Free Birthing

[AmberGretchen]

Date: 3/8/2010 12:15:50 AM
Author: TanDogMom
This truly frightens me. If I had attempted such a birth, I might not be alive today, as I required an emergency c-section. If a person wants to take her *own* life in her hands, fine, but it is not fair to the child, IMHO.

Completely, totally 110% agree. My cousin was actually born in a situation like this, in the middle of a snowstorm. The birth did end up being complicated, he was deprived of oxygen to his brain for a critical amount of time, almost died, and is now permanently disabled. I just can't fathom why anyone would risk a situation like this...

And, FWIW, there were no significant complications during pregnancy, and nothing to predict that this would be a high-risk birth. Sometimes things go wrong - that's why maternal and infant mortality are so high in so many parts of the world. I completely agree with those who made the point that:

1. It is not the child's choice, and it is selfish of the mother to make a high-risk decision on the child's behalf. We, as a society, feel completely free to judge women who drink and do other risky things during pregnancy, so why should this be different?

2. Why would we who are lucky enough to live in places with advanced medical care that prevent the aforementioned lower levels of maternal and infant mortality forgo the medical care (either supervised at home birth with medical professionals, or in a hospital) that could avert tragic outcomes for both mother and child?

 

[Blenheim]

I haven''t seen the documentary.

I don''t know about the rest of you, but I was pretty high on all of the birthing hormones and would not have been capable of rationally dealing with an emergency, regardless of the amount of preparation I had done beforehand. And if both my baby and I needed urgent medical assistance, there is no way that DH could have single-handedly attended to both of us while calling and waiting for an ambulance to arrive. Not to mention that we don''t own oxygen tanks and other emergency equipment that our midwives brought with them. The homebirth midwives who I know all have birthed their own children with other midwives and/or OBs present, which further says to me that it''s not just about the knowledge of how to deal with birth emergencies. I just don''t understand not wanting any trained professionals present.

 

[mayachel]

When I used to teach childbirth classes one of the birth dvds I''d show was an unassisted twin homebirth. I did so, because I felt it did a good job at showing various stages of labor and how the mother''s emotional state changed throughout. I also did it for the shock value of twins, at home, in the bathroom with handled complications-one baby was breech.

It also came with a speech from me, on how I personally and professionally do not recommend or advocate unassisted birthing.

As a disclaimer, I''m a midwife-so I do sort have a vested interest, but I assure you I support a woman being in control of how and where and with who she births.

So, I do not advocate laws against doing it. Still, I think that early and regular prenatal care is capable of helping many women and babies. It is the rare woman I encounter who does not still have questions or concerns, DESPITE being highly educated and reading lots of books on the subject.

What concerns me more so, is the medical community that feels they are entitled to treat ANY patient with the scorn and superiority that was mentioned with the placenta. To me, the woman took care of herself and her baby, understood her limits and sought out help when she needed it. Without other information, the Doctor''s need to belittle her and report to social services was waaay out of line in my book. It is also a perfect example of why this woman probably felt safer at home w/o the hospital''s help.

 

[megumic]

Date: 3/8/2010 12:57:17 PM
Author: PinkAsscher678
I think a few have brought up the good point of UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS.


I could never, throughout my pregnancy latch onto a preconceived notion about what my ''birth plan'' would be, even though I was encouraged to make one. Ultimately I didn''t end up doing it and I''m glad! I had vaguely planned on a natural birth to begin with, which wasn''t going to be a reality for me once I started on pitocin. And even though I had resolved to be pain medication free, that changed once I was 24 hours into feeling like I was being sawed in half (back labor).


None of this made me question my mettle as a woman. It just made me truly realize, the way ANY woman gives birth is to be admired, whether it be unassisted in the back of a taxi, or a planned c-section.


It''s these unrealistic birthing expectations, especially during first pregnancies that need to change. If you want a free birth because you have deep rooted beliefs that stray away from western medical intervention, that''s fine. But don''t do it to prove to yourself how much of a woman you are. Or to prove anything at all, for that matter.


And I also don''t believe anyone has the right to interfere in a free birth, should that be what the mother chooses. Least of all the law.

I''m not sure I get your post. You say these unrealistic birthing expectations. Which ones? What is unrealistic? Do you mean anything not involving medical intervention is unrealistic? Just curious...

 

[jewelz617]

Date: 3/8/2010 7:36:27 PM
Author: megumic

Date: 3/8/2010 12:57:17 PM

Author: PinkAsscher678

I think a few have brought up the good point of UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS.



I could never, throughout my pregnancy latch onto a preconceived notion about what my 'birth plan' would be, even though I was encouraged to make one. Ultimately I didn't end up doing it and I'm glad! I had vaguely planned on a natural birth to begin with, which wasn't going to be a reality for me once I started on pitocin. And even though I had resolved to be pain medication free, that changed once I was 24 hours into feeling like I was being sawed in half (back labor).



None of this made me question my mettle as a woman. It just made me truly realize, the way ANY woman gives birth is to be admired, whether it be unassisted in the back of a taxi, or a planned c-section.



It's these unrealistic birthing expectations, especially during first pregnancies that need to change. If you want a free birth because you have deep rooted beliefs that stray away from western medical intervention, that's fine. But don't do it to prove to yourself how much of a woman you are. Or to prove anything at all, for that matter.



