CNN/AP: C-sections in U.S. reach all-time high

C-sections in U.S. reach all-time high
Government research finds preterm, low-weight births on the rise
Tuesday, November 15, 2005


ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- The rate of Caesarean sections in the U.S. has climbed to an all-time high, despite efforts by public health authorities to bring down the number of such deliveries, the government said Tuesday.

Nearly 1.2 million C-sections were performed in 2004, accounting for 29.1 percent of all births that year, the National Center for Health Statistics reported. That is up from 27.5 percent in 2003 and 20.7 in 1996.

The increase is attributed to fears of malpractice lawsuits if a vaginal delivery goes wrong, the preferences of mothers and physicians, and the risks of attempting vaginal births after Caesareans.

The C-section rate increased for all births, even those that involved healthy, first-time pregnancies with a full-term, single child.

In 2000, the government announced a national public health goal of reducing the C-section rate for such births to 15 percent by 2010, but the actual rate now is about 24 percent and rising....


http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/11/15/csections.up.ap/index.html

1. Conveneince (birth can be scheduled).
2. No labor pain.

Not sure how I feel about it - just hope it doesn't affect these women adversely in the long run.

i've had 2 kids, neither by c-section. there are several years between my boys and i was very surprised by things that changed between the birth of the first and second. my older son was actually born a week after his due date - everything proceeded on mother natures schedule. when i did not proceed to go into labor on the "due date" of my second son i was already scheduled to visit the ob-gyn in the morning first thing to break the water and went immediately to the hospital where labor was induced. i was conveniently finished by 5 p.m.

the convenience, however, seemed more geared toward my doctors schedule...

in retrospect - oh, i really don't know! i am a huge fan of technology and all that it brings - but i'm just not sure that scheduled delivery for convenience is the best way to go. and i'm pretty sure that a scheduled cesarean without compelling medical reason is not the best way to go. but, then again, i'm done with childbearing, so i guess i don't really have much of a say ;-)

obstetrics.

The increasingly common practice of scheduled inductions in normal, healthy pregnancies is NOT good medicine. It IS, however often convenient for the doc.

Kath M.D.

If there was significant maternal hypertension, signs of placental insufficiency, LGA fetus, or any number of other reasons, it would have been perfectly good medicine.

Would you agree that if none of those counterindications
to continuing the pregnancy applied, and the only reason for the induction was that a healthy pregnancy had gone one day past the "due" date, an induction would not be warranted?

This is certainly the picture that Shugah's post appears to be painting.

I had a non-scheduled c-section with my last child. Oh sure, you get to stay an extra day or two in the hospital, but then you go home, and the real fun begins. You don't just have a new baby to deal with - now you're also recovering from surgery. My son weighed 9-15, and I nursed him - had to put a pillow on my lap to help keep the weight and pressure off my lower abdomen.

It's the afterwards that's difficult - they may not be considering that. I've had three children vaginally, so I've never experienced a C-section. I can understand why you had one - big boy!

:hi:

delivery had to be a c-section. Second c-section, I was released from the hospital the very next day. Had a five year old and a newborn to contend with while recovering from surgery and nursing as well. Yep, fun times! :rofl:

You just need to find a hospital and a doctor who is able to deal with high risk deliveries. I had pain with all three. It was just in different places. lol

The pre-scheduled ones, not the ones that happene because of complications. Hate to say this.. but they liked being able to be completely numbed out, have it done, and get to convalesce while someone else cares for the baby. And.. sadly, lots of women try for C-section, according to them, for.. um... (how do I say this?), it doesnt' mess with any of their privates? Leaving them as tho they never gave birth except for a small scar on the tummy. (I swear this is why so many famous and rich women do it that way.. vanity).

she had a "convenience" c-section too:-(

its not for vanity...its because i don't want to push a baby out of a small hole. Flame away, but its my choice

Having that choice and feeling empowered by that choice will make a world of difference.

I am a doula and am happy to help. just a quick word, your vaginal muscles are made to push a baby thru the birth canal. and your cervix dilates quite adequately to allow passage of the baby as well. C-sections are major abdominal surgery, cutting thru several layers of uterine muscle. Recovery is not easy. Just hope you have all the facts for your decision so that you make it with as much security as possible.

a great book to read is : The Birth Book by Dr. Sears. Might assuage any fears or misinformation you may have gotten from well meaning folks not educated about birth.

Congrats, and whatever you choose, I wish you a healthy pregnancy and a wonderful birth experience.

The best part of having no anesthesia was being totally awake and aware all during the process and afterward. At the hospital a lot of the women were like zombies afterward, I was watching TV, doing my nails, and all that.

The other thing is it gets you off to a better start with the nursing. Nursing is a full time 24 hour job when it's a newborn.

It might seem easier to have the surgery and bottle feed but in the longrun it's not. I felt sorry for my friends who had to deal with bottle warmers and all that. Although I'll admit I got sick of taking the breast pump to work.

You get thinner faster breastfeeding, and you can do sit-ups faster if you don't have the surgery. I mean you have to think of everything, not just the actual birth, that's not the end, that's only the beginning.

When I have kids I plan on having a C-section precisely so that it does not mess with my privates. It's not vanity. I don't care how I "look" down there, but I'd had a biopsy done for an abnormal pap-smear in the past and it was SO traumatic and made me feel so unsexual for such a long time that I NEVER want any sharp objects or any cutting, incisions or stitching anywhere near that area again. I'd rather have an incision in my abdoment than have vaginal tearing or cutting and stitching. I think it would psychologically affect my sex life far longer than it would have the physical effects. I don't think it's "sad" at all. Technology offers women this opportunity, which in many countires like Brazil and Russia is the preferred method of delivery, but in the US it is debated in the same moralized way that everything else about female reproduction gets debated.

It's not a fluke thing either, but a well documented statistical link. Children who are delivered by C-Section are far more likely to develop schizophrenia later in life.

Children born by C-Section typically have higher dopamine levels than children born vaginally, and high dopamine levels have been fingered as one of the causes of schizophrenia, as well as a possible trigger to Parkinson's and other neuropathies. Since dopamine levels affect information processing, there's also a strong possibility that out-of-kilter dopamine levels may contribute to behavioral problems and learning disabilities like ADHD.

Nobody's completely sure why c-section babies have higher dopamine levels, but there's research which indicates that hormones released by the mothers during vaginal delivery act as some type of calibrator to set the proper levels in the child. When a baby is born by C-Section, that calibration never happens and their dopamine levels generally come out above average.

But I was wondering if there were any adverse effects on the child.

It seems like an natural vaginal delivery would be better for a person's (the baby/child/grown adult) subconscious.

the shadow of a doubt. who were the people who did the study? I am asking because I have seen too many studies disproved through the last 50 years. I don't believe these things until it is proven beyond any doubt.

and I'm not interested in persuading you either way, but I just googled "caesarian link schitzoprenia" and there is a proven link with birth complications in general, including emergency caesarians.

http://ebmh.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/1/2/60


http://www.mentalhealthcare.org.uk/research/expanded/?id=8


However the following research suggests the possiblity of a relationship between all caesarians and schitzophrenia.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/216831.stm

A c-section is major abdominal surgery, requiring a longer hospital stay and a longer recovery time. Thus, more money for the dr. and the hospital. Plus, you don't have the pain (& inconvenience) of labor. That's why a lot of doctors push it, I think, even if it's not medically necessary. It's less hassle for them.

If you're afraid of pain, what about a vaginal birth with an epidural? You don't have to go natural. I would, and did, choose an epidural! I had one with my first daughter. I had a midwife up till the last minute, & wouldn't have needed an OB or an episiotomy if she hadn't gotten stuck & needed the vacuum extracter!

The 2nd time, labor progressed so quickly that there was no time for an epidural, but thankfully it was over in 3 hours.

It's a matter of individual choice (most of the time) how to deliver a baby, but I'm thankful I never needed one. I was up & around the next day both times.

That statistic is just so depressing. Fear of a mismanaged labor led my wife and I to have a home birth, and stats like this definitely played in.

All went well, by the way, and we will, provided mom and baby seem healthy, have another home birth next June.

I didn't do anything special. She had(has) the hard job.

It's quite humbling to see what she was going through and not be able to shoulder the load myself.

Double-entendre in that first line of yours :)

"I didn't do anything special. She had (has) the hard job."

Oh, joy of joys! I LOVE my double-entendres.

:bounce:

Hey I hope you're NOT offended? Sorry, if you are.

I don't really get the double entendre.

I am curious; why is the non-caesarean birth not an option? I don't mean to pry, and don't want any personal info, but is there a biological reason or is it just the reputed pain of child birth? Because if it's a pain thing, see post 11. I have a friend as well as my sister who both had c sections then VBACs, and they both found the 6 weeks of c section pain to be far more onerous than the relatively short labor pain.

Well, the double-entendre that you made was:

You said you didn't really do anything, then you said that it's your wife who had the hard job.

Your wife is having a bambino. You obviously had something to do with this joyous situation...SOOOO, it's NOT just your wife that had the hard job 'eh? :)

And there's your double-entendre. I just have a naturally dirty mind. I therefore have a double-entendre antenna.

No the C-section would be purely because I'm afraid of pain. I've checked out post 11 and there was another post to that I checked out and now I've got your post, and all three are saying the same thing, so I'll leave all options open then.


On Edit: Dammit, spelling error.

have a good night.

I'm off to my pillows and blankets now too. I'm tired. You have a good night also.

If you look at Europe, with much lower rates, and lower rates of interventions across the board, and comparable injury/mortality rates, and women who consistanly rate their labors better in terms of comfort (particularly emotionally), you have to wonder what we're doing wrong, when all of that gets trumped by fear of lawsuits. Egads.

Congrats to you and your wife! :)

like illnesses. Women are mad to give birth with or without help. I have heard all the statistics about modern medicine saving somany lives and what have you, but I believe that modern medicine has reached a point of diminishing returs in the birth area.

I believe the best thing to do is find a responsible mid-wife and go in thinking that everything will be wonderful, normal, and most of all natural. If the mid-wife is qualified there will be fewer tests done but you will actually end up with more information and candid answers to your questions than if you went the OBGYN route. This is just my opinion based on the experience my wife and I had after choosing modern medicine for Cormac (age 3) and deciding to take the leap into the tub with mother nature for Cian (age 1 1/2).

Please don't misread me. I don't mean that risk factors and family history etc. aren't important factors in the decision of whether or not to birth in a hospital. I only write to say that there is a lot of information on giving birth available and if you only trust medical doctors who require that your insurance pay the Frist family, you are only getting half of the story. Cover all the bases question-wise with many sources.

Oh and if you research home-birth check out all the British widwifery sites. They actually have the equivalent of a national midwifery department or something of that nature.

