..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?

TheProvincialLady - those 5 minutes can be critical in a baby being born dead or alive, or with or without the effects of oxygen deprivation. I'll take someone 'cutting my fanny' any time over that thanks.

I thought my NCT teacher was great. She was a homebirth team midwife and obviously favoured that approach but she told us all the options and the emphasis was an explaining each process and procedure and encouraging couples to communicate effectively with each other so that the birthing partner is informed enough to support the mother properly. I thought they were useful classes as a first time mum.

Personally I don't have a birth plan this time. Last time I wanted a homebirth but ended up in hospital with an epidural and emcs. My birth plan is to get the baby out alive and to be as unmangled in the process as possible.

I want a homebirth this time for , amongst other reasons, I don't want pethidine forced upon me. I honestly feel that if that midwife hadn't finished her shift I would've ended up with a CS.

Nobody is saying intervention is something to be ashamed of or shouldn't happen but that it should be the last resort and by the norm.

Sorry I meant "not the norm"

The point is surprisEs some of us come across those who do say it should never happen. Your view seems quite reasonable to me and I agree that medical intervention should be a last resort however not everyone out there is quite so understanding. When you are recovering from one of those situations and not feeling very well physically these people are incredibly damaging.

viomum routine episiotomies were not being done in emergency cases - they were being done even without any detected sign of foetal distress.

"I'll take someone 'cutting my fanny' any time over that thanks"

There is no evidence that routine episiotomy is linked to better outcomes for babies.

There IS evidence it's linked to more pain postnatally than a tear of the same degree.

There is no consistent evidence it has a protective effect on women's pelvic floors.

Which is why it is no longer recommended as a routine practice in the UK.

"I don't think people start out hostile though"

I think most women are quite scared of childbirth. And I think there are many people who don't want to hear that the things they are relying on to make childbirth bearable and safe: doctors and drugs, may not guarantee them a healthier, easier birth, and may expose them to avoidable pain and injury.

I think that makes a lot of people feel angry and helpless, especially when others suggest ways of avoiding damage and injury in childbirth - namely natural birth practices and homebirth, that they are unfamiliar with and suspicious of.

Our system of maternity care is highly medicalised, protocol driven and often very unresponsive to women's needs.

I think it's incredibly sad that an organisation which has done more to challenge the weaknesses of this system and to humanise birth for families is scapegoated so often on these boards. Usually by people making sweeping statements about supposedly core NCT beliefs on birth, that actually aren't reflected in any NCT publications or training materials.

And that's because views like the ones complained of here have nothing to do with the NCT, any more than the same views when expressed by a midwife are in any way a reflection of the views of the RCM.

"Seems to me ftom this thread that some NCT practitioners are more ideological than others"

In the 1950's the NCT was accused of taking an ideological stance on birth in arguing that women should be allowed to get off the bed during labour, and should be asked if they want pain relief, rather than just given it.

Our current system of maternity care is highly ideological. That's why I find it ironic that the NCT is seen as being 'ideological', when so far, all the things it has lobbied for in the 60 years of its existence have come to be seen as part of normal good practice. The focus of the NCT is still on humanising care and improving outcomes for women and babies. No different from the aims of the RCM. Their official stance on interventions is exactly the same as the RCM and the WHO. No different.

I had 2 elec CSs entirely as my birth choice. It suited me very well.

I know plenty of people who choose whale song births. It suited them very well.

In all aspects of life there will be extremists. I choose to ignore them and make an informed decision. The problem is OP was coming across as Extremist herself but on the side of intervention. She was doing the same as what she complained about. I have a problem with that.

YANBU but then I have to have a very medicalised birth due to a pre existing condition. I am absolutely fine with that. I like to plan and induction at 38 weeks suits me just fine.

I am also very natural NOT lentilly so I love it.

titty - I also had an episiotomy that healed incredibly well with very little pain. The scar is hard to find it was all that neat. I could sit down normally straight away. I'd chose that too over several of my friends' experiences with 'natural' tears!

Someone earlier pointed out that doctors outside maternity services are not challenged or mistrusted in the same way as obstetricians.

There is a distinct difference between these two groups of doctors: obstetricians deal with pregnancy and birth, which is a normal, healthy physiological condition. Other doctors deal with pathological physiological states.

When OBs treat pregnant low risk women within a pathological model, which is what frequently happens, they intervene unnecessarily and can jeopardise the outcome. Even a simple-seeming intervention can have major ramifications: inserting a cannula upon arrival at the hospital whether or not the mother needs it, results in restriction of movement. The birthing woman is unable to lean forwards resting on her hands, which is one common position which offers relief during labour. So the discomfort and irritation which ensue will affect her emotions and hormones during labour - two factors which we know form a vita internall setting which can make for a positive or negative birthing experience.

It is therefore right to challenge this assumption of pathology in order to achieve the best outcome for mother and baby.

I did the breathing classes and have to say it help. But the downsides with natural births you end up with fucking piles and believe me I hate it they pop out every two weeks so horrible. Take all the drugs they offer, its very painful. But I will say this it wont stop me having more.

Re tears and cuts, I've had both. I'd choose a tear hands down as they heal better. I had one of each during my last birth; the cut took months to feel normal, unlike the tear.

Biscuit - not everyone gets piles.

But I'm sorry to hear that you have them.

Having drugs during labour isn't going to automatically stop you getting piles biscuit

Thats great if you don't give a flying wotsit but many women do. I wanted to do without drugs, certainly without an epidural which would have meant continuous monitoring etc - and I was glad I did.

You may not mind OP, but just take care not to dismiss women who do feel completely euphoric about their natural births

My bloody episiotomy took months to stop hurting, I was still aware of it when dd was 8 months.

Stropperella - no, not all NHS courses are good. The one I went to managed, in the space of an hour, to destroy all my hard work of building confidence in my ability to give birth. Needless to say, I didn't go back.

Cumbria, you said it: you haven't given birth. Which is why your post comes across as well-meant naivety.

On the whole, I'm observing from this thread that those who are in favour of reducing intervention seem to have done more research than those who are not. Knowledge is a powerful thing indeed.

" I also had an episiotomy that healed incredibly well with very little pain. The scar is hard to find it was all that neat. I could sit down normally straight away. I'd chose that too over several of my friends' experiences with 'natural' tears!"

Doctors have to make decisions based on research evidence, not on personal anecdote.

I'm glad you healed well, but over all episiotomy is still linked to more painful healing and more nerve damage than natural tears OF THE SAME DEGREE.

"Biscuit - not everyone gets piles."

No - I didn't. Even after 3 vaginal births with babies over 9lbs, one of which involved 3 hours of pushing.

Got'em now though, nearly 7 years on from my last birth.

"YANBU but then I have to have a very medicalised birth due to a pre existing condition"

Don't know about your condition so am not commenting on that, but I've heard several people who had a similar pregnancy problems to me (gestational diabetes and baby over 10lbs) say they 'had' to be induced at term and that they 'had' to have a hospital birth. I didn't have either and I wasn't aware of any rules requiring me to do so.

I think we need as a population of mothers, to reacquaint ourselves with the notion of 'informed choice' when it comes to healthcare.

Piles are Evil Bastards. Never had one until DC3. 8 mins of pushing, only 9lb 7, and OUCH.

First poo a week after birth was worse than birth, I swear.

TMI?