AIBU to have found childbirth unbearably agonising?

[Caff2]

Just that. I had an elective section with ds2 because of it. And yet I have friends and read on here of people who "did it naturally" or "just had a bit of gas and air at the end".

Why was childbirth so awfully painful for me?

At some points during the thread there's been some posts I've seen (I can't trawl through 350 messages tonight but will tomorrow if need be) that seem to go the complete opposite way and suggest that women who don't have epidurals are strange, or even failing in some way. I don't understand why we all get so worked up about each other's birth choices.

I didn't not have an epidural because I wanted to have a drug-free birth, I didn't not have an epidural because I wanted to feel like my birth was somehow superior to those who did - I didn't have an epidural because I didn't want one, was more scared of the idea of a tube in my back (needles I can handle, tubes not so much), and I knew if I couldn't feel anything, I wouldn't bother pushing. My reasons for choosing not to have an epidural (although had I not been 10cm when they examined me, and had been 10cm for quite a while but didn't want to tell them because I thought I was just going to poo, I probably would've gone for an epidural after that) are no more or less valid than people's reasons for having epidurals.

Although that's all going a bit off topic and the subject has moved on since, I just wanted to lend my thoughts :)

"Whereas neglecting the needs of pregnant/labouring women is justified by policy decisions like 'there's no point in admitting a woman in early labour to hospital as it would interfere with her hormone cascade'"

What about 'we have a responsibility not to do things to women which will significantly increase their risk of serious birth injuries, without improving their chance of going home with a well baby'? And 'we have a responsibility not to clog up operating theatres with low risk women experiencing labour dystocia from being admitted before they're in active labour, as this puts women with complex pregnancies in danger'.

And I have never, never heard anyone involved in delivering maternity care calling women selfish for wanting pain relief or support in early labour. It's absolutely reasonable and sensible that women want to go to hospital in early labour - all mammals want to head for a place of safety, the place where they will deliver their baby, when they start having contractions. It's the logical thing to do. BUT - midwives and doctors have to work with the tools and the resources they're given to get as many women and babies safely through birth as they can, and at present there are not the resources to accommodate women who are not in active labour on our labour wards. There also isn't enough spare capacity in operating theatres to deal with all the extra caesareans that would arise from a policy of routinely admitting women in early labour. That's not to say that if a woman is in early labour and is in great distress staff shouldn't move heaven and earth to try to comfort and help her - they just can't change basic protocols to make admittance in early labour routine and standard.

Re: A&E - actually if seeing everyone immediately instead of allowing them to wait resulted in poorer outcomes for patients - higher rates of infection and re admittance to hospital, and cost the NHS more, I'm not sure people would be lobbying for huge improvements in waiting times....

I had no pain relief for either birth and it was very painful both times, first was worse as I was not allowed to move either. However, it was bearable, of course it is, women have been doing it forever, our bodies are designed to do it!

And I have never, never heard anyone involved in delivering maternity care calling women selfish for wanting pain relief or support in early labour - you must have been lucky. There have been many, many threads here where hundreds of women describe exactly that - being told they are silly, wasting time and to go home, have a bath and take a paracetamol.

As for "but it's no big deal really, as we are designed to do this" - having a baby used to kill about 1 woman in 100, it is seriously risky business.

posted too soon - and yes, I understand that women are sent home because there aren't enough resources to admit and support. But that's exactly what the previous poster is saying, it is considered acceptable that there are not enough resources.

And I'm guessing I would have been one of those who died in childbirth. DD was breech and well and truly stuck. The pain was unbearable, because our bodies aren't designed to do it that way. And don't go on about natural breech births. I did my research and I know that if there is any intervention in a breech birth it increases the risks (for both of you) massively. The amount of pain I was in was a warning. That my body couldn't do this by itself, which is why I agreed to a c section.

it was bearable, of course it is, women have been doing it forever, our bodies are designed to do it!

But plenty of women say that it wasn't bearable, that's the point!

It's technically bearable to have a tooth out without anaesthesia. It's technically bearable to have a shoulder popped back in without anaesthesia. People have been doing that forever. But it's seen as an improvement in life that people can now do this with pain relief. Somehow it is not seen as an improvement that women can give birth with pain relief. Why is that?

What about 'we have a responsibility not to do things to women which will significantly increase their risk of serious birth injuries, without improving their chance of going home with a well baby'? And 'we have a responsibility not to clog up operating theatres with low risk women experiencing labour dystocia from being admitted before they're in active labour, as this puts women with complex pregnancies in danger'.

It's an eternal debate - but why not just educate women and let them make a decision? Why make the decision about pain relief for them? There are increased risks, yes. But it's not in the realm of "50% of women who have an epidural will see their baby taken straight to SCBU", is it?

To me, it's attitudes like "I managed it, so any woman should" and "choosing pain relief puts your wishes above your baby" - which, LeMis, your opinions consistently hint at - which leave women depressed after birth and feeling like a 'failure' because they had an epidural. How's that helping anyone?

Why do some people accept that the medicalisation of birth is a good thing re survival rates for mothers and babies - but then want to knock medicalisation of the labour process too?

It all comes back to the same argument again and again on these sorts of threads. Women should be supported to chose the birth they want. And surprise surprise, not all woman want a pain relief free natural vaginal delivery. Most would prefer it, but that does not mean that everyone wants it.