Sorry, I meant to come back and reply to this earlier! I agree that we have come to view it as a medical condition that needs a medical solution. I think a lot of what goes wrong in hospitals is people wanting things to go faster, and the lack of emotional support, and therefore stress, that the woman goes through. And stress, in and of itself, can slow down or halt labor. That's definitely counterproductive. I'm glad that interventions are available, and I believe, of course, that the woman should have the right to choose them if she so desires, but I think we need to stop making vaginal birth out to be a terrible, scary, dreadful thing, and remind people that having major abdominal surgery by choice, and then trying to care for a newborn, isn't a walk in the park, either...

I was induced with our daughter because I'm diabetic, and babies tend to grow larger and have a higher risk of stillbirth in diabetic women past 38 weeks. Next time, if there is one, I will try all manner of herbal and natural (;)) methods to get things going. Being on my back, having water broken, internal monitor, pitocin, and two external monitors, and then an epidural, was totally not the way I wanted things to go. I made it 4 hours on my back like that, no water to support her anymore, and then I couldn't stand it anymore :( Still, she is here and she is healthy, and I am mostly healthy. I pushed for a lot longer than I needed to, though, since I couldn't move around at all.

My wife had a similar situation during our first (minus the diabetes and induction). She did have a pitocin drip eventually but it was because labor wasn't progressing to satisfy the CNM. We now understand that with my wife's situation it was stress that shut down her labor. She didn't feel safe delivering.

I agree with you that interventions are amazing opportunities to save a miracle during emergency situations. My hope was to make the point that society rarley waits for emergency situations to intervene. This happens throughout medicine but particularly with birth and pregnancy.

I hope all goes well with your future pregnancy(ies). No matter the ultimate actions necessary to ensure a safe and minimally stressed birth and pregnancy I still respect you for your strength and admire your natural ability.

We need to get back to the concept that birth is a natural process, not a medical procedure. I am glad for the medical technology that is available WHEN NECESSARY, but there's something very wrong when it starts becoming the norm rather than just a safety net when there are complications.

:rofl:

My cousin's wife had her baby at home. He called me immediately aftwards to let me know that his wife and baby were AOK. He delivered the baby himself, with no doctor or midwife.
I asked him if his wife had endured delivery with a "stiff upper-lip" (she's British) and he said:

"It's not her upper-lip I'm worried about"

Badump!

with his wife while she was pregnant. She had the baby about 6 months ago. They were surprised by the doctors nonchalance about the whole thing. Basically told them, "Well, when it's time, call the midwife". They had to actively look for a hospital to have the baby in. He said the maternity ward was pretty small.

My wife and I tried to have all three via midwife at a birthing center with no drugs. We were successful with the second two but the first was stubborn so she had to transfer to the hospital where he was yanked out with forceps (after an epidural and some potocin). She did however try to get him out naturally for about 18 hours.

With my wife it was just a desire to truly experience the birth. She did not want to be numb for such a special occasion. She didn't want to feel like somebody's patient.

the norm unless you have complications. They consistantly rank in the top 5 for mother/baby outcomes worldwide, US ranks in the low 20's, 26th last time I looked in 2000. so sad.

I feel the same way as your wife. :-) Congrats on your positive birth experiences!

Maybe I'll move over there before we have another kiddo :)

help make homebirth normal!

http://www.midwife.org/find.cfm

although I would also love to live in the Netherlands myself! :-)

I love this quote I found on this site: http://www.homebirth.org.uk/youcant.htm#19
from: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Estates/9015/vbac.html
(I love the trip you go on when you google!)

There is no question of a midwife or doctor being able to decide whether a woman can, or cannot, have a home birth. It is the woman's choice, and hers alone. Health professionals may give her advice, but it is up to her whether she accepts their recommendations. Anyone who tells a woman that she "can't" have a home birth misunderstands their own authority.

you wouldn't say that under every single condition it is okay to attempt a homebirth, right? There are conditions that make it irresponsible if the mom is concerned about her family living on withour her, or losing a child because of a personal decision, correct? Or do you think I have been misinformed?

Sincerely curious.

But each woman and family must be seen as capable of making that decision themselves. With a well trained and well educated health care provider, who works from a woman centered model of care, parents and families can make a decision based on all the factors that apply to them.

I know of one family in particular, a VBAC situation, where an OB/GYN was emphatic about a hospital, highly managed labor, with mandatory c-section for her subsequent births. She met with a well respected midwife in the area and reviewed her entire history and medical records (which she had to fight tooth and nail to get hold of, btw) and the midwife agreed to do a homebirth. Everything went beautifully. They had a wonderful plan in place if anything went differently than expected, and she has had 3 VBAC's at home since the first C-section.

What it really comes down to for me is that each pregnancy and birth is different, and there are no blanket decisions that need to be made, you have to have a well educated and secure support system in place and make the decision that is right for your personal situation.

When a woman makes a decision about her birth that is from an empowered position, that decision is a sound one. When we make decisions based on fear and misinformation, that is when regret sets in.

Simply put, women are forced into situations in hospital births that are detrimental to her and her baby's health and well-being all the time, but people jump to the conclusion that this doesn't happen. Maternal/Infant outcomes are better for homebirths than at hospitals, even when factoring out high risk pregnancies and births. Ina May Gaskin's most recent book includes amazing statistics for homebirth, I highly recommend it.

http://www.farmcatalog.com/birth.htm
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553381156/002-7949907-1421650?v=glance&n=283155&n=507846&s=books&v=glance

I don't know if this actually answered your question, but I hope so. please feel free to restate if I didn't get it! :-)

I just wanted to clarify, because your first post gave me the wrong impression. I too know women who have had VBACs just fine even though they were told, in one instance as the c section was being performed, "No more home births for you." By a female surgeon! What a waste of air.
Plus, both of the women I know had their c sections in the first place because of being induced and having labor go out of control, causing no reasonable dilation but depressed heart tones in the baby. More interventions causing problems ... more reason to stay out of the hospital if you don't absolutely have to go.

I wouldn't have my 22-yr. old son. After the birth of his twin sister, my son's cord was wrapped around his throat. The nurses kept the "birth canal" open so he had oxygen while the doctor prepared me for a crash C-section. My son was born healthy. No oxygen deprivation. But it took two nurses and a surgeon to make that happen.
Don't play around because of your ego with your child's life.
Get professional care. That could easily include surgical care.
Do you really want the responsibility of knowing you could have done more? But didn't...so you could prove to others you're more "dedicated" or "natural" than other women? Is a child's life worth that feeling of superiority?
Face it. You're talking about ego.
And I'm talking about doing all that is possible to have a healthy child. And that's what every parent should want.

Hardly anyone would try to have a home birth with twins. Your situation doesn't apply. And your assertion that we home birthers are all about ego is embarassingly ignorant, along with childish and confrontational. I don't know where you people get this feeling of superiority nonsense, but it's a steaming load. You should be ashamed for demonstrating such ignorance in public.

take risks with her child's birth? That makes no sense. Don't we owe our children the safeguards that are available to us? And it is ego. It's not about the child. It's about what Mom wants. Mom wants a home birth. What if surgery is needed? You're going to tell me that taking that risk is justifiable? To who? The child?
Would you do your own apendectomy? Your own electrical wiring? Your own dental work?
No. You go to the professionals. You actually realize that, yes, there are people with more knowledge. People who have received extensive training.
Yes. It's ego. Ego trumping doing all that you can for a safe and healthy delivery.
Of course, the fundamentalists in many societies prefer home birthing. Have you read about Middle Eastern women dying during childbirth because they weren't allowed the assistance of male doctors? Better Mom die than be seen by a man other than her husband.
How do parents live with themselves after insisting on home birthing and then having problem births with tragic results? And knowing that the tragedy could have been easily prevented in a hospital.
How is that in the best interest of the child?

I will not repeat all of the arguments for home birthing, other than to say that if you did read, you would see that all of the interventions do save some babies, but also put a larger percentage unnecessarily at risk. I will never believe that taking a healthy mom and baby to a hospital before there is an emergency is smart, because there is no evidence to support it. Unless, of course, you can find said evidence. But I have not.

Attacking the character of those who make such reasoned decisions doth not constitute proof.

for the "interventions" creating more casualties and at risk babies.
Or is this folk lore?
Medical journals? Or propaganda?
Your argument seems very akin to "intelligent design".
Religion, not science.
I'll wait for your legitimate sources.

There are many more that can easily be found through google.

http://etd02.lnx390.lsu.edu/docs/submitted/etd-0711102-182913/unrestricted/Richard_thesis.pdf

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/archive/7068pr4.htm

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/archive/7068pr3.htm

http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/whoplace.html

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/318/7185/721

I hope you find these useful.

I called you out on the reading thing, if you don't recall, and you need to respond, not just by attacking me again. The onus is on you. I already told you it's all here in the thread, and you aren't even reading that.
But just for free, I'll toss in:
Look at Kailassa's list of books. Posts? Kailassa's post 243, Fleabert 147, electricray 29, wicket 46, mountainlaurel 225. There's more, too, if you have the time to read through the thread. As far as I'm concerned, just read Henci Goer's The Thinking Woman's Guide to a Better Birth and then look at the references in that.

Cheers!

PS who would be spreading propaganda? That makes it seem like there's somebody who's going to profit. The powerful doula/midwife lobby? Are you serious? On the other side, though, the hospital birth industry is big business - you do the math.

I have a son who will never learn to read and write because of maltreatment by an experienced doctor in what was supposed to be a very good hospital, and it was only luck and a tough constitution that kept me alive. So don't try your "holier than thou " put downs, thank you.

My first birth was also managed atrociously in a hospital, and I had to physically fight of the doctor to prevent him giving me an episiotomy, then I sat up and delivered my daughter myself, gently, with no tearing.

So for my third I went for a home birth for safety reasons. I knew that in my own home I would have more control over what was going on, and could choose good caring people to take care of me. Because I had previously had things go wrong I was also booked into a close-by hospital and had a doctor attending, one of the only 2 in my state who do home-births, who was able to provide transport to the hospital to have a caesarian if anything went seriously wrong.

During the labor, the baby's heart was monitored regularly the old fashioned way, using a stethoscope, and during delivery his heart rate changed in a way that got the midwife worried. She diagnosed a cord around the neck, the doctor agreed, she slid her hand in beside the baby and was able to move the cord herself. If that had not been successful, I could have been having a caesarian within 15 minutes. The doctor was ready to ring the hospital to get theatre ready.

Hospitals can help with some problems, but they can also cause problems, nothing is perfect anywhere. So the only answer is to each be as well-informed as possible before making our own decision, and there is no reason not to treat other people's decisions with respect, whether or not they are in line with our own.

