..to not give a flying **** about having a 'natural' birth

[somewherewest]

OK I can understand the desire to avoid intervention if possible but I really really don't get the ideological fervour which some people seem to invest in 'natural' birth. I've been just been going through the handouts from the NCT antenatal course the DH and I are doing and the message basically seems to be "Your choices are important...but if you don't chose to have a 'natural' homebirth sustained only by breathing exercises and whale music and to breastfeed the DS until he's old enough to be bringing girlfriends home then YOUR CHOICES ARE BAD". I really, really do not get this horror of 'intervention'. Is it just that decades of organic yoghurt adverts have conditioned us to think that 'natural' must equal 'better' in every bloody situation, or am I being totally unreasonable?

I thought exactly like you, OP, both before I gave birth and I continued to think like that after the birth of DC1.

It was only after the birth of DC2 that I realised what all the fuss was about re as little intervention as possible.

I used to be really defensive and say things along the lines of people not being expected to go through any other type of pain without artificial assistance - you take panadol for a mere headache; why not for the 'horror' that is childbirth?! etc, etc...

DC1 was induced, so I was strapped to the table to be monitored and therefore couldn't move around to alleviate the pain. I went straight from gas and air to insisting on an epidural, which only affected the right side of, so the left side was still in agony. Yet I still couldn't feel anywhere near enough to push, so he ended up being a ventouse delivery. This ended up happening really quickly, along with an episiotomy, since his heart rate dropped and we had to get him out.

And then, because he wasn't A-OK on arrival, they had to check him over properly, so we never had skin-on-skin after delivery. Eventually he was passed to me all bundled up - we never had that (what I now know to be) crucial skin-on-skin bonding. He was very sleepy and not interested in feeding whatsoever. It was probably around 10 whole hours before he showed any signs of hunger, and at that point he just couldn't work out how to latch on.

It took us weeks to get breastfeeding established from there, and only happened eventually through sheer determination on my part to make it work, down to going out into the depths of winter and the early 2009 snowfall, when he was days old to get hands-on advice and support. We eventually got there, but man, it was a traumatic, painful struggle.

Contrast this with DC2. Again, induced, but this time it all happened so quickly that I didn't even have time for panadol, let alone any single other form of pain relief. She came out totally unassisted, was weighed and then plonked onto me, went straight for the breast, fed perfectly and my milk came in pretty much the next day, instead of the usual 3-5 days.

It all couldn't have been more straight forward and problem-free.

There will always, always be a place for intervention and assistance, and there are no medals for childbirth so you should do what you have to do.

It's just that there is a very valid reason for pushing / making aware / promoting / whatever... natural childbirth, because assuming it goes well, it is so much better for all concerned - the baby, the mother, breastfeeding and lowest down the list of priorities, but on the list nonetheless: cost to the NHS/tax-payer.

Why would you assume that I don't know the history of obstetrics, tittybangbang?

As a matter of fact, I've worked alongside clinicians in the area and with a wide range of doctors. I really appreciate their rigorous scientific discipline and professionalism, compared to e.g. any alternative therapists I've dealt with. I'm well aware that the 1950s-1980s was not a golden era in terms of empowerment for mothers but that was influenced by the trend for behavioural determinism in science overall at that time and an excessive faith in 'progress'. A good example was the idea at the time that formula milk was inherently better than breast milk because it was scientific and thus more 'modern'. We know better now, partly thanks to the work of groups like the NCT.

The overall trend in medicine in all areas at that time was paternalistic and controlling. Lots of unnecessary procedures were carried out across all specialisms - removal of adenoids, tonsils etc - things that we know today are not necessarily beneficial.

I couldn't open the link you provided but a book that I've found useful in understanding the history of medicine is 'The Rise and Fall of Modern Medicine' by James le Fanu. It shows how trends have come and gone in medicine during the post-war era and explores why innovation in medicine has ground to a halt in recent years compared to the 'glory days' of medicine when huge innovations with major benefits to human life were developed in a very short space of time (vaccines, antibiotics, transplants etc). Obstetrics and gynaecology are covered as well although mainly relating to innovations in infertility treatment.

I think we all owe a huge debt to modern medicine and it's naive to dismiss centuries of scientific achievement just because there was a brief period last century when the trend was towards excess intervention and authoritarianism. Personally, I'm grateful to the innovators and risk-takers of the past and very very glad that I live in the 21st century so I don't have to give birth to 8 children at home without medical help like my grandmother or indeed give birth to 4 children in a highly medicalised setting supervised by a male obstetrician like my mother. I have more choices, which is great.

Yet another thread that attempts to put women into two opposing camps.