But Hazle - telling a woman to take paracetam

But Hazle - telling a woman to take paracetamol, a warm bath, to rest and to eat is the ONLY thing a midwife can do if she's not able to admit the mum to hospital - and usually she can't. That's not implying that the mum is selfish or weak - it's sensible advice given that she can't usually offer anything else!

Thurlow - there are benefits for many women and their babies in having an unmediated labour, none in going without pain relief for dental surgery.

Can we just acknowledge this please and stop recycling this pointless and irrelevant cliche?

Pain relief in childbirth can sometimes cause complications, slow labour down, impact on baby's breathing an adaptation to life outside the womb, and result in more severe birth injuries for the mum.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't use it but it does mean we need to acknowledge that it's not the same as having a tooth out.

Argh - unmedicated.

Thurlow - I'm not hinting at anything.

I had an epidural myself in one labour, also pethidine.

"It's an eternal debate - but why not just educate women and let them make a decision?"

I'm not aware that there is a single voice on this thread raised in support of women being refused pain relief when they have requested it and where it is possible to give it to them.

Given that, I'm not sure who you think you are making a case against.

Laughing here...had four children a long time before epidurals.I am a petite dancer and all four were 'stargazers'.I think you say back to back now.

All I could remember was my Grandmother saying that just when you think you are going to die and do not care,the baby will be born.

Hate how young women have so much knowledge and fearfulness now.There used to be an unspoken rule not to tell the gory details to new expecting Mums.

Anyone using the cost argument to justify poor care, needs to get their head out their arse. There is an awful lot of it going on, on this thread.

Its not acceptable. Compassion and respect cost nothing, and poor care tends to cost more in the long run.

There has been a rise in the last ten years of women seeking help for psychological problems - and indeed physical problems - resulting from childbirth. Whether this is because care is getting worse or women are becoming more confident in coming forward to seek help is an arguable point, but regardless all these women should get the help they need and this costs money.

So by investing earlier, you save money further down the line. Yet maternity care in the UK is still stuck in a mentality of simplistic price tags rather than looking at long term profit and loss.

Its not about medicalisation v natural birth. Its about processing women in a factory style ward as opposed to individual care, which listens to and recognises anxieties, fears and needs.

Not read all the posts but my 30h labour was excrutiating, I told my dh never again, I would beg for an epidural next time or perhaps even an ELCS. It's true you forget how painful it was, but my dh keeps reminding me how stressful it was for him and how horrendous I found it and thus is quite adamant that things have to be different next time. And I honestly thought my pain threshold was high.

"Anyone using the cost argument to justify poor care, needs to get their head out their arse. There is an awful lot of it going on, on this thread."

Well it depends on what you call 'poor care'.

Do you call not admitting women in early labour 'poor care' - even if by doing this hospitals will have to increasingly close their doors to women in established labour? I live in the real world. Where do you live?

"Its not acceptable. Compassion and respect cost nothing, and poor care tends to cost more in the long run."

FFS - who is championing unkindness and not listening to women?

But listening and being kind is the ONLY thing that midwives can do if there simply aren't enough anaesthetists on duty to provide everyone with a guaranteed epidural within 10 minutes of asking for one, and if there isn't enough bed space to admit women in early labour.

"So by investing earlier, you save money further down the line. Yet maternity care in the UK is still stuck in a mentality of simplistic price tags rather than looking at long term profit and loss."

My dear, you will find this across the board in the NHS. I've joined a campaign for increasing midwife numbers, increasing case-loading care, and for years I've sat on the MSLC at our local hospital making a case for compassionate evidence based care. What are YOU doing to improve the situation?

Not trying having a go at people raising the subject and creating a debate about it.

For starters...

why are you laughing, gotthemoon?

Personally I'd rather know that labour can be VERY long, or that back to back can be very painful, or some of the horror stories - the person I know with the worst PND was someone who thought labour would be a breeze and didn't think about any of the things that can lengthen it or go wrong, and then ended up with an emcs.

I can't imagine it's particularly beneficial for women to go into labour thinking "sure, it'll hurt a bit but that's all".

LeMis, please don't judge other posters because they aren't able to get actively involved in voluntary or policy making organisations

A lot of it is really down to your mental attitude and the whole fear, tension, pain cycle.. - what a load of shite!

Dd1 labour four hours, managed on g&a
Dd2 labour twelve hours which ended up EMC because of failure to progress and dd was in distress.The pain was from the depth of hell! I would have happily thrown myself from the windown if I could have moved. It was fucking awful. Horrible horrible wracking pain through my whole body. Actually thought I was going to die.

Was fecking traumatised afterwards and won't have another because of it.

Chuffty badge for lem!!

'Women have been doing it for centuries ...its what our bodies were designed to do'

Women have been dying in childbirth for centuries, and still are in parts of the world where maternal care is poor or absent.

Talk to them about 'pain thresholds'

Pain relief in childbirth can sometimes cause complications, slow labour down,

And I'll bet my life savings that lack of adequate pain relief and care is just as capable of causing complications and slowing labour down in women who are too exhausted and frightened from the pain to push the baby out.

I held off myself from pushing my third out- quite simply because I was in so much pain I'd hunched up as a defence mechanism and I couldn't relax enough to get into position and push. I can't see how that's supposed to be better for anybody from a clinical point of view.