By the way, if I had been expecting twins, the doctor would have been reluctant for me to have a home-birth, as any multiple birth is more likely to entail risks.

and Stanwyck, I apologize for my tone in my earlier email: it was late and I had a bad day. But I don't retract any of my points. The hospital is no more a 100% safe place to birth than home is. If the mom and baby are healthy, there is a solid backup plan for emergencies, and mom has experienced, caring help at home, there really is no reason to start labor in the hospital.
On edit: Unless you just feel much more comfortable in a hospital. It's just that lots of us don't, and it doesn't have anything to do with ego or a need to be right or to feel superior.

that most people reading a forum don't contribute at all, but just want to learn, and not taking any whose attitude is "lalala, my hands are over my ears," too seriously. ;-)

Besides, my adorable bad-tempered half-persian alley cat is on my desk wanting his soft warm tummy stroked, so it's not a time when I can get mad at anyone.

O8) O8)

Then I see you've got another bambino going to arrive. Aw, heck :)

i had two (out of 4) homebirths. it was wonderful...

congratulations, shanti

The reason I ask is that I would love to have a home birth if/when I have another baby, but my husband is adamantly against it. He is just worried about the "what if there are complications" issue, and I can't seem to convince him, despite the fact that I've already had two healthy, uneventful pregnancies and births. (Yes, I know it's my body, but I don't think it would be very good for our marriage if I were to start making unilateral decisions about things like this!)

If you did need some convincing before you came around to accepting the idea, do you remember what arguments/info were the most persuasive to you?

Thanks!

Through that amount of immense pain :scared:

Anyhow, I'm a careful girl, so I'm not planning on getting into a situation whereby I'll be needing a C-section any time soon.

But in the future, I'd opt for a C-section. The other option is not on the table.

Perhaps you should consider c-section as an option, rather than an absolute.
If you're prepared and knowledgeable about what your body is doing, labor is a perfectly natural and entirely bearable experience -- even without drugs, and certainly without major surgery.
I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but your decision seems a bit premature.
Don't sell yourself short.

:-)

Just that I'm a chicken :scared:

But I've noted your comments and advice and I'll at least think about them :)


...now where did I put my smelling salts? ;)

there are other options besides natural childbirth and c-sections. you don't HAVE to feel pain.

Here, for a COMPLETELY pain-free natural birth...The FULL bottle downed in ONE GO and I'll be fine, it's 100% guaranteed.



Ah love mah Tequila.

:bounce:

Hey what were your other options?

On Edit: First link didn't work.

if you drank that for the pain, your baby would be drunk too! ;-) no, i was referring to an epidural.

I'll have to leave the Tequila at home, is what you're saying :cry:

Oh okay, the last thing we'd want is a drunken bambino.

No matter what you ultimately choose when the time is right.

See above post! It'll be okay, you're right :)

posts you've made in this thread, I'm convinced that whatever decision you eventually make will be the right one for you!

All best,
e.
:woohoo:

:hug:

and a c-section for my daughter...15 hours of 1 and 1/2 minute contractions every 2 minutes with double peaks. Lamaze was great! But she was stuck and simply would not pass through my hips. She could not even drop far enough through to dialate my cervix properly. The doctor finally was so baffled he took an x-ray and measured. I saw it myself. She was NOT coming out.

In the middle ages I would have simply died. I am thankful that c-section was an option and my daughter will be 18 next summer.

My son was a scheduled c-section as my hips were not any wider apart than they had been 2 1/2 years earler. :eyes:

I preferred labor to the c-section recovery pain hands down. No question about it.

but when I do, I also plan on having them by C-section. Saying that labor is natural in that context is a naturalistic fallacy. It is an evolutionary imperfect biological event that is traumatic for the body is ways that I do not wish to undergo. I understand that C-section is a surgery, but I am more comfortable with those physical interventions than I am with labor. It sounds like the poster you are replying to has the same feelings on the subjetc. I think that your comment "don't sell yourself short" is indicative of an attitude that exists in our culture where C-section is somehow inferior to Real Birth and should be avoided except in cases of medical necessity. Why is deciding to have a C-section in advance because you don't want to go through labor selling yourself short? I am sure I could give birth naturally, I am sure it would even be an easier labor than for some people, because I have wide hips and in general the right body type for it. But I just don't want to go through that, even though it's a "bearable" experience. Why is that a premature decision? It's just not the default one.

and you are left with a scar. Even after a difficult birth, delivering an 11lb 2oz baby, 5 days later I happily danced all night. If I'd had a caesarian, walking at that stage would still be a bit painful.

I don't see this as a moral issue, I hope that whatever you choose goes well. But if you are basing your choice mainly on what would be less painful, I believe you would go through much more pain from a caesarian than from giving birth. There are always anaesthetics, and they can be good for someone who knows from the start that they want to have them.

Of course I have my own biases. I don't like pain and I don't like scars, so natural birth is the way to go for me. ;-)

If you are worried that birthing might damage the playground and make married life less fun, I can assure you it doesn't. The area concerned is all muscles, and regular exercise, even just walking, keeps it young.

See my post above about recovery after a c-section.

To quote a friend of mine, "I'll take the epidural for a thousand please."

Actually, it'll cost you a bit more than that.

I have 2 kids - the first was a normal vaginal birth, the second a c-section (based on some problems during labor and the fact that I was in my 40's) - and had an epidural both times. It was worth every penny that BCBS paid!

I'm putting my trust in you. I'm putting my complete faith in the epidural.

:hug:

Don't put all your faith in the epidural. I had the epidural, then I had the C-section (same pregnancy, the cord got wrapped around her neck and we lost her heart beat).

The c-section sucked, but the epidural was brutal for me. Like having a nail slowly driven into your spine - I will never forget that feeling as long as I live, and I will never get pregnant again because getting the epidural itself inserted was the worst thing I have ever been through, by far. If I were a prisoner of war and they threatened me with an epidural I'd tell them every last state secret I knew, and I'd make up some extras.

So, what's a girl supposed to do?

I know you don't believe me but, trust me. I have seen my wife go through two pregnacies and she is taller than any mountain and tougher than a pit-bull in my estimation. She is woman and I did hear her roar. It was awesome.

When the time does arrive, ie. sometime within the next five years.

When the time does arrive...you're ALL invited to be in the room in order to give me moral support.

I'll have about...oh I dunno, 60 members of my family in the room too, but we'll manage to fit all of YOU in the room too...EVEN if you have to sit on other peoples' laps.

Sitting on peoples' laps...oh heck, let's just NOT go THERE...or SHOULD we?

:evilgrin:

On Edit: Spelling error...even more coffee needed.

My daughter gave birth sitting on my lap.

That was after I spent 8 hours kneeling on cold tiles to massage here while she lay in a big bath in the midwifery unit. She had no man to support her, and although I was terrified of seeing her in pain like that, and shy, I was very honoured to be asked, and could not refuse to give her support when she did not have the option of "opting out" herself. The next day I could not work out why my knees looked like footballs.

Pain is all in the head. This does not make it unreal, but what we experience is our brain's interpretation of the sensations it receives. Feeling safe and well taken care of, and having trusted friends with you so you don't get lonely, do a lot to make the sensations less painful.

For someone who is frightened, I recommend starting the labor naturally, and having the option there to get pain relief if it gets to a stage where you are not coping. You might surprise yourself at how well you cope when you can remove the fear factor in that way.

The other things that help beforehand are doing lots of walking and having an energetic sex-life. They both help tone the muscles that you will need in labor. Labor pains are just big versions of the spasms involved in orgasm. If you feel safe and loved so that you can relax completely, they are not painful at first. It's like riding a horse, your muscles have taken over and are taking you somewhere, but it can be a good ride. Later, when it gets to transition stage, it does get painful and emotional, but that part rarely lasts long. As for the baby actually emerging, a good midwife, (sadly we don't have doulas in Australia,) will help you to just push slowly, and help the vaginal opening to gently expand to let the baby's head through, so that it's not painful as you might think.

That part is just so exciting. My first birth was handled so badly, with me on my back, lonely and frightened, legs tied up in stirrups, that when the medical staff started approaching my tender nether regions with scissors and forceps I panicked, broke the stirrups, (me being a big strong country sheila,) and kicked the staff away from the bed. My baby's head was already coming out, face up, so I pulled her out myself, as we gazed into each others eyes. She had a look in her eyes at the time as if she knew absolutely everything, full of peace and happiness. She is still a very special person. (She was 11 lb 2 oz.)

Afterwards the same recommended exercises will get the area tight again. After having 3 natural births to very large babies, I can still smoke a cigarette with it. ;-)

I understand different people wanting to do things differently, but take care when your choices are affected by fear. we are each bigger and stronger than we know, and birthing your baby only happens once.

childbirth is the EASY part of being a parent, and there are billions of people as proof of it!

Natural born wimper-outer.

I can be strong in given situations though, indeed I have been strong in a variety of given situations.

to an emergency on the first and lack of progress on the secind (and no pitocin could be given for a vbac).

You may also want to consider the effects and risks of a c-section on the baby.

I'm sorry you had to go through all of that :( That's awful.

So the C-section can stress the baby out?

Some babies are sleepier for the first few days and take longer to orgnaize thier behaviors. Mothers who had CS take longer to get their milk in, and that sets off a chain of events of problems: greater potential for jaundice, supplemental feedings, which can permanently interrupt nursing at the breast. Milk supply is best kept up by nursing at the breast and making bottle feedings the exception.

My children who were born by C-section both had jaundice - the second one born via CS had fairly severe jaundice and had to be in NICU getting fluids through an IV in his skull. :( My middle child was a VBAC (planned homebirth, but transferred to the hospital because the labor was progressing too slowly for my midwife). He didn't have any jaundice and I have to say, hands-down, that the recovery was 100 times easier. See, with a vag birth - even a really long and difficult one like mine was - the worst is over for most women when the baby is born. So at most you have a few hours to a day or two of pain. Whereas if you have a C-section, you skip the pain when the baby's born, but when the baby's born and you want to be enjoying the baby and trying to adjust to life with a baby in the house, that's when your pain STARTS. Having done both, I have to say that it's vastly preferable to do it the natural way. I did my vag birth without drugs and had a 10 pound baby, and I'm 5'1", so I know it can be done, but if you opt for the epidural I'm told that it cuts down on a lot of the pain.

Both times I had C-sections, I was trying to adapt to the screwed-up sleep schedule of a newborn when I most needed rest myself so I could recover. And then in the first days after birth, because my babies were jaundiced, I had to arrange trips back and forth to the hospital for follow-up testing at a time when I wasn't supposed to be driving.

Really, I can't say enough about how vastly preferable a natural birth is over a cesarean. And the myth that is partly driving up the cesarean rate about how a C/S is the "less painful" method bothers me most of all, because it's a lie. 6-12 hours of pain of a vag birth vs 3-6 weeks of pain recovering from major surgery? For me that's a no-brainer.

...my girlfriend has had both a C-section and a vaginal birth. She said the vaginal birth (no drugs either) was a piece of cake compared to the C-section. There was pain for weeks after the C-section.