And I also don't believe anyone has the right to interfere in a free birth, should that be what the mother chooses. Least of all the law.

I'm not sure I get your post. You say these unrealistic birthing expectations. Which ones? What is unrealistic? Do you mean anything not involving medical intervention is unrealistic? Just curious...

I mean unrealistic expectations about what they want out of a birth experience in general. Whether it be expecting more than what your body is capable of, or expecting a birth experience that is the most magical moment of your entire being. It could also mean expecting a completely natural birth and being devastated when it ends in an emergency c-section. Of course I don't think anything not involving medicine is unrealistic! Women found a way to give birth long before epidurals were invented!

I just think that a lot of women build up how their birth experience will be in their minds and feel bitterly disappointed when it doesn't go as planned. And it's sad, because there shouldn't be so much pressure to "perform." The goal is a healthy baby.

 

[somethingshiny]

mini threadjack....

PA~ Please tell me what the quote in your sig means.

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 3/8/2010 3:12:40 PM
Author: jas

I agree with this.

For me, I viewed L&D much like I viewed my wedding day. It''s ONE day, the first day, an important day, in my life. My wedding day was the first day of my marriage. My sons'' birth (I believe it was their birth, I had mine 37 year ago) was the first day of their life and the first day of my post-uterine motherhood. I personally was grateful for the c/s I had, which saved my son''s life. I don''t feel less of a mother cuz they didn''t come out via v-birth. Now, 18 months later, I almost never think about how they came out...I think about how I felt when I held them the first time...which was many minutes later for one of them because he was in serious need of oxygen. Many people I know commented that I didn''t get to ''bond'' with them because they didn''t nurse right away..many commented that I was cheated out of some magical, powerful experience. I don''t feel that way at all.

Nature is magnificent, and I agree that we need to trust the natural birth process more (all things being equal and safe). I also believe we are a social species, and I believe that being in some form of community (be it medical or midwife or doula or older tribal females) is not an unnatural thing during the birthing process.

Of course, your mileage may vary. I am enjoying reading the diversity of opinions on this topic.

I don''t mean to threadjack, but Jas, I just had to respond to this.

When I was born, my Mom''s situation was very similar to yours. I was born by c-section, and my Mom had some very serious complications which required her to be hooked up to all kinds of medical machinery for quite some time after I was born. Because of this, she wasn''t even able to hold me at all until I was one week old. She remembers when the nurses would bring all the babies into the mothers'' rooms at feeding time (this was 1978, before babies stayed in the mom''s room), and the other mothers would nurse or bottle feed their babies, while a nurse would bottle feed me in my Mom''s room while my Mom watched. My Mom would just cry and cry, because she so wanted to be able to hold me and feed me, but she couldn''t . . . she had to watch my Dad, my grandparents, nurses, etc. holding me and taking care of me, but she couldn''t do any of it herself. She had the same concerns that we were missing out on some important bonding opportunities, but that was absolutely not the case. My Mom and I have always been very close, and the complications when I was born had exactly zero effect on our relationship.

If I were ever to have a child, I don''t think I could do a home delivery, with or without a medical professional present. I really feel that I would just need to be in a hospital, due to the fact that my Mom had such severe problems with her labor and delivery. If my Mom hadn''t given birth to me in a hospital, I can assure you that neither she nor I would be here today.

 

[jewelz617]

Date: 3/8/2010 8:44:06 PM
Author: somethingshiny
mini threadjack....


PA~ Please tell me what the quote in your sig means.

LOL it''s a total inside joke that makes me smile. I am taking an intensive Russian course and was supposed to be translating how to find the nearest telephone, but I ended up writing "Here coin goes bell someone which it worries."

It''s a work in progress

 

[Tacori E-ring]

I think a major component of being a good parent is putting your child''s need before your own. I saw a documentary about mystery twins (women who thought they were only carrying one baby) and one lady free birthed both her twins who were both breeched. I think that was frightening. She is LUCKY those babies survived and she had no complications. If a woman (low risk) wants to have a home birth with a midwife/nurse that is her choice. I would never choose that but I can respect it. Free birthing is dangerous and scary. I find it beyond selfish.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think that is insane and irresponsible! I wanted a home birth *supervised by a qualified medical practitioner*, but who wants to give birth alone??? Simply insane.

 

[Dreamer_D]

OK PEOPLE

I just read the rest of the comment.

Home birth when supervisd by a midwife is NOT the same thing as "free birth". Supporting a woman''s right to choose does not extent to blantant insanity. I don''t think that we should support people giving themselves an apendectomy at home, so why support this?

And yes yes, they are not the same thing because birth is natural etc. But there are risks and those risks need to be given real weight when considering how to birth your child. No, it is not a mdeical emergency. But it is the one place where women still routinely die and babies also die. That means no birthing in the woods in my book.

And I am very pro midwife. Had one myself. But it is just very bizarre to me to think of giving birth without an attendant.

 

[somethingshiny]

PA~ lol. thanks for sharing, it was driving me crazy!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Megumic Before giving birth myself, I think I had veiwes about birth that are closer to yours, just based on what you have said here. I had a rather normal delivery, I wil spare you the details

. I am basically happy with how it all went. And I was cared for by midwives. But after being through it and realizing how on the edge you really are during the process -- on the edge of reason, on the edge of reality, on the edge of emotional and physical collapse, and even on the edge of life and death -- I became much more positive in my attitudes towards medical availability, if not outright intervention. I always wanted a home birth, but now I do not. I feel safer and more secure in a hospital.