Why do they always start to go this way? (although this thread is nowhere near as bad as some, but its early days).

At least no-one has pulled out the sefish card [overtly]

Whatever birth we have I think we all do it for the same reasons. Because we want what is best for us and the baby. If our plans go awry we have no control - its not a punishment for chosing the wrong way in the first place.

Gets on my bloody nerves, all this making assumptions about why someone else has had their baby at home or in hospital or whether they had a CS or no pain relief.

So many prejudices.

HipHopOpotomus - But you could only ever find out after the birth whether it was going to be ok or whether intervention would have been neccessary.

Increased risk means that there's an increased risk. It's not to say that it definitely will go wrong, and that it went ok for you is great. However it says that the likelyhood of something going wrong is higher and they offer methods to reduce this risk, but those come with their own risks too, so you need to weigh up which risk you are more happy to take.

They don't throw statistics at you which they've just made up to prevent you from having a 'natural' birth. But they have to inform you about the risks, when they are known. If they didn't, and something went wrong with whatever risk factor you have as a contributing reason, then you'd rightly blame them for not giving you the tools to make a decision.

Personally, I get the feeling in discussions like these that the risks connected with interventions is often emphasised a lot, whilst the risks of going natural are downplayed.

Speedy, you ask a good question. The hypno stuff certainly helped with my labour and I am very positive about it and would do it again, though the final bit, where it all went tits up.. I'm not so sure it really did. I definitely still used it.. I almost felt like I left my body.. but this was not in itself a positive or empowering experience.

However, I think it's important to learn that you may need to surrender control to more than just your body. I do feel the NCT stuff sometimes seems to suggest that if you just "do birth right" that it can be glorious, but there are other factors at play that may not be under your control.

At the point I had my delivery, with the Kielland's forceps etc, it was the right thing to do medically. My son was born with a relatively low Apgar and who knows what might have happened with a delay either way etc. We are tremendously lucky that we are in a situation where, when things change in labour, there are options that reduce the likelihood of catastrophe. My grandmother laboured for 72-96 hours on all five of her pregnancies, all of which happened when she was more than two weeks overdue and her waters had gone prior to labour (like me). Sadly, she didn't bring her fifth baby home because of this management... in those days, 4/5 live babies was considered reasonable odds from a medical point of view, but from my grandmother's point of view it was, of course, devastating and she speaks of Peter regularly (he would be 42 now if he had lived). I am glad that we have assistance and are not left to labour for days and days with our babies in distress.

I think though that next time, I will do hypnobirthing.. but I will be focusing on remaining calm in any eventuality, not in assuming that physical reaction will lead to a particular outcome (e.g. unassisted vaginal birth). I think I would rather a more realistic hypnobirthing, if that makes sense.. I think going into trance is helpful and focusing on a safe and healthy birth for your baby is a great aid to enjoying birth, but I am not personally bothered if circumstances dictate that this is not vaginal without assistance as long as we are all safe.

I don't really get why there needs to be an argument over this issue. As long as people are given the information they need to make an informed choice then ultimately it is the business of the birthing mother how she decides she wants her birth to be. Obviously there are factors outside her control and she may not get what she envisaged but, again, information about options and possible outcomes is key. And the NCT do give that information.

What is noticeable is that people aren't saying "C sections are BAD THINGS" but there have been quite a few posts saying that natural birth is hideous and agonising. This is simple not true for everyone. I was spectacularly lucky - I had a fast and straightforward delivery where the pain was manageable - to a great extent it wasn't pain as we know it, it was a very disturbing intensity and the feeling of my body taking over and doing its own thing. It wasn't fun by any sretch of the imagination, but it was certainly bearable. I ddidn't need pain relief to get through it and I had a straightforward recovery. So for some people, a completely natural birth is entirely realistic. For others, for many reasons outside their control, it isn't. That doesn't make the people who get the natural birth any better, or cleverer, or stronger than those who don't - it just makes them luckier.

widow I agree in some cases with you. However if I hadn't known what my preference was, I would have perhaps succumb to the huge pressures from doc to be induced. I felt if my body wasn't ready then the likelihood of further interventions was likely. I wanted to avoid UNNECESSARY interventions.

Yes the docs have stats, but there are alternatives to induction that I was up for. The consultant did make me anxious with his demands and implied I was putting my baby at risk. But seriously don't be naive to think in many cases this is anything but arse covering by the doctor abd hospital. When I declined the induction and elected to come in for monitoring I was told to cone back in five days!!! That's 5 days after it was so important to be induced because I was putting my baby at huge risk. Because that was best for my baby? No - because there was a bank holiday weekend. Apparently these risks to baby only occur when the banks are open!!!