I've only had a vaginal birth, and all I know is I never felt like it was something my body couldn't handle. Sure it hurt, but it wasn't unbearable.

the first was a "code Blue" (channeling ER:)..) the other two scheduled,. I am a fast healer and i always said i preferered my stiches to my friends'.... 'Oweeee'

Part of the reason so many women LABOR through labor is because giving birth flat on your back with your feet in the air, is NOT what nature intended..

just my .o2

is putting pressure on a majot blood vessel and the reduced circulation can impede labor. It's much easier and more relaxed if gravity is allowed to help rather than hinder, and the mother-to-be encouraged to walk around during labor. The ideal ways to give birth are underwater or on a birthing stool, or sitting on somebody's supportive lap.

He wouldn't have been born at ALL if there hadn't been a C section. My daughter had a toxic pregnancy. She would have died if she hadn't had the section. The baby was just fine; he looked great, no stress through the birth canal. The C section saved her and him! Please, get a grip on this.

That doesn't mean everyone should have them every time they give birth. I'm glad your grandson turned out fine. Most do, but certainly not all. None of us are saying "NO C-Sections under any circumstances." We are saying that the less medical intervention there is, the less likely there are to be medical complications. Industrialized countries that have lower CS rates also tend to have lower infant mortality and better breastfeeding rates, the importance of which should not be underestimated.

We studied this extensively in nursing school: how to intervene for all the problems that can arise from CS: excessive bleeding, thrombophlebitis/stroke of mother due to longer (and resisted) recuperation. Reactions to epidurals, including maternal fever. Accidentally cutting the baby during the incision, etc.

Ilsa, RN

I had a vbac for the third and I had pitocin after 17 hours of labor when it stopped. This was many years ago though.

I can't begin to tell you how much pain is involved in a C-section compared to natural birth. I wish....oh how I wish I had been able to have both my children naturally. Unfortunately I'm one of those that could never have a child naturally, but I am very grateful that modern medicine allowed me to have children and live to raise them.

Recovery from the surgery, both of mine were vertical cuts from naval to pub, took months. Starting with 4 to 5 days of severe pain recovering from the surgery....btw, you get to have labor to deliver the placenta anyway, and labor on top of major surgery after cutting through the abdominal muscles is excruciating.

Both of my deliveries were complicated. It was heart breaking for me to have to stay in the hospital to recover and watch all the other mothers that delivered naturally get to go home with their new babies.

I had an incisional infection and had to be re-hospitalized for 5 days. I was feeling sorry for myself, there on the surgical floor, till they out a woman in the room with me who had just had a stillbirth- a full term baby girl- she just stopped breathing. So I stopped feeling sorry for myself very very quickly.

especially when it was the last child they wanted. Reason: during C-section procedure and by using the same operation, a plastic surgeon can also perform a tommy-tuck. Actresses and rich women have doing it for years. Plastic surgery is for anyone today, and women want a quick flat stomach after birth.

involute after a CS. I know plastic surgeons that won't touch a mother until at least a year after the last birth she intends to have.

But we must live in hope that other fellows might chip in.

If it was possible to be a male mid-wife I would be all over it.

I've seen ads in magazines for male midwives.

but I don't think that I could ever live up to my own personal perception of what a midwife is. Part of the strength a female midwife brings to the table (preferably a mother) is her credibility to the laboring mother. When my wife was giving birth to our first son (in a hospital, very clinical) I seriously felt powerless to help her deal with the mental stress brought on by the pain she was in. Later on in our discussions I realized that it was one of the few times in our marriage where she and I both new that anything I said was B.S. meant to placate her through a truly difficult moment. I just had no idea what to tell her when she asked how much longer, and truly I could no more tell her credibly what to expect from her body than I could tell her what it is like to be a donkey.

I don't mean to knock male midwives, I truly respect them and I feel like I can understand their passion. It is just a personal opinion that I hold that we wouldn't have had the same experience with a male midwife.

we have the same reading list. although I admit to mostly learning from my wife after she did the reading.

All this labor talk is bringing it all up fresh again; I like your description of your wife's power. It was the most amazing, vital day of my life.

I can't believe I grew up thinking that if I were ever to attend a birth, I would puke, pass out, etc, etc. It's such crap what our culture teaches little boys and girls about this stuff. We ditched our TV in our latest move, and for my daughter's sake, I don't know if we'll replace it until she's, what, 18?

we just got rid of our TV as well. I have never felt more liberated (well with the exception of pre-cell phone and computer, I can't remember what that felt like)

I am a big advocate of knowledgeable respect rather than fearful avoidance. I think it applies in most every area of American life today. I am not the type to write in to complain about TV depictions of bad birth experiences (especially now that we are sans TV), nor am I one to attempt to minimize a woman's pain during birth. But I will always be an advocate of equal time when it comes to consideration of birth methods.

I wish that modern OBGYNs and medical type CNMs would attempt to reach across the ideological spectrum to natural birth "extremists". I truly believe that with a balanced approach emphasizing the natural ability of women but respecting the modern ability to solve crisis-type emergencies if they should arise we could create the lowest level of birth-related mortality possible.

Nice to meet a fellow unplugged American.

article a few years back.

Lest a flame war break out.

I wonder how much of this C-Section popularity is from insecure men leaning on their wives in an effort to keep things "snug down there"?

That is a very kind way to put it.

It is another example of assumptions trumping facts. In this case, very, very, VERY ignorant assumptions trumping overwhelming facts, but who's counting?

...'Ol' Gunny' tales at their favorite bar and are worried it's gonna rattle around in there."? :evilgrin:

YOU know the truth, and *I* know the truth, but then, we're not the ones leaning on our women to get C-Sectioned, are we?

the words that remain unspoken...i know that my father didn't want my mother to breastfeed (this was back in the 50's) because he wanted them for himself! true story!

The NYT had an article a couple months ago about how some men who watched their wives give birth lost interest in sex after seeing what happened to their little playground during birth.

I can only speak for myself, but that article sounds like a steaming load - what good is printing that kind of ignorance? I hope not to offend anyone, but that kind of reaction seems like it should be described in the DSM-IV, not the NYT.

I haven't been able to get much (if any) action since the birth of 2nd daughter via VBAC. He had some issues before, but it seemed to get much worse after he saw me give birth.

:cry: :cry: :cry:

I sincerely hope the issue works itself out.

I should be more careful with my posts, but I do have a tendency to get extra down on men. I was raised by my single mom and my older sisters, so I have a natural bias.

I'd put a bet that there is more going on emotionally for him. Just a hunch. How's the relationship beyond the bedroom?

With any woman who had ever given birth.

Even Prescilla after Lisa Marie came along.

ehhh..women get their muscle tone back...believe me, its essential to get THAT back in shape!

YOWZAH!
:evilgrin:

There was recently an article about the rising rate of c-sections in Norway which claimmed that one of the reasons women were choosing c-sections were because they were being pressured by their partners. But not to keep things "snug down there". The men want their partners to have c-sections because they can't handle seeing their partners in pain while not being able to do somthing about it. They feel so helpless in a normal birth situation that they encourage their partners to choose an option where everything is controlled.

but a number of my friends have had C-Sections. Not one of them planned on having one, but after hours of difficult labor, the pregnancies ended up in them. So, it was always the doctor's recommendation.

I don't know anybody who went into the hospital with the plan to have a C-Section. Though my Sister in law was just talking about that with the tummy tuck thing. (Apparently her good friend just did that one.)

I didn't even think about THAT. Quite depressing that it would actually happen that way too.

That seems like it could be a motivator, as well.

In addition, with a scheduled c-section, the time they invest is much shorter, and at their convenience. There's an interesting book out called "The Thinking Woman's Guide to a Better Birth" by Henci Goer. You might check it out for lots of relevant stats.

neither is going to be a big money maker for hosp. Its the doctors choice, though some hospitals may have chosen, like physicians, to not do the procedures because of malpractice issues.

get on board with the tort reform, malpractice settlement limit folks. I'm not being judgemental, just speaking from 35 years in health care. If docs perceive they are being targeted for litigtion, they will be defensive in practice. If they are protected, they are more creative and open to alternatives.

This has been a traditional repug issue, though it has an impact on any number of medical practices and procedures. To the extent that the public is willing to limit or even surrender their options to pursue remedy in the courts, then such procedures will increase. No amount of logic, arguing about rights, quality of the experience, will make a significant impact.

I completely agree with you! Also, if we want to see a higher midwife rate in the US, malpractice insurance has to go down and litigation against them has to be limited. They are targeted by lawyers and have been forced out of practice in many areas.

It is hard for me, as a Liberal, to support tort reform, but my strong belief in birth reform knows that it is necessary for change to occur on a grand scale. If we, as Dem's, can write the reform legislation, perhaps there is a way to protect the little guy (or midwife) out there without taking away the ability to punish those truly guilty of negligence?

There's no question that expensive lawsuits have driven up medical malpractice rates so high that many OB/GYNs have gotten out of the profession. I don't debate that it's a problem at all. But the problem is much deeper than that. Right now, just limiting the amount of lawsuit damages isn't going to solve the problem in itself. The problem is with how modern obstetrics is practiced. Doctors are doing procedures that put moms and babies at greater risks of the kinds of catastrophic injuries/deaths that result in lawsuit, because they're trying to save time. Scheduling a C-section for someone who has no risk factors is a bad idea from a medical standpoint. Using pitocin to induce labor to fit the doctor's schedule or the doctor or hospital rule that pregnancy "can't" go beyond 41 weeks, or because the mom needs to have the baby by the end of the year so dad can get the tax deduction - all those things happen very regularly and it's a dangerous practice. Most of the common birth interventions that have high rates of catastrophic outcomes are because doctors are trying to rush things. And of course that's not all the doctor's fault, either - doctors have too many patients as required by the health insurance companies and can't afford to have a patient who's in labor for 18 hours. My first C-section was done supposedly for "failure to progress", meaning I wasn't dilating fast enough. I was only in the hospital for 6 hours by the time they decided I had to have a C-section, even though the baby was fine. Oh, and it was Thanksgiving day...doctor was done with the C-section by 5pm and on her way home to a nice turkey dinner. :grr:

Medicine should NOT be practiced that way. But it's one example of how screwed up the health care system is in this country. The less that the powers that be try to spend on health care, the more likely it's going to result in high-dollar lawsuits.

If you don't mess up, you won't get a judgment aganist you. Ever.

Tort "reform" is no reform at all.

in the big picture, not dollars. I know there are exceptions, but after 35 years in healthcare in hospitals from 42 beds to 800 beds in 3 states, IMHO, its the physicians' perception of risk that drives much of this behavior, not money (with the acknowledged exceptions).

My husband was able to participate in the experience, not just sit idly by.

My son was almost 10 pounds. Yes, it was intense, and hurt, but it's nature's way.

Did it "damage my privates"? I hear no complaints! Did my stomach flatten? Flatter than before I conceived!