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 3/8/2010 9:48:48 PM
Author: Tacori E-ring
I think a major component of being a good parent is putting your child''s need before your own. I saw a documentary about mystery twins (women who thought they were only carrying one baby) and one lady free birthed both her twins who were both breeched. I think that was frightening. She is LUCKY those babies survived and she had no complications. If a woman (low risk) wants to have a home birth with a midwife/nurse that is her choice. I would never choose that but I can respect it. Free birthing is dangerous and scary. I find it beyond selfish.

Totally agree with you.

Also agree with DD''s description of birth process.

Having a home birth with attendant, while not for me, is something I can respect - provided that there is a backup plan in place to get to the hospital should an emergency arise. To be honest, I still don''t think it is the best choice, because sometimes emergencies must be dealt with very quickly. But I respect that for some people, the benefits outweigh the risks.

"Free birth" is a totally different ballgame. Especially as a first timer, how would a person know the difference between normal labor pains and a potentially life threatening complication?

 

[rockpaperscissors67]

Date: 3/8/2010 7:56:26 PM
Author: PinkAsscher678

I mean unrealistic expectations about what they want out of a birth experience in general. Whether it be expecting more than what your body is capable of, or expecting a birth experience that is the most magical moment of your entire being. It could also mean expecting a completely natural birth and being devastated when it ends in an emergency c-section. Of course I don''t think anything not involving medicine is unrealistic! Women found a way to give birth long before epidurals were invented!

I just think that a lot of women build up how their birth experience will be in their minds and feel bitterly disappointed when it doesn''t go as planned. And it''s sad, because there shouldn''t be so much pressure to ''perform.'' The goal is a healthy baby.

IMHO, women that have expectations about birth but don''t do as much as possible to make their goals happen are the ones that end up disappointed. I''ll give you examples from my experience.

With my 4th, I wanted another unmedicated birth (and I had had 2 prior to this). I was birthing in a hospital because my then-husband would not agree to a homebirth. I was very disappointed about that, but liked my OB overall. The problem for me was that I had not gotten into the frame of mind that I needed in order to get through an unmedicated birth. I went into labor in the early evening and was very tired. We also had all of the kids at the hospital, so my husband was back and forth between them and me. I should have been ok because I tend to go very deep into myself when I''m in labor, but it was distracting to have him back and forth.

Late in the evening, I was still at 4 cm and wasn''t really making any progress. I was tired and obviously in pain. I decided to get an epidural, thinking I could finally rest and we''d have a baby in the morning. Our daughter was born an hour after the epidural was placed -- and then I had the joy of not being able to get out of bed for another 4 hours. It was not anything close to my best birthing experience.

With our 3 year old, I did everything I could to have the experience I wanted. I planned a homebirth with my midwife. I read and re-read tons of natural birth books. I had a lot of long talks with myself. Our homebirth was a fantastic experience. If something would have happened that I would have had to transport, I would have made peace with it because I had done everything in my power to have the birth I wanted, but I recognize that not everything is in my power.

We planned a waterbirth with our youngest, who is just 5 weeks old. There was a terrible snowstorm here on Jan. 30, and my water broke and contractions did not start immediately. I had several discussions with my midwife about what to do. She was concerned about getting to us and then being able to get back home. I knew that I had to have the baby as soon as possible or I would have to go to the hospital. As it turned out, our midwife made it here and our son was born 15 minutes later. I had the urge to push about an hour earlier and our midwife had me get on my hands and knees until she arrived. Even though I was pushing the entire time (not on purpose), the hands and knees position kept our son from being born. I did not get the waterbirth that I wanted, but this was something I couldn''t control -- I didn''t have the option of a relaxed birth because of the circumstances.

I have a friend who ended up with an "emergency" c-section. I put it in quotes because she is convinced now that there was no emergency -- she was on the OB''s schedule and when she didn''t progress as he thought she should, he operated. The bad thing about it was that the spinal didn''t take so she felt every single thing during the surgery. She was not only disappointed with her experience, she was traumatized. One of her biggest pet peeves is when people say all that matters is a healthy baby because she felt like people used that expression to dismiss her feelings.

FWIW, she had another child a few years later and attempted a VBAC. She ended up with another c-section but felt much happier with that experience because she had given the VBAC her best.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 3/8/2010 10:04:31 PM
Author: dreamer_d
I think that is insane and irresponsible! I wanted a home birth *supervised by a qualified medical practitioner*, but who wants to give birth alone??? Simply insane.

LOL, I was reading through this thread and was thinking, am I the only one who is going to say this sounds NUTS????

I was someone who wanted to labor naturally, etc etc. I get the whole "want to experience birth" dealie. I had a totally uncomplicated pregnancy but got toxemia several hours into my labor.

I''m all for midwives and home births, but this, IMHO, is taking it too far. I think a first time mom who is considering this is not only selfish, but a bit mentally unbalanced. It''s just unnecessary to do it with no help...either the mom has some kind of weird ego or a view of the world which is a bit cuckoo.

Yes, this is one instance where I would be judgmental. Having experienced a textbook pregnancy which went downhill in L&D very quickly (before any drugs were pumped into me) has certainly made me biased.