My point being in MY case, the docs weren't interested in me or my baby personally, just as a number on a graph to be 'processed' through the machine, based purely on my age.

Thankfully I got great support here on MN and from DP and stuck to my plan, based on me, my
Body and feeling, my first pg experience etc.

Had I been arm twisted into due date induction, who knows what could have gone on, completely unnecessarily. So knowing you wld prefer a natural birth can help many women through this minefield. Consultants don't necessarily know what is best for each individual.

I realy would love a vbac this time but I know it's not going to happen,

Last time the 5 mins where I thought the baby had died were the longest mins of my life so I'm just hoping for an uncomplicated cs this time.

I found my opinions changed with each Experiance, after ds1 I never thought that I would have ds2 without an epidural but I did, but then labour was not as long with him and he was a lot smaller than his brother

increased risk means there is an increased risk - but does it?

Just because the numbers can go from 1% to 2.5% (or whatever it is) doesn't mean that MY numbers, or that MY risk increases at all. In fact any individual may be at no risk of problems at all, unless you get the fear from the figures and deviate from the plan. There needs to be a lot more treatment and assessment of individuals.

Of course we are all discussing this in hindsight!!! Fact remains, it would have been much more convenient for the hospital if I was I induced and baby delivered before the 4 day weekend!!!! Not a factor women should really have to be considering in their decisions surely?

I too would have had to be induced on the Thurs despite that technically being 41+4 because the ward was busy with ELCS' on the Fri and they didn't like to schedule things for the weekend. However, I am sure that my dates were right, not the scan's, meaning that I would have only been 40+2...

And I agree with Kungfupannda too. No-one here is saying "all intervention bad, whale music good"...just saying they think it is important not to have blind faith in a system that doesn't always take into account the individual or provide alternative viewpoints.

NinkyNonker - I totally agree. People need to be more educated about conception, pregnancy and birth meaning that they are in control via knowledge.

I also agree with the OP in that the NCT course does not provide control via knowledge. I did only do the yoga sessions but imagining golden feathers floating did not help me manage pain relief and my complicated medications in the face of a midwife's ignorance - knowledge did.

HipHop

"Just because the numbers can go from 1% to 2.5% (or whatever it is) doesn't mean that MY numbers, or that MY risk increases at all."

True, statistics work on a population level, but if you are within a risk group, you should be advised that you are so you can make an informed decision. Whether you as an individuum will be in the 2.5% for which there's an adverse outcome or in the 97.5% for which it's going right, is something they can't foresee.

That's not to say I doubt your story, I don't. And I really don't understand why they didn't monitor you, but that doesn't negate the basic point that you as a patient should be informed about all risks of all varieties so you can make a decision.

I was really pleased, for example, that when I went in to request my ELCS the consultant took time to discuss with me both risks of VBAC and ELCS, and only agreed with signing me up, when he realised that I had done my research and knew exactly what I was asking for without pushing me into either direction. But I guess that not every trust and every consultant is that good

Wow this thread has grown and grown

I'll use an illustration to explain what I'm getting at in the OP....another first time pregnant woman who very much wants a natural birth recently told me that she would feel she had "failed" if she ended up having a c-section and would be "disappointed" with her birth. The first part of that is fine, the second and third parts made me wonder where she got the message that having birth X rather than birth Y made her a "failure". It feels like birth ends up being some sort of test that women pass or fail. I want to say again that the woman doing my particular NCT course has been very good, setting out all the options and advising everyone to keep an open mind (which is pretty much how I feel about it too). Its the NCT literature we got and some of the natural birth rhetoric I've come across elsewhere that pisses me off.

OP,last preagnancy I know I would've said the same as the woman you're talking about. I wouldn't have felt like a failure but I would've been very disappointed and it would have seriously depressed me. I'm petrified of certain medical procedures and I hate the idea of being cut open at such extend a CS does. I will do anything in my power to stay away from the hospital and the delivery room this time. I honestly think labour would have been quicker If all the machines, tubes and monitors weren't there ( none of them needed thank God). The fear of needing those things tensed me and I'm sure it played a part. And the pethidine made me irrational and incapable of staying focused. I won't take this time, I didn't even ask for it last time. I would've been happier I'd they left me to it. Unnecessary intervention that was.

I do feel like a bit of a failure about my labour. However it wasn't all my fault, to use a cliche the system failed me as well and I am angry about that. This isn't to say that I believe all intervention is bad, just that I believe women ought to be more empowered about their abilities and what their rights are, and the options they have open to them. If the NCT are a little militant about that then so be it.