I think vanity and wanting a pain-free delivery are poor reasons for a C-section.

Getting through the pain is part of the process of really experiencing your child's arrival. The breathing techniques work very well. If you have a prolonged labor as I did, you can opt for the epidural.

Finally--the work makes you really think twice about the next one!

I went through transition in a hot tub, and never felt a thing! That's why it's called "nature's epidural".

I delivered both of my daughters with midwives and would never do it any other way (barring medical problems that neccesitated Dr. intervention)

When I first learned about them in HS, I swore that I would never have an epidural (needle in my spine - Ugh!) or an episiotomy (the thought still makes me squirm).

This topic is a particular passion of mine. I could go on for hours:)

It was actually at the hospital, in the natural birthing room, they have a big tub full of water in there for that sole purpose. Too cool!

I was talking to my friend about the birth recently, and she loaned me the book "Birth Without Violence", you may be interested in it, so check it out :) :

"Birth Without Violence" by: Frederick Leboyer

It totally changed the way I looked at the birth process, and the experiences of the Mom and the baby. I am so glad that I read it before giving birth!

My second child's birth at home was much more pleasant than my daughter's because I soaked in a hot bathtub through most of the painful contractions leading to the actual birthing process. (I got out of the tub for that).
The relaxation of the warm water tremendously helped me to relax and I think reach full dilation much quicker.

DemEx

And it certainly has changed my outlook on the birth process too! :) When I decide to start having children, I'm definitely going to go that route, so glad it worked out wonderfully for you :)

Wicket said:

That sounds a cold way to bring a baby into the world. I'd be asking for some hot water in that. But then getting into hot water has always been a habit of mine. ;-)

My son's birth too was so much easier and less painful when I spent several hours in my warm bath at home getting through the worst contractions. It was so relaxing I even dozed some!

:-)

DemEx

Getting through the pain is part of the process of really experiencing your child's arrival.

I learned more about myself, and of what I can endure and accomplish, through giving birth naturally than from just about any other life experience.

Yeah, it was incredibly intense, but worth every minute of the experience IMHO.

My first born was almost 10 pounds - very long labor too - while my second was 8 1/2 and much quicker! :-)
The actual birthing of the baby through the birth canal I did not experience as painful - it was the hours of contractions that was the bitch for me.

DemEx

Extended labor seems to be part of the first birth, though, and it gets faster and easier with subsequent vaginal deliveries (barring complications, of course).

I had 2 C-sections out of necessity, but complications with the first one kept me in the hospital for 2 weeks. In retrospect I would rather have done vaginal births but really didn't have a choice. If not for modern medicine I would have died in childbirth.

Anyway, what do insurance companies have to say about C-sections just for convenience, without medical need? Do they question it?

I don't know what insurance companies would say - our kids were born the old fashioned way. But in the past 20 years I've seen things go from it being unheard of to schedule a C-section for convenience to a surprisingly common thing among professional women. I won't question their choice, but it is not a choice that would be made in my family.

start with something as simple as not allowing mom to walk or move as she desires, and it's a slippery slope.

Don't even get me started on mandatory 100% fetal heart monitors...

every single intervention leads to another, and too many are given without cause or adequate research into the benefits. Also given out without proper information to mom and family about the benefits/risks outlook, and usually not presented as a choice, but as a need.

there are times these interventions are necessary and they save lives of both mother and baby, but we have horrible mother/baby outcome rates compared to the rest of the industrialized world. They are used too often as a replacement for human to human care, and for fear of litigation, or assumed convenience of the mother.

Often, the medical interventions required of a "safe" hospital birth are exactly what lead to emergency C-sections for failure to progress according to a specified timetable.

With my first child,my daughter, I had 22 hours of labor & did not progress beyond 5 centimeters. I had pitocin and did not have an epidural for the first 20 hours. At that point I was just insane with pain and exhaustion, so I got the epidural but just did not progress at all. I had the c section and everyone was OK, but the recovery was brutal. I swelled up something ferocious and really felt lousy for a few weeks. I was nursing, I developed a fever, I had to stop nursing for a day or two (fortunately, I was able to resume nursing, but I had to pump milk every three hours for the two days I couldn't).

When I had my son 3 years later, I was very large, even though I gained only 22 pounds. (I'm only 5 feet tall, so that was a lot!) They did a sonogram at 36 weeks and estimated the baby's birth weight to be almost 9 1/2 pounds! My doctor told me I'd never pass a kid that big ( remember, I'm only 5 feet tall!) and I was scheduled for a c section 2 days before my due date. I went into the hospital, and had the c and my son was only 7- 11, BUT the cord was around his neck, chest and thigh!
Had he turned and descended into the birth canal, he would have asphyxiated or been seriously brain damaged. So I felt pretty lucky they messed up the birth weight estimate.

BUT- I developed a post surgical infection and had to be re hospitalized for five additional nights that I was away from my newborn. I got up every three hours to pump so that I could nurse him when I got home. It took a good month to recover.

I needed both of my c sections but they were difficult surgeries. And all things being equal, I'd rather have a section I didn't need than not have one I did (I know someone whose son has cerebral palsy because of a birth injury- they did not section her when they should have and his life is pretty well ruined- you can't get that back). But if I could have delivered naturally, I think I'd have preferred it, episiotomy notwithstanding, I think the recovery is much easier.

b

for your situations. I admire women who have had c-sections (for medically necessary reasons). I can't imagine recovering from major abdominal surgery AND caring for a newborn at the same time!

Part of the problem with pitocin is that you are bed-bound. Unless you are like me - I had to go to the bathroom all the time - on purpose! I wanted to walk around as much as possible, and get that d@#%ed fetal monitor off my stomach! The first few times I did it, the nurses came running in to see why the monitor had stopped registering. After they realized that we knew what we were doing (my sister was my relief coach for my husband - she is also an L&D nurse), they left us alone.

As for the episiotomy, I didn't have one for either of my births. The midwives taught us massage techniques to stretch the opening that my husband could do. That was one of the reasons for switching to midwives. The Dr. whose care I was under initially told us we could "try" massage to avoid the episiotomy (she did not recommend it), but if it didn't work, "at least it would be fun"! I've got news for her - it wasn't fun, but it WORKED!

Parents think, or are led to think, that taking the baby a week or 2 early is no big deal...that the baby is close enough ready. WRONG. I've seen these kids end up in the neonatal ICU with respiratory problems, eating problems (nippling is the last skill developed in utero).
It's a sad joke in our nursery: "How come this mom is being induced (or having a C section)?" Answer: "Because it's Plano" (that's the city I live in----rich, white, me-me-me-me kind of place).

It seemed to be a right of passage for anyone who lived in one of the more affluent burbs in DFW. :(

On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate the pains of labor versus the worst cramps you've ever had?

My cousin, who is a retired L&D supervisor in Floriduh, said that in her many years of experience, women who had severe monthly cramps reported that labor pains were not as bad as they had expected. Those who had an easier time every month thought that labor was hell on earth.

I concur with that. When I had natural (not on BC pills) my cramps were bad. I loveed being in labor (I know - I'm a sick puppy:) ). I never felt that labor was that horrible. At one point, my sister told me to use my Lamaze breathing. I told her I was waiting for it to get bad. She said "this is as bad as it gets!"

I'd prefer to get an epidural, but I have terrible cramps every month. I heard that exercise helps with the cramps (I'm starting to train for triathlons.) Maybe that would help with delivery down the road?

All this info. is so helpful. My mom has made pregnancy and motherhood seem like it's a travesty.

intense, physical, yes; painful, no. Obviously that is not the mainstream experience, but if our culture is gonna load up young women with the idea that labor is TERRIBLY painful (and our culture does), I think it's important to keep in mind that there is room in the world for alternative stories.

10+

But hey....labor pain doesn't frighten you. Its a pain that comes and goes like clockwork, giving you breaks to catch your breath. Trusting in your body's instinctual intelligence is a great partnership...though I have to admit getting fed up near the end and thinking, "if anybody would offer me a way out, at this very moment, I would gladly take a way out." But I didnt plan on a way out, I planned 'o'natural' to the finish. 2 boys, each 10 lbs, 6 hrs of labor, at home.

Its the only time in your life when you're not in control..and the more you grok that, the easier it goes. ; )

Good Luck! Congrats!

it started out resembling menstrual cramps, then eventually went off the scale..but it didn't last forever. I had my son naturally.

"Remind me NEVER, EVER TO DO THIS EVER AGAIN!"

Call me coward, but I never did.

She gave birth to each of us naturally. She says that for about 12 years she had one child at her side, one on her hip, and one in her belly. Today she is 88 years of wisdom, spends 6 months of the year barefoot and in the garden, carrying 5-gallon buckets of water and dirt all over the property and turning the compost heap. She has never taken a hormone supplement, and the only drugs she takes are aspirin, diazide, and procardia.

C-sectiion, to Clarice, was literally unimaginable. I think all that pain has informed her life experiences for the better - made her a better nurse and hospice chaplain, a more compassionate counselor.

Scheduling? Typically, she would be scrubbing the bathtub or making dinner and decide to call Daddy... they'd get to the hospital just in time, and the next day she'd bring home the new addition to the household.

Of course, she is not even typical of her own generation - she is of ancient French Catholic stock - she is Acadian! She lived the life so beautifully described by Longfellow in his epic elegy to that grande tradition, "Evangeline":

It seems to me a brutal way to bring someone into the world unless it is really necessary...

Same stock and all...they were Quebecois

She had 14 of 'em--all natural--and is in splendid shape, as your mother--boy, those French Canadian Catholic women are something else!

My daughter was 8 lbs. My pre-pregnancy weight was just 98 lbs. Although I was given an epidural, my doctor told the anestelogist to just give enough medication to "take the edge off the pain." I could still feel the contractions and as able to push.

My OB/GYN told me at the start that it was up to me and would require a LOT of work on my part, but it could be done. Yes, it is possible. Of course, this was 26 years ago. Even then back then, the hospital staff was in an uproar over this. I had almost the entire obstetrics staff there watching my daughter's birth. As my doctor said to them, "Watch and see how it can be done."

The hell with pain! What, do tell, is the point of it? I decided after my first experiment with "natural childbirth" that I would never do it again. I had an anaesthetic at the base of my tailbone with the second but with the third I had the then newly developed epidural.

Women should not have to go through the pain of labor if they do not want to! Period!

This whole thing about "experiencing all of the birth" is a bunch of sh*t in my opinion. If you want to do this, fine. If not, why is it not okay to have the anaesthesia?

I am furious that my older daughter was told to "wait" for drugs with her first child, only to be told when she begged for them that it was "too late." This is not uncommon. Women should be taught to tell Dr.'s they can stuff it if they don't agree to give them pain medication when they ask for it!