 

[megumic]

Date: 3/8/2010 10:09:43 PM
Author: dreamer_d
OK PEOPLE


I just read the rest of the comment.


Home birth when supervisd by a midwife is NOT the same thing as ''free birth''. Supporting a woman''s right to choose does not extent to blantant insanity. I don''t think that we should support people giving themselves an apendectomy at home, so why support this?

And yes yes, they are not the same thing because birth is natural etc. But there are risks and those risks need to be given real weight when considering how to birth your child. No, it is not a mdeical emergency. But it is the one place where women still routinely die and babies also die. That means no birthing in the woods in my book.


And I am very pro midwife. Had one myself. But it is just very bizarre to me to think of giving birth without an attendant.

Women and babies routinely die in car crashes everyday too, but that doesn''t stop us from leaving the house. While I personally am not a proponent of free birthing, for some women the benefits outweigh the risks. It may be insanity to you, but the free birthing mom''s may think going to the hospital to birth is insane. I don''t think it''s about supporting or not supporting free birthing, I think it''s about letting a couple and the mother choose their own methods of giving birth, as opposed to what society thinks is the "right" way for women to give birth and what is mainstream.

I agree 100% that it is bizarre to give birth without some sort of professional assistance, but I stand by women having the option to birth as they please. We don''t have laws against women drinking or smoking while pregnant, which is undoubtedly harmful to the baby, so why should we have laws about how women should give birth, which may or may not be harmful to the baby?

 

[jewelz617]

Date: 3/8/2010 10:54:18 PM
Author: rockpaperscissors67

Date: 3/8/2010 7:56:26 PM

Author: PinkAsscher678


I mean unrealistic expectations about what they want out of a birth experience in general. Whether it be expecting more than what your body is capable of, or expecting a birth experience that is the most magical moment of your entire being. It could also mean expecting a completely natural birth and being devastated when it ends in an emergency c-section. Of course I don''t think anything not involving medicine is unrealistic! Women found a way to give birth long before epidurals were invented!


I just think that a lot of women build up how their birth experience will be in their minds and feel bitterly disappointed when it doesn''t go as planned. And it''s sad, because there shouldn''t be so much pressure to ''perform.'' The goal is a healthy baby.

IMHO, women that have expectations about birth but don''t do as much as possible to make their goals happen are the ones that end up disappointed. I''ll give you examples from my experience.


With my 4th, I wanted another unmedicated birth (and I had had 2 prior to this). I was birthing in a hospital because my then-husband would not agree to a homebirth. I was very disappointed about that, but liked my OB overall. The problem for me was that I had not gotten into the frame of mind that I needed in order to get through an unmedicated birth. I went into labor in the early evening and was very tired. We also had all of the kids at the hospital, so my husband was back and forth between them and me. I should have been ok because I tend to go very deep into myself when I''m in labor, but it was distracting to have him back and forth.


Late in the evening, I was still at 4 cm and wasn''t really making any progress. I was tired and obviously in pain. I decided to get an epidural, thinking I could finally rest and we''d have a baby in the morning. Our daughter was born an hour after the epidural was placed -- and then I had the joy of not being able to get out of bed for another 4 hours. It was not anything close to my best birthing experience.


With our 3 year old, I did everything I could to have the experience I wanted. I planned a homebirth with my midwife. I read and re-read tons of natural birth books. I had a lot of long talks with myself. Our homebirth was a fantastic experience. If something would have happened that I would have had to transport, I would have made peace with it because I had done everything in my power to have the birth I wanted, but I recognize that not everything is in my power.


We planned a waterbirth with our youngest, who is just 5 weeks old. There was a terrible snowstorm here on Jan. 30, and my water broke and contractions did not start immediately. I had several discussions with my midwife about what to do. She was concerned about getting to us and then being able to get back home. I knew that I had to have the baby as soon as possible or I would have to go to the hospital. As it turned out, our midwife made it here and our son was born 15 minutes later. I had the urge to push about an hour earlier and our midwife had me get on my hands and knees until she arrived. Even though I was pushing the entire time (not on purpose), the hands and knees position kept our son from being born. I did not get the waterbirth that I wanted, but this was something I couldn''t control -- I didn''t have the option of a relaxed birth because of the circumstances.


I have a friend who ended up with an ''emergency'' c-section. I put it in quotes because she is convinced now that there was no emergency -- she was on the OB''s schedule and when she didn''t progress as he thought she should, he operated. The bad thing about it was that the spinal didn''t take so she felt every single thing during the surgery. She was not only disappointed with her experience, she was traumatized. One of her biggest pet peeves is when people say all that matters is a healthy baby because she felt like people used that expression to dismiss her feelings.


FWIW, she had another child a few years later and attempted a VBAC. She ended up with another c-section but felt much happier with that experience because she had given the VBAC her best.

I totally agree! But there are still plenty of women who do prepare, read the books, take the classes and still feel let down because they feel they didn''t "perform" as they should have, even if there was nothing more to be done.

" I recognize that not everything is in my power. "
This is the attitude that every woman giving birth should have, it would save lots of disappointment.

 

[honey22]

Date: 3/8/2010 12:15:50 AM
Author: TanDogMom
This truly frightens me. If I had attempted such a birth, I might not be alive today, as I required an emergency c-section. If a person wants to take her *own* life in her hands, fine, but it is not fair to the child, IMHO.