If anyone else tried to tell me I failed I would force feed them Raspberry leaf tea, beat them round the head with my copy of Ina May and then lob my hypnobirthing CD set at them as they crawled away. I was prepared damn it! Just not to do it in the time frame the NHS set out for first time mothers, not to do it strapped to a bed with various probes everywhere.

Raspberry leaf tea. Drunk it like a trooper! Tasted horrible!!!

I know! I switched to capsules in the end...I think I was on 6 a day by the time I got to full term, I was rattling!

I think everyone has to look at the possible outcomes of all types of birth but keep an open mind. At least if you have read up on what could potentially happen you mgiht be a little bit more settled if it should happen.

I had first daughter with epidural. Didnt feel like i had given birth and felt disappointed and I do think that didnt help our relationship.

With the 2nd i went in saying i would see how it went and if so have everything available. Turns out there was no room on delivery so they sent me to the antenatal ward (i wasnt having pains or contractions - my waters had gone) and sat for the next 10 hours playing cards with other women and had sent DH home. I rang him at 1130pm to come back as was getting some niggles and DD number 2 was born on the antenatal ward one hour later with just gas and air as there was still no room on delivery. I felt so much better for doing it that way and although i am nervous this time i plan on doing the same if possible. Have been told if i am anything like last time i wont even make it to hospital which would be even better in my mind.

I drunk the thing every night before bed. I don't think I'll be drinking it this time. Didn't seem worth it at all. I'm going to try perennial gel. Sorry if TMI

I really don't understand why there has to be this divide between "natural" and "intervention". I am an advocate of natural birth (refused induction at term +10 and was lucky enough to have a completely unmedicated birth with DD) but can see that interventions are necessary at times. What I don't agree with is interventions for the sake of "hospital procedures" or "this is what we always do".

I don't see why the two "strands" of birth have to be mutually exclusive.

Oh somewherewest how i loved your post... it gave me the much needed chuckle i needed today.....Being a Birth Doula for quite a few years now i have seen probably absolutly every kind of labour and delivery possible! Hypnobirthing, massage, water births & natural labours work great for some and equally gas & air , pethadine and an epidural work just as well for others.

At the end of the day it doesnt matter how you get there. As long as you and your baby are happy and healthy at the end of it all, it really doesnt matter what you believe in, or how your personal birthing experience was!

People should stand strong in trying what they want and giving in when they want - a healthy baby is the most important thing!

Good luck and huge congratulations.

Victoria.x

"As long as someone is happy with the birth themselves, that's the most important thing." TOTALLY agree with this. I have no idea why so many women can't just accept that some women want the all-natural/hypnobirth/whalesong/homebirth kind of delivery whereas other women would actually prefer an epidural/cs. Neither is wrong, it's just personal preference based on what instinctively appeals to you and which risks you would rather run (there are risks to all types of birth, just different types of risks and different likelihoods of them occurring).

I think part of the problem with the NCT is that they assume that you want a natural birth. Not necessarily the case - I only went to the classes because I wanted to meet people. In point of fact, if I could have chosen I would have gone for an elcs. And I do think that they sometimes propagate a failure culture, even if they don't do so consciously: in my group, there was one cs, two ventouses and a forceps, with all the others bar one having an epidural. We were told that "none of you have failed" - I for one didn't consider myself to have failed and thought it was pretty patronising of her to "reassure" us like that (given that she hadn't bothered to ask us how we felt before coming out with that gem, so she clearly felt that the thought should have occurred to us).

If you look at it the other way zombie they could also be assuming that those who didn't have a natural birth would need reassuring that they hadn't failed because that's how a lot of women feel, and i'm sure not all of those would feel happy to speak up about how they feel. the intention is to reassure and support, not patronise. if you don't feel that way then great, but maybe others in your group did, or secretly did?

I think it can be a vicious circle naturalbaby. When people try to reassure women, it kind of reinforces the idea that women can somehow "succeed" or "fail" at giving birth. I think it would be more productive to address the idea that there is no such thing as "failure to give birth properly" as opposed to telling people that they didn't fail, because it is implicit in the latter that it actually is possible to fail.

As someone who delivers lots of baby animals. I come from the stand point that if there is a live and healthy mother and a live and healthy baby regardless of how we reached that point it is a success.
Yes regardless of whether you are a cow, dog or human it is much better if you can push the little one into the world unaided. However, there are lots of different reasons why this might not happen, the vast majority of which the individual has very little control over.
What does make me cross are the people who have been lucky enough for all the cards to fall the right way and for it to occur naturally to suggest that intervention is an individual's fault. I remember it being implied to me that it was my fault that DD was breech - it was not she was an stubborn little sod who didn't actually turn and then used the LOP tactic too.