My younger daughter had to have an emergency C section. She had a toxic pregnancy, undiagosed by her physician and his staff, and presented at the hospital with significant pain in her liver area, un related to any labor pain. OF COURSE, she had to have an emergency C section. IT SAVED HER LIFE!!!

People have got to get real when it comes to the REALITY of women's labor!!!

Obviously the c section has its place. I haven't seen anyone on this thread attack those who get c sections like you just attacked people who want a natural birth. Why are you so cruel about those who make a different choice?

This whole thing about "experiencing all of the birth" is a bunch of sh*t in my opinion.

I'd say that's an opinion with no public worth. You want to look down on people different than you, fine. But it has no place here.

Note that I said "in my opinion." Note that I said "women shouldn't have to go through pain if they don't want to". There are doctors out there who agree with me (my own GYN, but only after my childbearing days).

Now here you come saying my opinion has no public worth and I don't even know what you mean by that. I do not look down on women who make the choice NOT to have drugs and I never said that I did.

I've given birth 3 times and I have a right to my opinion. I am still furious that my daughter was told "let's just see how labor goes and we'll decide then about an epidural" and then the dr. kept saying "just a little longer" until finally my daughter said "Enough, I want the epidural" and the dr. said "Too late!" Maybe that wouldn't piss you off but it sure as hell did me! My daughter had some urinary incontinence for weeks after that experience. But not after getting epidurals with her subsequent 2 births. Sorry you don't like it, but that was my daughter and the thought of her suffering was unacceptable to me.

It seems to me that you are being intolerant of MY opinion here.

But you're telling us the whole natural birth thing is crap. That's what got my panties in a bunch.

You say you don't look down on those different from you. Fine. I would then urge you to re-read your post, because it sure sounds like you're tossing us out with the doctor you are legitimately upset with.

And yes, I am being intolerant. Opinions that attack my wife and those like her for no good reason make me upset. It seems you are blaming people who want a natural birth for your family's pain, and I think that is wrong. I am tired of being blamed for women who don't breastfeed a long time just because my wife still breastfeeds our daughter at 2 1/2. I am tired of being excoriated for having a homebirth by people who chose differently. We are not the people writing cruel anonymous internet posts about people who don't breastfeed or don't have a birth the way we chose. I think both sides who write cruel stuff are in the wrong, and it sounds like you're doing just that.

I'm sorry if that offends you, but you need to know the power of the words you're throwing around.

I have only the greatest respect for women. Sure, I'm angry at what happened to my daughter, what parent wouldn't be?

Look I didn't mean to drive you 'round the bend, so to speak. Please understand that I was not attacking you or your wife or anyone else who chooses not to have anasthesia. Her choice or it should be. Don't you see in my daughter's case where her choice was not allowed? I think that's wrong!

My feelings about the subject are different from yours. When you say I have no right to a public opinion you are in effect telling me to shut up because you don't like my opinion. I didn't think we liberals thought that way...

And I'm sorry your daughter did not get the pain relief that she had a right to receive. That sucks for anyone.

Unfortunately I know the reason that most doctors do that sort of thing, though - if an epidural is given too soon, it can slow down the progress of labor and lead to a C-section. But if the laboring women progresses relatively quickly from that point, it can become too late to give the epidural because babies can have serious breathing problems from the anesthesia if they're born too soon after the epidural.

I know that's probably not much comfort, but I hope you (and your daughter, if she's so affected) can come to some kind of peace with it.

and your wife. and I totally see your point. those of us who support homebirth, longterm bf, etc... often run into this attack, it gets old. :hug: to you for trying.

The problem is I generally can't convince the attacker that there is an attack going on, so I just shut my piehole.

I had a 'friend' tell me all about how her friend who had to quit breastfeeding was attacked by the "stinky hippies" for not continuing to bf when her friend really had no choice because of work. I can relate, I sympathized. Then my friend turned right around and told me how fucked up it would be to be able to remember breastfeeding when you get older.

She said it as if she was discussing incest, or something similarly repulsive. Minutes after watching my wife nurse my daughter. My daughter at this point had been talking for almost a year. Who knows what my friend thought about my daughter's memory.

breastfeeding into toddler hood is the norm, historically. the average age for weaning, worldwide, is 4; that means some go less (like here, six months is treated as something amazing by dr's, sadly) and some go more, like to 6 yrs.

the AAP recommends a minimum of 1 year, the WHO, 2 years, or as long as is mutually beneficial for mom and baby. (this info is for the benefit of the thread, you already know these things!)

A fantastic book is Mother Nature, by Hrdy (no spelling error, that's her name) about the history of motherhood thru the ages, worldwide.

The last thing I want to do is trade insults with anyone. I will not post on this anymore.

s arrival are people who look down on women who choose epidurals or C-sections. I am not saying you do, but there IS a lot of holier-than-thouness in the natural birth/doula community, so I can understand her feeling the way she does.

I understand there is some holier-than-thou-ness in the natural birth camp, but that idiocy exists in absolutely every cultural camp. Pick a group of people, and I guarantee you there will be some smug, self-righteous loser in there. I don't see why anyone needs to have such thin skin that they broad brush everyone in a certain group as self-righteous. And I don't need to be treated as full of crap when I am not.

Birth and parenting are the strangest things in our culture. As soon as you get pregnant or become a parent, it seems you've given up all rights to privacy, and every Tom, Dick, and Moran thinks they have a constitutional right to tell you what you're doing wrong. You should see things from my perspective. In the last month, we've been told by no less than three close friends or relatives that we are doing things wrong. And we have the most amazing, intelligent daughter you can imagine, and a serious crop of good friends and family. Everybody just thinks they know better, and for some godawful reason must tell you about it. Wait until you get pregnant and random assholes, or worse yet, people you know and really don't feel comfortable with, start touching your belly without asking and telling you that something you're doing or planning on doing is wrong. They may be home birthers, they may be c sectioners, but it will happen. Probably by both sides.

If I had jumped down her throat for having an epidural, I'd understand her reaction. But read my post - I didn't. I don't care what she or anybody else does with there body. You want to have your kids by c section? Live it up. I simply responded to an unfair offense with, I think, a well-moderated response. My internal dialogue is much less civil. I have had it so up to here with people telling me I'm wrong for doing what we do and having seriously the most incredible child, that my patience has absolutely run out.

So congratulations for understandanding how she feels. So do I. She should probably spend her time attacking self-righteous holier-than-thou people if that's who's pissing her off, then, not just people who want a natural birth. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING.

But I do understand why she is being defensive. Usually when people say "natural birth is the REAL birth" or variations thereof, they don't articulate it as "hey, that's my choice, live and let live," the way you phrased it is very similar to natural-childbirth platforms that DO disparage things like epidurals, formula-feeding, etc. etc. I don't think you were judging her or meant any offense, but I do understand why your phrasing made her defensive, that's all.

anonymous holier-than-thou types who "disparage things like epidurals, formula-feeding, etc. etc." I've never seen them. I can provide a nice website, from a very entertaining woman, wherein breastfeeding advocates are referred to as nazis.
Or just google breastfeeding nazi - it's an instructive little search.

Categorically, I'll say anyone who calls anyone that isn't a murderer a "nazi" is ignorant, insipid, and shallow, and following in the grand footsteps of Rush Limbaugh.

What I see generally is people like you and CT Yankee with seemingly well thought out references to these vicious, terrible natural parenting advocates. But frankly, I'm beginning not to believe it. I think we're being framed by people who are making themselves feel bad totally irrespective of anything my crowd is up to. I think for any set of information put out into the world, there'll be some set of humans, larger than 1, that will be deeply offended by that information: call it Matt's Theorem. And just because the information about natural births, home births, attachment parenting, and breastfeeding has been collected in some books, there will be people who think they are being attacked by that information, even though no attack is occurring.

I'm basically laying down the gauntlet: you find me any internet reference to any natural birth, attachment parenting, or breastfeeding advocate who refers to people who get a c section or get an epidural or don't breastfeed as a "nazi", and I'll build some sympathy for the other side of this issue. Until then, I don't think my side is attacking anybody. We're just being attacked.

I don't participate in such communities on the internet, but over the course of a project a couple of years ago I met doulas and a woman who was making a documentary about doulas. This was more of an advocacy documentary b/c she really believed in things like natural childbirth and thought childhood vacinations were harmful etc. Of course, they paid lip service to a range of choices, but off-record they talked about how women were brainwashed by society into making bad decisions and they, as doulas, would use their role to try and pressure women in having natural births b/c it was better for them. That is not what doulas are supposed to be about, they are supposed to be there to support a mother-to-be's choices, but it's indicative of the patronizing, disrespectful attitude that people who consider themselves social/political advocates of childbirth often sport.

You interpret these doulas, probably accurately, as patronizing. But there still are no instances of which I am aware of people like this using language such as 'idiots', 'nazis', or "full of shit" when discussing people like you. They may be patronizing or condescending, but they are civil. The same cannot be said about your side of this issue. Since when are Americans allowed to call somebody a nazi when they're just condescending?
And yet reasonable people like you support people like CT Yankee who get to wander in an otherwise civil discussion of c section rates like a drunken sailor, spouting off about natural birthers being full of shit. Which would you rather be? A patronizing zealot? Or a boor? Personally I choose to be neither, but don't expect me to back down when a boor randomly walks up and insults me.
Why is this your issue anyway? The only reason I'm still posting on this is that people keep telling me how reasonable it is that I am being insulted. It's not reasonable. If she had simply said, "I'm sorry, you're right, that was out of line. But some natural birthers are out of line too" I'd have responded with yep, you're probably right, thanks for the apology. End of issue. But no, I just keep getting told why I shouldn't get upset when I am told I am full of crap. That is so American. We can never admit we did wrong, can never just own up to it and apologize. It's just this kind of character that makes it inevitable that we end up with a leader like *. No one will ever convince me that it's okay to spit on someone for no good reason and not apologize.

I was merely explaining that I understand how there is an attitude that can make women who elect to have medically unnecessary C-sections or epiduras b/c they don't want to experience the main, defensive of their choices, because there is a discourse within which they are framed as somehow inferior mothers. I would not express it in a rude way, but I see her point of view. I wasn't rude to you. I think your statement could have been interpreted as patronizing to women who don't think that pain legitimizes childbirth. None of us live in a vacuum so when I hear a statement like that I have a reaction in which I think about the sort of advocacy speech that derides women for not making the "natural" choices. I don't think it's unreasonable that you are upset, and also see why she reacted the way she did. I think more than anything it is indicative of what a polarized and divisive issue it is, and how it's not handled very well by peope who publicize it.

"I think your statement could have been interpreted as patronizing to women who don't think that pain legitimizes childbirth. None of us live in a vacuum so when I hear a statement like that I have a reaction in which I think about the sort of advocacy speech that derides women for not making the "natural" choices."
I really have no idea what you're talking about here.

I'm reading your posts carefully to try to learn from them how to respond in such a way myself when I feel attacked.