I agree and would go as far as to say it''s totally irresponsible. You are taking the most precious thing in the world, your child, and taking a risk with it''s life. It''s not worth it and should be illegal.

Fair enough if you want to have a homebirth and have a midwife, a doula or some other experienced person present, who can give advise as to whether intervention is necessary, but not on your own. It''s too risky.

Personally, I would never attempt a homebirth. I have been told already (not even preggo) that I have a narrow pelvis, as did my Mother who was in labour with me for 47 hours and ended up a having an emergency c-section. I wouldn''t take that risk at home.

 

[kelley1975]

I''ve seen the documentary and was pretty much in shock the entire time. It''s been a while, and yet the young lady who wast taking an infant CPR class asking if it was ok for a baby to go 20 minutes without oxygen made me want to stab myself in the thigh. Also, the woman who gave birth on hands and knees and the "popping" sound that occurred when the baby burst out of her vagina will haunt me in my dreams.
Aside from that, without getting into the debate too much, as a NICU nurse unassisted home births scare the living crap out of me. I''ve seen too many bad babies come in after an attempted unassisted home birth. Even home births with a lay midwife are not the same as having a trained professional there for the delivery. Anybody can call themselves a lay midwife. You don''t need a degree or training. Scary.
A well attended home birth in an uncomplicated pregnancy is not as alarming to me. Yes, things can happen, and you should be sure to be close enough to a hospital to get there FAST if complications arise. Even so, some things happen so quickly there wouldn''t be enough time even if you were next door to a hospital. I think people who want a low to zero intervention delivery can still have such at a hospital where there are safety precautions and plans in place. You just need to find the right provider. I had a zero intervention delivery with a certified midwife at the birth center where I work, and was very thankful for the safety plans in place when my LO came out and didn''t want to breathe. For 10 minutes. He would have died at home, possibly, or at least suffered from some oxygen deprivation even with rescusitation because giving mouth to mouth is a lower concentration of oxygen than he would get with respiratory support at a hospital.
I totally agree that it is selfish for a mother to even take that risk with their child''s life. When asked what my birth plan was I stated, "Whatever is necessary to have a healthy baby and mama."

 

[Pandora II]

Date: 3/8/2010 10:59:17 PM
Author: megumic

Date: 3/8/2010 10:09:43 PM
Author: dreamer_d
OK PEOPLE


I just read the rest of the comment.


Home birth when supervisd by a midwife is NOT the same thing as ''free birth''. Supporting a woman''s right to choose does not extent to blantant insanity. I don''t think that we should support people giving themselves an apendectomy at home, so why support this?

And yes yes, they are not the same thing because birth is natural etc. But there are risks and those risks need to be given real weight when considering how to birth your child. No, it is not a mdeical emergency. But it is the one place where women still routinely die and babies also die. That means no birthing in the woods in my book.


And I am very pro midwife. Had one myself. But it is just very bizarre to me to think of giving birth without an attendant.

Women and babies routinely die in car crashes everyday too, but that doesn''t stop us from leaving the house. While I personally am not a proponent of free birthing, for some women the benefits outweigh the risks. It may be insanity to you, but the free birthing mom''s may think going to the hospital to birth is insane. I don''t think it''s about supporting or not supporting free birthing, I think it''s about letting a couple and the mother choose their own methods of giving birth, as opposed to what society thinks is the ''right'' way for women to give birth and what is mainstream.

I agree 100% that it is bizarre to give birth without some sort of professional assistance, but I stand by women having the option to birth as they please. We don''t have laws against women drinking or smoking while pregnant, which is undoubtedly harmful to the baby, so why should we have laws about how women should give birth, which may or may not be harmful to the baby?

Sorry, but exactly what are the benefits of free-birthing compared with a professionally assisted home-birth other than pandering to some selfish woman''s ego?

I don''t think calling Social Services was wrong either. If a woman will take that kind of risk with her child''s life, maybe she will take others like not seeking medical care for the child - at which point the State can quite rightly step in. The State will also step in to ensure that you educate your child appropriately, either at home or in school - should this too be down to the mother? Or if she decides to homeschool and teach nothing but Astrology for example is that acceptable?

I think maybe you need to have a child of your own and have experienced labour to really understand what the stakes are and just how nuts this is...

 

[yssie]

oh my, I've been following this thread since the beginning.. and it scares me! I'm absolutely terrified of childbirth as it is - I'll take doctors, nurses, lawyers/engineers/artists if they increase the likelihood of a safe birth with as little PAIN as possible!



My thoughts as a woman who has not given birth but expects to in the next three or four years:


As the child of a textbook pregnancy, unforseen complication and emergency C-section - without which it's very likely that neither me nor my mum would be here - I have to say it'd be fantastic if the state stepped in and legislated against this sort of stupidity. I'm not talking about midwife-assisted home births, pitocin or epidurals, or really any unnecessary (and yes, it's foggy) medical intervention, I'm talking about dismissing the possibility that that intervention may be needed, and not effectively planning for it.. Any woman who deliberately and selfishly chooses to engage in such high-risk behaviours - who willingly endangers herself or her child to make a point, or to attempt to gain some sort of transient satisfaction from the experience of childbirth at the expense of her and her baby's health... it's lunacy, it's criminal, and it frankly ought to be treated as such.



