Royals being put to sleep to give birth? *MNHQ edited the title for some sort of clarity*

[Butterandsugar]

Posting in here for traffic, and also in case my lack of experience is at play here.

I have just been advised that when the royal family are due to deliver their babies they are put to sleep and someone else does the "work" for them because it is deemed too traumatic an experience.

Note, apparently this isn't a long winded and not really accurate attempt at saying they have caesarians.

I have scoffed at this, but an being told that this truly is the case. AIBU to not see how this is physically possible? And why on earth something like giving birth is deemed below the royals if so?

There's often a lot of rewriting (unwritten) history on threads about giving birth. Twilight sleep seems to us barbaric but at the time, many women wanted it as the most effective pain relief available to them for the agony of labour. It's misleading to suggest that it was fully imposed by imperious doctors on unwilling women. (I do not apply this of course to the stories of how horrifically mistreated often single mothers were whose babies were forcibly removed or strongly coerced into adoption. Those histories are heartbreaking and awful). But in the general population there was no great yen for experiencing the full unmitigated pain of labour.

Also the idea of royal midwife-led home births is a complete misinterpretation. The present queen gave birth in her home alright, but with a fully staffed and equipped operating theatre installed in the palace. And under the best medical expertise that money could buy. I believe the queen mother had c-sections. There is no glorious homey folksy midwife tradition to look at through rose tinted glasses.

Having said all that, I think every woman is entitled to the highest standards of safe medical care in birth and to have her privacy and dignity respected. If a woman, royal or otherwise, wants to make a fully informed choice to choose a c-section, or an epidural or whatever else, I say good for her. It's nobody else's business.

I gave birth in Singapore a few years ago. It was a planned C section for various reasons and I was asked if I wanted a spinal block or general anesthetic. I went for the spinal but a general is pretty normal in some countries.

My mother had something similar when I was born, it went pear shaped and she didn't know she'd had me until I was a few days old.

Knocking women out for labour was common practice in the US as late as the 70s. The babies were whisked off to the nursery and returned for feeding every four hours so breastfeeding seldom got off to a successful start. Women stayed in the hospital for ten days or up to a fortnight, and slept all night every night during that time as the babies were fed by nurses in the nursery. Returning home, they went straight back to homemakering duties, with the babies fed every four hours.

Thanks to feminist campaigns for birthing practices that honoured the mothers and the relationship between mother and baby, and especially the dusting off of wisdom about breastfeeding, the OB establishment began to change.
......

I gave birth in the US and had episiotomies. They are not the horror they are cracked up to be at all, ime.

Good thing I read the thread because I was going to remark that the corgis, while perfectly well bred, are not quite members of the Royal Family.

I remember George having forceps marks on him. The midwives at work all commented on it.

www.mothering.com/forum/213-birth-beyond/471563-birth-60-s-unconscious.html

A very sad forum. Women talking about their mothers' experiences.

Your manager is a twat. many people who are “put to sleep” to have their babies are left severely traumatised, often with ptsd and unable to bond with their babies. Years of triggers, flashbacks and missed time with their newborn are probably a bit more traumatic tbh.

Branleuse, where did you get that name

I had a General for dc1 birth as I had grade 4 placenta praevia. I eventually came round with dh holding dc1 saying wake up wake up. I remember being very happy that dc was fine & that I was alive!

My nana insisted she was put asleep for each of her births. This would have been 1945 onwards.
I couldn't figure out how that would be possible until now

My granny gave birth to my mother by twilight labour in 1939. The damage done by pulling out a child without an 'active pushing' mother meant that my mum is an only child - granny didn't want to go through it again. Being an only child has been one of the great sadnesses of my mothers life. Especially since her parents died.
All down to 'twilight labour '

Upthread it was mentioned that George VI put an end to the Home Sec being present at royal births. But that wouldn't have happened anyway, would it? At the time of Queenies and P Margaret's births they were just the children of the king's brother and not really expected to be in the succession (only if he remained childless), so would it even have been mooted?

My manager is hardly a twat for saying this is a thing, when it was indeed a thing - and very widespread it seems.

The enema thing is a bit too.

Your manager isn’t a twat as it was complacent.

Common place

keira it wasn’t limited to those in the direct line of succession. The Home Secretary was present at the Queen’s birth (1926), Princess Margaret’s birth (1930) and Princess Alexandra’s birth (1936) but a line was drawn under the practice when Prince Charles was expected (1948).

kitten, a relative of mine was pulled out by her right arm for the same reason and never had use of it.

No idea what went on in the past but there is no way modern day royals give birth like this. Dangerous practice.
Also for those querying did Kate have an instrumental delivery with her first of course she didn’t!!!
She will have had the best monitoring, care and conditions to get the baby in the best position. Top Experts in the field to predict his size. She would have been prepped with relaxation techniques by experts and probably was relaxed in labour knowing she had the top experts in the country on hand.
Any sign of problems regardless of this and she would have been whipped off for a c section. Knowing the damage that forceps can do to a mother I doubt they would inflict it on the Dutchess. They wouldn’t have wanted the trauma to the heirs head either.

Meanwhile in your average NHS ward.... mothers left in labour without one midwife monitoring them let alone several and a team of obstetricians.
Denied pain relief.
Butchered cut and torn to keep c section rates down at any costs..... left to face a lifetime of health problems and trauma because of a badly managed labour.
No doubt Kate will have another text book birth for her third baby delivered by her team of midwives and obstetricians......

Wait for it. next week it will be 'evidence' that the royals are reptilians. Too traumatic. Well I would find giving birth to a lizard baby traumatic

Have a look at @natalielennard on Instagram. She is a fine art photographer who has devoted thousands of hours to researching royal births. She has 'recreated' Prince Edward's birth - an unmedicated home birth.

Well this is fucking hilarious - what kind of buffoon actually believes this shit??!

My MIL (90) said to me when I had DD1 that women these days whine on about labour pain far too much. She had DH and DSIL in a maternity home while unconcious.

Yes this scene is in the crown, Queen is put to sleep for one of the births (anne?), but for the final birth (Andrew) she’s awake

My friend was one of the midwives that helped deliver princess Charlotte - there wasn’t anything unusual about the birth. Although bless her, she won’t reveal anything about it other than to say it was quite normal but just with more staff on hand