:hi:

Coming from you, that means a lot to me.

My wife just read through this whole thread and was amazed at the general level of patience and reason shown by the likes of you, DemExpat, Kitselaya (sp), etc, given some of the posts.

It is a polarizing issue, but I don't get why. The fact that we're finding mercury and PCBs in breast milk? Nobody on the other side of this issue seems terribly polarized by that.
But hey, suggest that not getting major surgery is a better idea than major surgery and the things that lead to major surgery, when it comes to starting a new life, then hell yes, let's get polarized! Riddle me that, batman.

and increasing their knowledge and understanding is a lifelong source of pleasure. But these people have never made a solid, cohesive bulk to a mob, so, in a weak species such as homo-sapiens, where being part of a tight-knit group has always been a great boon to survival, these traits have largely been bred out.

Instead, humans tend to accept the constructs of the group they belong to as their own, and base their perception of self on their degree of similarity to the rest of that group. Any information that conflicts with the constructs of the society they identify with can be interpreted as a personal threat, because if they listen to it, they will no longer feel securely part of their group.

And, of course, some people are just spoiling for a fight. ;-)

That was what would have made me defensive.

I am also a bit confused, I am sorry, in this thread you talk about your birthing choices, but then in the thread above you say that your wife reported it wasn't that painful.

I am not making any assumptions about your lifestyle, and I am NOT trying to attack you here, but that is a bit confusing to me.

I just spoke about my wife reporting it not being painful because some women have never heard that report. Our culture is full of descriptions of how painful it is (tv references, "like passing a bowling ball", "if it was up to men, we'd never reproduce - they can't take the pain", etc.). When my wife first heard someone describe birth that way, she was pretty surprised. But then she gave birth, and thought that the pain-free description was more reasonable. Intense, physical, yes. But she thinks of pain as some terrible thing that she would like to avoid, and she did not find labor to be in that category. That's all.

And about the public worth: I just think if you really despise what someone chooses, and that choice isn't illegal or harmful, you should probably keep it to yourself. Both sides could learn from that.

I just reread the thread and you didn't say the thing about public worth until after she already got upset. Ok, so in that case she was just rude, I concede. Again, I do understand where she is coming from, but cannot condone her tone.

I still am a bit confused about my other question.

I've never personally known anyone who scheduled a c-section for convenience. Clearly, it happens, but I've never known anyone to do it. As far as its messing you up less - I'd have to disagree with that. My first was vaginal and I did get back to normal. My second was a c-section. He was breech and we did labor for a total of 30 hours first. The c-section was fully justified. The scar was tiny and not noticeable but the muscles around it have never been the same. My daughter, who also had an emercency c-section experience the same thing. So if anyone's thinking about it for vanity's sake, I don't recommend it.

On the other hand, I remember when c-sections were considered drastic and they were rare. I have one nephew who was born with brain damage who would have been fine if they'd taken him and if fetal monitors had existed at the time.

So, I do think that some increase over the c-section rate of, say, 40 years ago, is justified. I recall when my son, now 26, was born. Since he was breech, the way my nephew had been ten years earlier, I was terrified of what could happen to him in the birth canal. The doctor assured me that the monitors would tell us if there was distress and we'd give it a shot. We did and although the distress never happened, I can tell you I couldn't have taken much more and was totally grateful when the doctor said he thought it was time to just take him out. Still, the first thing some of my friends said when they came to visit was how quick they were to do a c-section. My reaction was, "You do labor for thirty hours and see if you think it's quick."

As to not taking the risk on trying natural birth after c-section - well, that didn't come up for me. My son was my last, but that's what's happening with my daughter and she fully agrees with the doctor. He delivered her first and was more than willing to wait out a long and protracted delivery before resorting to c-section. It's not for his convenience, but because he really believes that statistics show an increased risk of rupture if there's been a previous c-section and does want to choose a date before she's likely to go into labor on her own.

I guess my feelings on the subject are - if you're doing it for convenience or to avoid labor, that's crazy and a doctor that would do it that way is irresponsible. On the other hand, I think it's crazy to try to ride out difficulties in labor if there's any risk at all when a c-section is an option.

That has more to do with physicians than mothers: The percentage of births that end up in C-sections doubles in final hour of a shift, and triples on holidays.

However, I have read about parents' scheduling births as well. The Wash Post did an article a couple years ago about a woman who scheduled a CS because of a business meeting.

flawed research. there is no reason a healthy pregnancy cannot attempt a vbac, as long as there is no induction. cytotec is the worst. just google 'vbac support', there is a ton of information out there.

I think there is an overall increase in the population in some STDs and would think this might cause an increase in c-sections.

Also I'm thinking that the rise in the age of women at the time of pregnancy may have something to do with the increase in c-sections.

I was recently told that most doctors refuse to allow women over forty to go through a vaginal birth (by my sister in law who is a nurse.)

I'm thinking there may actually be a social changes that we aren't looking at in a statistical way.

On another note, my oldest (we were born a week apart in the same hospital) friend just gave birth via C section after 40 hours of labor. She (the mother) is tiny (4'11 and her daughter 7'7oz) so this may have had something to do with the c section - but I still wonder why 40 hrs of labor first. We have been playing phone tag so I haven't received all the gory details.

Anyway, all my life my mother told me how horrible pregnancy and labor, especially labor (35 hrs for her) is to the point that she instilled in me a huge fear of having a child. She was extremely swollen/bloated and I have inherited this tendency from her so I know pregnancy wouldn't be so pleasant for me. She also told how, in 1965, the hospital had a huge ward with only one toilet and they'd dose all the women with a laxative then the women would have to line up to use the one toilet. Strange hmmm. And she implies that she and my father had a good marriage (10yrs) until I was born - though she doesn't blame me as a human being - just that she thinks any children are bad for a marriage (that men are inherently selfish and don't want a child to displace any attention on them).

So, between moving around a lot, fear of child birth, and concern that a child could create marital conflict, I've always had a fear of having children. On the face of it we'd have a lot to offer a child - good marriage and enough income - but we have sort have become set in our ways without a child around - a child would be a big change. Also, I'm extremely introverted and dread the thought of play dates, PTA meetings and all of that stuff.

I'm left thinking that it's often the twenty year olds who don't think about having a child but just do it who end up having children. If the decision is fully contemplated, if it is well thought out and analyzed, if it becomes a rational decision, it is more likely to be a "no" - a no to both c sections and natural birth.

They also have a high rate of cosmetic surgery.

It's related to a belief that c-sections are better for their appearance and for their sex organs.

women don't have much choice in the matter. They are either forced by their partners, or have been convinced by misinformation from society at large that vaginal birth is equal health wise to c-section and/or that vaginal birth is for the poor only.

here's some more info on the subject
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2604700.html

http://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?pid=S0034-89102005000500010&script=sci_abstract&tlng=en

http://www.popcouncil.org/mediacenter/newsreleases/brazilcsection.html

It really doesn't surprise me that if you give a group a basic incentive of more money and less time with a better schedule that they would follow that incentive.

It does sound like the women are more intimidated by the doctors.

Of far fewer gynecologists also practicing obstetrics is contributing towards more planned inductions and C-sections. One doctor can only handle so many OB patients with similar due dates... If you know you have a patient load of say 6-8 women all due during the same week, you may be more willing to give into either the patient's desire to schedule or be more susceptible to thinking scheduling will help you deliver better quality care if you fear over-extending yourself between patients.

There are likely so many factors that come into play with the scheduling and/or increase in numbers of C-sections that nailing it down to just one or two would be an exercize in futility.

But you may well be onto something with mentioning STD's as an active factor. My mom works for an OB/GYN office, and she has seen HPV infection and abnormal pap smear rates increase by more than triplicate in the last 8-10 years. She calls it south Georgia's silent epidemic. And yeah, any of their OB patients who has an active genital wart outbreak during their pregnancy must be scheduled for a C-section in order to reduce transmission to the baby.

why the hell is it anyone else's business?

Maybe they should focus on reducing cosmetic surgery, if they want to eliminate unnecessary procedures.

of all the facts, I have no grouch with that. I'd disagree that it's a good idea, because it's replacing a natural event with an unnecessary operation, but we're allowed to disagree. However my doctors in the past have presented me with a quite untrue picture in order to get me to consent to it for their own convenience, and that, IMO, is utterly disgusting. Any choice is only a genuine choice if you are well informed beforehand of the ramifications of either decision.

As for cosmetic surgery, that just doesn't happen to be what is being discussed in this thread. I thing it's silly and often counterproductive, but I sympathize with women who feel, in this society that judges women so heavily on appearance, that they need to get it done. Just as I sympathise with women going through innecessary C-sections through pressure from doctors or partners or through a fear that they might find natural birth to painful to cope with.

My own experience was not horrific, but enough to convince me that the 2nd and 3rd births would involve anesthesia. With my first, the dr. performed the episiotemy at exactly the moment that I had a contraction, and I yelped in one of the worst moments of pain in my life. I must have raised my hands to stop it and the nurse angrily told me to stop or my hands would be tied to the table! In those days, women giving birth had their hands routinely tied to the delivery table, but I had been spared because I said I would be OK during delivery. Ha!!

in subsequent births. Birthing is a very different experience for different women, there are some who genuinely find it painless and some who find it much more difficult. For me it was never easy, and every time a sister-in-law boasted about how she loved giving birth and always popped them out in an hour and couldn't understand what other women were whining about, I felt like scratching her eyes out.

You were being flexible in adjusting what you did to your own experience, and I commend that. There are other ways to decrease the pain too, which are worth learning about, but only so you have more facts to base your choice on. I don't know the statistics, perhaps Fleabert might, but I'm sure you'd find that there is a much smaller rate of episiotomy in home-births, because a woman helped to give birth gently can stretch, with appropriate massage, to allow the baby out. However a hurried, hung-up doctor does not want to slow the birth down and stand there gently rubbing a woman's private parts. Besides, in such a prudish country, he'd probably be sued if he did that to the average patient. ;-)

My second birth was utterly horrific, nobody checked during the entire birth to see if I had dilated, and it was only when my body was trying to do the last few pushes to eject the baby from the womb that I realised there was something wrong there. The baby's heart was stopping, and the irate doctor, who had been angry from the start that I had refused to schedule a convenience caesarian, told me that if I didn't push him out then he'd die. I had to push, for the baby's sake, even tho it was the worst pain in my life as the undilated cervix just split open, and I believed I was killing myself in doing so. Blood was pumping out in bursts, going everywhere, because an artery had ruptured.

The doctor got the nurse to inject me with something that makes the womb cramp tight to stop the bleeding, and then told her to again and again, and she was arguing with him that any more and I'd die of the drug. I could hear in his voice that he was certain I was dying anyway, and thought if he could have the nurse inject more he could then blame her. However drugs never have much effect on me, I seem to be immune to most, (one reason I didn't ever bother with anaesthetics) so I told her to give me more, that it wouldn't hurt me, and she did. It turned out I'd lost 2 litres of blood, and was not even given plasma or allowed anything to drink. I believe the doctor wanted me to die so I couldn't sue for malpractice.

