Imagine: You are happily expecting the birth of your child, and when the thrilling moment approaches you check into your local hospital, a scenario common to most American mothers-to-be. You give birth to a healthy baby boy, but when you, yourself, are finally released from the hospital, it is more than three months later and you have lost your uterus, both arms, both legs and very nearly your life.

That's what happened to Claudia Meija. Somehow during what should have been a very brief stay at the hospital, in an area (labor and delivery) where the patients aren't even sick, she acquired an "aggressive streptococcal infection," a.k.a. flesh-eating bacteria.

There were no complications with the birth: "Everything was normal." But then she developed a rash ("possible allergic reaction to the sheets") and severe stomach pain ("normal for someone who had just given birth"). Two days later, doctors performed a hysterectomy. Twelve days later they amputated all her limbs, having given her the choice between that and dying. Even so, it was months before she was healthy enough to leave the hospital.

Is it any wonder that when Jon was in the hospital with viral meningitis I prayed as much that he would not acquire a new infection as I did that he recover from the original?

Is it any wonder that, despite its own inherent risks, home birth is looking more and more like the safer alternative?
posted by sursumcorda on Saturday, January 21, 2006 at 09:49 AM
Permalink
Category Health
Comments (rss)