetrics
, 21st ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001), p. 447.

3
.  “Vigorous uterine contractions combined with a long, firm cervix and a birth canal that resists stretch [found in a woman having a first baby] may lead to uterine rupture or extensive lacerations of the cervix, vagina, vulva or perineum. It is in these latter circumstances that the rare condition of amniotic fluid embolism most likely develops.” Cunningham et al.,
Williams Obstetrics
, p. 447.

4
.  What is the evidence that there is an increase in AFE deaths in the United States? AFE was once so rare that textbooks estimated its frequency as 1 in every 50,000 to 1 in every 80,000 births. But the Massachusetts Department of Public Health Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee in 2000 reported AFE as the second most common cause of maternal mortality
(Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review in Massachusetts: A Bulletin for Health Care Professionals
, no. 1, May 2000).

5
.  M. Wagner, “From Caution to Certainty: Hazards in the Formation of Evidence-Based Practice. A Case Study on Evidence for an Association between the Use of Uterine Stimulant Drugs and Amniotic Fluid Embolism,”
Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology
19, no. 2 (2005): 173–76.

6
.  For a thorough discussion of the off-label use of drugs in obstetrics, see M. Wagner, “Off-Label Use of Drugs in Obstetrics—A Cautionary Tale,”
British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
112 (2005): 266–68.