For the next 3 months I struggled with constant illness to look after a handicapped baby, until one day I thought I was giving birth all over again, and the smelly green remnants of a placenta finally came out.

Now please people, don't be put of by this, it is impossible for any well supervised birth to have this stuff happen. So with my 3rd, I organised a home-birth, because I knew the sort of people who would look after me at home would have to be much more careful and caring.

I guess my point is that you need to think very carefully about who assists you during birth. Qualifications, imo, are meaningless, what matters is that there is someone experienced there who genuinely cares about you, and will take the time to keep an eye on things properly. And this is something you may be more likely to ensure at home than in a hospital.

Thanks so much for telling the story. It needs to be heard.

:hug:

You had some courage to have a third after that....

DemEx

Don't over-rate me, I've never got pregnant on purpose.

I'm just one of those people who contraception doesn't work for, and I mean combining the pill, inter-uterine devices, condoms AND only doing it in what the Billings Method said were the safe times. It runs in the family, my mother had seven children, and each of the first 5 were had using a different method of birth control, the much later last two were had after menopause. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if I could get pregnant cybering after having a hysterectomy. ;-)

She told me the sad story to get me to promise not to use any of those methods that hadn't worked for me, and then belted me for being on the pill instead. Then, when I got pregnant the next year, at 19, she was not happy either. Honestly, there is just no pleasing some people.

Of course, I could have had abortions, but to my mind they were each my baby that had to be protected from the moment I became pregnant. I organised an abortion for the 2nd, because my partner wanted me to, but then backed out because I realised I would resent him so intensely for making me "murder" my baby that I wouldn't have a relationship afterwards anyway.

However there were two much earlier pregnancies in very nasty circumstances where things were quite different, and they taught me that every woman should have the right to abortion as early and simply as possible, if she feels that's what is right for her.

And :hug: back to you too Demex, to Fleabert too, and to all the others here on both sides of the debate.

"Any choice is only a genuine choice if you are well informed beforehand of the ramifications of either decision."

only thing I would change is the words 'either decision' to 'any option'.

spectacular.

I was just considering the choice between caesarian and vaginal delivery, but of course either of these options leads to a great many other choices that can need to be made.

I've always wondered about the women who choose to have a ceasarian with local anaesthetics so they can still be awake and see their baby born. (A practice that I believe is far more common here in Australia than in America.) I really don't think I'd have the guts to watch myself getting cut open.

and mom's abdomens are draped so they cannot see the surgery, but can see and participate in the birth. The birth I have attended that was a c-section went exactly like that. After baby was born, dad left mom's side and I slid in to stay with mom as the placenta was removed and surgery was completed.

Mom and baby were fine, but I had to keep my mouth shut that I thought they were railroaded into the section, mostly by the previous decisions that were made by the dr. regarding interventions. they were not the usual ones due to her circumstances, and I could not have forseen their implications, or I would have said so at the time. I was very sad that parents who wished to have a natural, vaginal birth were literally forced into a c-section because of their dr. (I can't give many details, professionally, but I will say it was related to a medication interaction issue)

One of the gripes I have with society in general is the way experts set themselves up as gods who can't be questioned, while they are just as human as the rest of us, and just as liable to be mistaken, uninformed or operating from motives that are not in our best interest. And they can get away with this for as long as people take the easy way out of trusting other people to make decisions for them rather than questioning everything and researching issues for themselves. Which is so much easier to do now we have the internet.

And this applies to politics and religion just as much as to medicine. I've never understood why Abraham didn't just explain to god what a frigging power-mad idiot he was being instead of dragging little Isaac up that hill to kill him, so I don't take the word of a mere doctor for much either. ;-) (But then, having had my church-going parents try to kill me as an incestuously abused, pregnant young teenager, for the good of my family, I was not overly impressed by the minister preaching that Abraham's willingness to kill his son on God's orders was proof of his great holiness.)

Of course even being as well informed and questioning as you are can't always stop situations such as you describe from happening, but at least they will be a lot less likely to happen with you around.

the first child born naturally with no meds toward the end and the second child delivered by c-section because she was breech and the amniotic fluid levels were dropping due to my blood pressure problems..

Personally I say it is the choice of the mother and the doctor....does it hurt to give birth...yes but the pain of childbirth is easily forgotten and nothing compared to the pains that a mother endures as that child grows and toddles about in life...

I think it's sad that women can't trust their bodies and their minds. Doctors never let anything procede naturally, they always find some little measure that demands their intervention. I'm all for med intervention when called for but they ALWAYS do something and I think it's mostly for profit and/or convenience for themselves.

Girls, if you get an experienced midwife to help you through, the pain is not terrible in childbirth, it's instructional, it's just telling you what's going on. There's no sharp pains, no knife like pains, they are like cramps and they all have a wave pattern. You feel the beginning of the pain and you ride it like a wave and you visualize it doing it's work.

If you concentrate on what is happening and "ride the contractions" like that, it's really very manageable. I didn't even have aspirin with either of my girls. It sure makes taking care of a newborn easier when you can start without having to recover from drugs or surgery.

Aspirin makes the blood coagulate more slowly, and should never be given in situation that can lead to bleeding.

I'm glad that childbirth went well for you. What you describe is exactly what the average healthy woman can expect if she feels secure and relaxed and well cared for.

If somebody experiences unbearable pain, then relieve it I guess, but I was just concerned that people plan to have the whole childbirth experience taken away from them without even considering the benefits of not having all that crap. There are benefits to it and for many women, the pain is not that bad. You CAN use your mind and knowledge of the process to stay calm and ride out the pain. I'm not an massochist, I just don't like/trust doctors and hospitals that much, personally.

Please don't generalize about the levels of pain a woman feels in childbirth.

Just as women's cramps vary from woman to woman, so do labor pains. I find these "it's all in your head" posts to be somewhat condescending, in the same way I would feel it was condescending if I went to a doctor for pms symptoms and he told me it was all in my head.

Some posts in this thread subtly imply there is something wrong with you or you aren't completely in control, or you're less of a complete healthy woman in control of or in touch with her body if you aren't willing to experience what - for some people - is extreme (and unnecessary) pain.

Part of knowing your own body is knowing what your own tolerance for pain is, and how your body reacts to pain. You never hear any subtle guilt trips, or statements like "visualize riding the pain out - it will empower you" when people talk about getting their wisdom teeth out. People just get the Valium, or Novocaine, or laughing gas without a second thought, if that's what their pain tolerance requires. And not a single damn person tries to make them feel like less of a person for it, or lectures them about how they are strong enough to do it without the pain killers.

But switch the conversation from wisdom teeth to wombs, and all of a sudden it gets to the core of your identity and strength as a woman. Screw that.

You have a high pain tolerance and want a quicker recovery? Do the natural childbirth. You prefer a longer recovery with less severe pain? Make arrangements for that.

I've got better ways to prove my self-worth as a human than getting wisdom teeth removed while going to my "happy place."

it was "all in your head." In fact the doctors often make it worse by saying that the labor is too slow and you need pitocin or something to speed it up -- faster = more painful.

Natural childbirth, for many women, is not that painful if you read up on what to expect. It's definitely an option. It is NOT like getting surgery or dental work with no novocaine etc. Pregnancy is not a medical problem that needs to be fixed, it's a natural process that in most cases does not require drugs or surgery. I so NOT have a high pain tolerance and I freak out about going to the dentist and stuff. I just want to tell especially the younger women who said that they were scared, it's not necessarily that painful or scary. It was a good experience for me -- a lot of the interventions IMO are for $$$. There's pain in the recovery anyhow...there's pain when you start breastfeeding (THAT was painful first couple of weeks.)

I guess my suggestion is to only think of the labor as one little part of it --- consider the recovery, consider how you want to be that first could of days with your newborn. It's hard to find a comfortable position for feeding when you are recovering from ab surgery. I dont' think people consider the pros and cons.

If you want absolutley no pain of course, the best way to go is...ADOPT!

Even those having instruction. From what I experienced and what I heard from other women is that labor became so intense they couldn't keep up with the breathing and panic set in. They were truly expecting to ride the contractions, but the contractions overwhelmed them. Also, some women (I am one)have a very low threshhold for pain.
Not allowing a woman who is suffering to get some relief is just wrong.

P.S. After my daughter's experience with the first OB who said "Too late" for the epidural, she found an OB who said she would give her the epidural. My daughter got to the hospital about 45 minutes before giving birth with her 2nd, the dr. tried to talk her out of the epidural, my daughter burst into tears and said "You promised!" She got the epidural (I believe it was a quickie)and said the birth was wonderful, in contrast to her first!

I am just trying to present a counterpoint to the automatic "plug in the spine, knife in the stomach" approach to childbirth. I don't think it's necessary for every person. I'm not saying it's not ever necessary but to all the young women here who only hear of painful childbirth, it's not always like that. I did NOT want pitocin, epidural or anything like that and my first one, it annoyed me that they were constantly badgering me about it and saying things like "this is your last chance" etc. It was messing with my concentration. The hardest thing about natural childbirth for me was fighting off the interventions -- the second one, I didn't go to the hospital until 20 minutes before she was born so it was too late for them to "help me." I had a pretty pleasant experience walking around the house, getting in and out of the shower and stuff before heading over there.

I have had friends who experienced birth more the way you describe. They were not overwhelmed. They seemed to "ride the contractions" as you say.

I don't ever tell young women experiencing their first pregnancy that they will be in intolerable pain. I, too, believe that they should see how it goes. I do say to them that they should talk to their dr.s about their options. I've heard the story too many times about women changing their minds in labor, asking for the epidural and being told it's too late.

I also know women who simply do not want to experience contractions they consider uncomfortable. They feel that since they are awake that's "experiencing childbirth" enough, thank you very much. And they are not shy about saying that! (Oh, I can see people shaking their heads and going "tut tut"!)

boob jobs and tatooes and all sorts of stuff -- people don't have the aversion to knives and needles that I do!!

just no pain in childbirth. They aren't partiuclarly strange or vain, they just view pain in a different dimension from those who want childbirth to be as natural as possible and who do not consider contractions as pain. Different strokes...

No I just mean that in general people are less adverse to knives and needles and meds, than in my generation. My childbirth pain was manageable but I would have never known it if I would have decided YEARS in advance for a surgical birth like some of the young women I've seen here.

Also it needs to be said that they can't promise you that you won't have pain or healing complicatons as a result of the cesarian. And if you need pain meds to recover, how do you feed your baby without passing them along? The benefits of breastfeeding are enormous -- I think it's harder to get started post-Cesarian, at least for people I have known (although not impossible.)