There, I got that off my chest. Whew!





ETA: megumic - yes, to function in society driving's kinda gotta happen, and women and babies die in car accidents every day. That's why responsible parents put their children in carseats - to lower that risk as much as humanly possible. In fact, to do otherwise is illegal. To have the baby the birth itself has kinda gotta happen, and women and babies die during birth everyday. That's why responsible parents choose the safest delivery option - to lower that risk as much as humanly possible. To do otherwise should be illegal.

 

[rockpaperscissors67]

Date: 3/9/2010 5:30:45 AM
Author: Pandora II

Sorry, but exactly what are the benefits of free-birthing compared with a professionally assisted home-birth other than pandering to some selfish woman''s ego?

I don''t think calling Social Services was wrong either. If a woman will take that kind of risk with her child''s life, maybe she will take others like not seeking medical care for the child - at which point the State can quite rightly step in. The State will also step in to ensure that you educate your child appropriately, either at home or in school - should this too be down to the mother? Or if she decides to homeschool and teach nothing but Astrology for example is that acceptable?

I think maybe you need to have a child of your own and have experienced labour to really understand what the stakes are and just how nuts this is...

Well, I''ve had 6 kids and I don''t necessarily think UC is nuts.

I don''t think you can make the leap from someone choosing to have UC to not being able or willing to take care of her kids because I think the majority of the people that UC don''t make that choice lightly. They do it because they feel that it''s the best choice for them and their child. To me, it''s no different than choosing to co-sleep or delay vaccinations. There are risks associated with both of those and people certainly get up in arms about both topics, but I don''t think I''ve ever seen anyone suggest that someone who co-sleeps may also be capable of neglecting to get medical care for her child or educate them appropriately.

I''m sure there are lots of people that think we were crazy to have homebirths because they are convinced that the risks outweigh the benefits, so it''s conceivable that they would make the same leap of logic about us. I can assure you that even though we do avoid the doctor''s office as much as possible because I hate having the kids pick up every germ that''s going around, in an emergency, I''m off like a flash to the hospital or urgent care center. And our kids are being educated by the good old public school system (which some days makes me think they would be better off being homeschooled, even if they only learned astrology!).

Some of the benefits to UC that I can think of:

1. An intervention free birth. A couple might feel that going to the hospital will make this difficult and there may be no midwives in the area, so it''s either one extreme or another. Midwives that attend homebirths are not available everywhere in the US and often, midwives that are attached to a hospital are no less intervention minded than the OBs.

2. Avoiding exposing a newborn to the various germs at the hospital. Hospitals are nasty places and I would not want to expose my baby to the germs there if I could avoid it.

I don''t think UC is a good idea for a first time mom because she doesn''t know how birth will go for her. Moms with experience and a history of complication-free births, though, are a different story IMHO.

 

[icekid]

Date: 3/8/2010 6:09:16 PM
Author: mayachel

What concerns me more so, is the medical community that feels they are entitled to treat ANY patient with the scorn and superiority that was mentioned with the placenta. To me, the woman took care of herself and her baby, understood her limits and sought out help when she needed it.

mayachel- I''ll disagree QUITE strongly that (most) women who would choose to give birth at home, unassisted know their limitations. In medicine, I believe that one of the most important things is KNOWING what you don''t know and that is not an easy thing, in the least. While low risk pregnancies with midwives at home are quite reasonable, going this alone with the technology we have available is NOT. I''m not an OB, but I can understand why he would be pissed off. Sure, ideally the patient should not see that but doctors ARE human, too.

And I would also like to comment on rockpaperscissor''s comment that the hospital is not ready to do a c-section immediately. In a rural hospital, this may be true. But in any well-equipped hospital, even in the middle of the night, they could deliver within 3 minutes when needed. The anesthesiologist is in-house, the OB is in-house, the operating rooms are READY to go!

Being a physician, I know too much to ever consider a home birth. However, birthing at home without assistance IS plainly irresponsible and ridiculous. This has absolutely nothing to do with a woman''s right to choose.

 

[Pandora II]

Date: 3/9/2010 8:17:40 AM
Author: icekid

Date: 3/8/2010 6:09:16 PM
Author: mayachel

What concerns me more so, is the medical community that feels they are entitled to treat ANY patient with the scorn and superiority that was mentioned with the placenta. To me, the woman took care of herself and her baby, understood her limits and sought out help when she needed it.

mayachel- I''ll disagree QUITE strongly that (most) women who would choose to give birth at home, unassisted know their limitations. In medicine, I believe that one of the most important things is KNOWING what you don''t know and that is not an easy thing, in the least. While low risk pregnancies with midwives at home are quite reasonable, going this alone with the technology we have available is NOT. I''m not an OB, but I can understand why he would be pissed off. Sure, ideally the patient should not see that but doctors ARE human, too.

And I would also like to comment on rockpaperscissor''s comment that the hospital is not ready to do a c-section immediately. In a rural hospital, this may be true. But in any well-equipped hospital, even in the middle of the night, they could deliver within 3 minutes when needed. The anesthesiologist is in-house, the OB is in-house, the operating rooms are READY to go!

Being a physician, I know too much to ever consider a home birth. However, birthing at home without assistance IS plainly irresponsible and ridiculous. This has absolutely nothing to do with a woman''s right to choose.

Ditto - the hospital I delivered in had TWO dedicated operating theatres on standby 24/7. From when they decided to take me to theatre to when I arrived on the OT table was less than 2 minutes.

Daisy was in Occipito Transverse and wasn''t going to move a centimetre without being pushed back up and turned. I''d laboured for 42 hours - 39 of which I was up and walking around and having 5 minute long contractions - before getting an epidural and pitocin (no option as my waters had broken over 46 hours previously by that point). There was no way that I could have done ANYTHING to get that baby out - and after 3 days of labour and no sleep I was in no place to have 100% clear and logical thoughts.

Just wanted to add that the team did everything possible to avoid a c-section UNLESS it became necessary for our safety. I had a successful forceps delivery using a type of forceps - Keillands - which are rarely used anymore as it''s a very skilled procedure that isn''t often taught these days.

 

[megumic]

Date: 3/9/2010 5:30:45 AM
Author: Pandora II

Date: 3/8/2010 10:59:17 PM

Author: megumic

Date: 3/8/2010 10:09:43 PM

Author: dreamer_d

OK PEOPLE



I just read the rest of the comment.



Home birth when supervisd by a midwife is NOT the same thing as 'free birth'. Supporting a woman's right to choose does not extent to blantant insanity. I don't think that we should support people giving themselves an apendectomy at home, so why support this?

And yes yes, they are not the same thing because birth is natural etc. But there are risks and those risks need to be given real weight when considering how to birth your child. No, it is not a mdeical emergency. But it is the one place where women still routinely die and babies also die. That means no birthing in the woods in my book.



And I am very pro midwife. Had one myself. But it is just very bizarre to me to think of giving birth without an attendant.

Women and babies routinely die in car crashes everyday too, but that doesn't stop us from leaving the house. While I personally am not a proponent of free birthing, for some women the benefits outweigh the risks. It may be insanity to you, but the free birthing mom's may think going to the hospital to birth is insane. I don't think it's about supporting or not supporting free birthing, I think it's about letting a couple and the mother choose their own methods of giving birth, as opposed to what society thinks is the 'right' way for women to give birth and what is mainstream.


I agree 100% that it is bizarre to give birth without some sort of professional assistance, but I stand by women having the option to birth as they please. We don't have laws against women drinking or smoking while pregnant, which is undoubtedly harmful to the baby, so why should we have laws about how women should give birth, which may or may not be harmful to the baby?

Sorry, but exactly what are the benefits of free-birthing compared with a professionally assisted home-birth other than pandering to some selfish woman's ego?


I don't think calling Social Services was wrong either. If a woman will take that kind of risk with her child's life, maybe she will take others like not seeking medical care for the child - at which point the State can quite rightly step in. The State will also step in to ensure that you educate your child appropriately, either at home or in school - should this too be down to the mother? Or if she decides to homeschool and teach nothing but Astrology for example is that acceptable?


I think maybe you need to have a child of your own and have experienced labour to really understand what the stakes are and just how nuts this is...

If you had read any of my previous posts you would know that I am not, I repeat NOT a proponent of unassisted home birth. I was merely pointing out that for some women (not me) the benefits of unassisted birth clearly outweigh the risks, and they are willing to forgo what some see as the benefits of medical intervention for the benefits of an unassisted home birth.

Just as every woman has the choice of whether or what kind of birth control to use, the choice whether to maintain or terminate a pregnancy - I think women should have the choice on how to birth their babies. I truly believe this requires a LOT of research and personal edification, but I also think it is still a choice and needs to be respected.

I think part of what traditional hospital birthers don't see is that the unassisted home-birth moms think their choice is in fact the most responsible, least risky, safest, and in their family's best interest. They see the hospital as a threat, as many women describe pressure-filled experiences by medical professionals to have pitocin, epidurals, or emergency c-sections, etc.

 

[jas]

Date: 3/8/2010 9:01:55 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Date: 3/8/2010 3:12:40 PM
Author: jas

I agree with this.

For me, I viewed L&D much like I viewed my wedding day. It''s ONE day, the first day, an important day, in my life. My wedding day was the first day of my marriage. My sons'' birth (I believe it was their birth, I had mine 37 year ago) was the first day of their life and the first day of my post-uterine motherhood. I personally was grateful for the c/s I had, which saved my son''s life. I don''t feel less of a mother cuz they didn''t come out via v-birth. Now, 18 months later, I almost never think about how they came out...I think about how I felt when I held them the first time...which was many minutes later for one of them because he was in serious need of oxygen. Many people I know commented that I didn''t get to ''bond'' with them because they didn''t nurse right away..many commented that I was cheated out of some magical, powerful experience. I don''t feel that way at all.

Nature is magnificent, and I agree that we need to trust the natural birth process more (all things being equal and safe). I also believe we are a social species, and I believe that being in some form of community (be it medical or midwife or doula or older tribal females) is not an unnatural thing during the birthing process.

Of course, your mileage may vary. I am enjoying reading the diversity of opinions on this topic.

I don''t mean to threadjack, but Jas, I just had to respond to this.

When I was born, my Mom''s situation was very similar to yours. I was born by c-section, and my Mom had some very serious complications which required her to be hooked up to all kinds of medical machinery for quite some time after I was born. Because of this, she wasn''t even able to hold me at all until I was one week old. She remembers when the nurses would bring all the babies into the mothers'' rooms at feeding time (this was 1978, before babies stayed in the mom''s room), and the other mothers would nurse or bottle feed their babies, while a nurse would bottle feed me in my Mom''s room while my Mom watched. My Mom would just cry and cry, because she so wanted to be able to hold me and feed me, but she couldn''t . . . she had to watch my Dad, my grandparents, nurses, etc. holding me and taking care of me, but she couldn''t do any of it herself. She had the same concerns that we were missing out on some important bonding opportunities, but that was absolutely not the case. My Mom and I have always been very close, and the complications when I was born had exactly zero effect on our relationship.

If I were ever to have a child, I don''t think I could do a home delivery, with or without a medical professional present. I really feel that I would just need to be in a hospital, due to the fact that my Mom had such severe problems with her labor and delivery. If my Mom hadn''t given birth to me in a hospital, I can assure you that neither she nor I would be here today.

Thanks for sharing your story! I can only imagine the heartpull of not being able to hold a baby for weeks, but obviously it all turned out well. Mine was only for about 45-60 minutes, and I was so wackadoo on the birth hormones and the drugs that any "bonding" was going to be trippy anyway!
Also, want to clarify in my original post, that by saying I believe birthing is a natural process, in no way am I for unassisted delivery. I''ve heard too many horror stories and saw too many students who had severe problems due to delivery to even consider it.

 

[icekid]

Date: 3/9/2010 8:51:17 AM
Author: megumic

Date: 3/9/2010 5:30:45 AM

Author: Pandora II

Date: 3/8/2010 10:59:17 PM


Author: megumic

Date: 3/8/2010 10:09:43 PM


Author: dreamer_d


OK PEOPLE




I just read the rest of the comment.




Home birth when supervisd by a midwife is NOT the same thing as ''free birth''. Supporting a woman''s right to choose does not extent to blantant insanity. I don''t think that we should support people giving themselves an apendectomy at home, so why support this?

And yes yes, they are not the same thing because birth is natural etc. But there are risks and those risks need to be given real weight when considering how to birth your child. No, it is not a mdeical emergency. But it is the one place where women still routinely die and babies also die. That means no birthing in the woods in my book.




And I am very pro midwife. Had one myself. But it is just very bizarre to me to think of giving birth without an attendant.

Women and babies routinely die in car crashes everyday too, but that doesn''t stop us from leaving the house. While I personally am not a proponent of free birthing, for some women the benefits outweigh the risks. It may be insanity to you, but the free birthing mom''s may think going to the hospital to birth is insane. I don''t think it''s about supporting or not supporting free birthing, I think it''s about letting a couple and the mother choose their own methods of giving birth, as opposed to what society thinks is the ''right'' way for women to give birth and what is mainstream.



I agree 100% that it is bizarre to give birth without some sort of professional assistance, but I stand by women having the option to birth as they please. We don''t have laws against women drinking or smoking while pregnant, which is undoubtedly harmful to the baby, so why should we have laws about how women should give birth, which may or may not be harmful to the baby?

Sorry, but exactly what are the benefits of free-birthing compared with a professionally assisted home-birth other than pandering to some selfish woman''s ego?



I don''t think calling Social Services was wrong either. If a woman will take that kind of risk with her child''s life, maybe she will take others like not seeking medical care for the child - at which point the State can quite rightly step in. The State will also step in to ensure that you educate your child appropriately, either at home or in school - should this too be down to the mother? Or if she decides to homeschool and teach nothing but Astrology for example is that acceptable?



I think maybe you need to have a child of your own and have experienced labour to really understand what the stakes are and just how nuts this is...

I think part of what traditional hospital birthers don''t see is that the unassisted home-birth moms think their choice is in fact the most responsible, least risky, safest, and in their family''s best interest. They see the hospital as a threat, as many women describe pressure-filled experiences by medical professionals to have pitocin, epidurals, or emergency c-sections, etc.

I get the home birth idea. But what is their argument against having a qualified midwife present, then? They are quite sadly mistaken if they think being alone is more responsible and safer than having an experienced midwife.

 

[megumic]

Icekid, I have not the faintest clue why someone would not want a midwife present, nor what the argument may be. I only argue that their decision should be respected, as I''m certain it is well informed, and perhaps more so than hospital birthers b/c they are relying on medical professionals, while the unassisted home-birthers rely only on themselves...

 

[Lilac]

Date: 3/9/2010 7:29:57 AM
Author: rockpaperscissors67

I don''t think UC is a good idea for a first time mom because she doesn''t know how birth will go for her. Moms with experience and a history of complication-free births, though, are a different story IMHO.

Just because a woman has had complication-free births before doesn''t mean every birth will be like that. My MIL gave birth twice completely naturally with no complications whatsoever. Her third pregnancy she was in labor and the umbilical cord got stuck around the baby''s neck. The baby couldn''t breathe and wasn''t getting enough oxygen and if she hadn''t been in the hospital to have the emergency c-section she needed both she and the baby very likely would have died.

I think for any woman to assume she can handle childbirth herself (whether it''s the first birth, second birth, third birth, or ANY birth) without the help of a medical professional is just silly, irresponsible, careless, and unbelievably selfish.