To feel angry at my sisters NCT antenatal course teacher.

[LBsmum]

My sister is due in December and over the weekend has developed complications resulting in her being admitted into hospital ? on phoning her course teacher to explain she would be missing the remaining evening classes the woman responded by saying ?Oh I hope that doesn?t mean they will induce you ? urhhh ? which I find an outstandingly unsupportive and inappropriate reaction. Further during part of the course my sister managed to attend this teacher produced epidural needles to show the class whilst emphasising what a particularly gruesome procedure it was ? again I consider this inappropriate and can only assume she is trying to scare people into not having an epidural.
This is not an anti-NCT rant, I am a member and my own antenatal class was run by a practising midwife who sensibly discussed epidurals as part of a range of options available. I am just feeling frustrated by the natural birth high horse my sisters teacher seems to be on and feel bad for encouraging my sister to take the course.

What I feel both about the traditional medicated-birth-forced-on-women(which I have no experience of- didn't feel like that at all at my hospital) and the sort of situation gabygirl envisages (where an NCT teacher/midwife tells you that if you are induced and give birth in hospital you will need an epidural) or my friend telling me I must^ feel sad about my Caesarian is-

they are actually the same thing.

it's about taking the right to decide away from the woman. It's about not allowing a woman the right to her own feelings. It's about telling people what they ought to want.

I disapprove of them all equally. The NCT teacher who says "you will feel this way during the hospital birth" is doing exactly the same thing as the old-fashioned doctor who tells you waterbirths are a load of tosh. Trying to take over somebody else's birth.

In a sense, I did have the right to decide about the birth taken away from me. Not by any doctor or nurses, but by medical circumstances.

But I kept the right to decide about pain relief and about my emotions.

I think people forget there is a difference between intervention/ CS rates being too high and them not being needed at all. I had a Crash Section with a GA because I was 31 weeks, my daughter was coming too fast (2cm to fully dilated and already coming in an hour) and presenting a foot. I'd already had one premature footling delivery where the waters didn't break and the concern was it would be the same again and at this gestation they needed to protect the baby (my previous one had been at 20 weeks so they couldn't do anything for her). Within 20 minutes I was prepared for the GA, under and baby out.

If I hadn't she could have died. It wasn't a nice experience, it was like having something cut from me - sounds stupid because it was literally, but I mean in an emotional way. I lost my baby emotionally, as far as I was concerned another baby had died and I had no emotional links to that scrap in an incubator. As much as I mourn and have suffered BT because of it, I know it did something from saving her life to protecting her from a brain injury.

OTOH you have the situation where the first unnecessary intervention leads to another and another (I love the cartoon that The Business of Being Born did showing this) and then the baby gets in distress and "It's a good job you had that section, your baby could have died". Not that I'm saying all interventions go that way.

Some people need to remember there is a difference between the two situations. Those of us who would genuinely have lost our babies without intervention didn't ask to be in that situation - I had it all natural, I had no pain relief during my labour, I did what felt right until I was strapped to a CTG, US and drip.

It's like this with the feeding debate, some people get so worked up because the FF rates are so high they forget that most times it ends up not being a choice, the support isn't there and with FF babies would die and sometimes there is a medical reason why it can't happen. I'm not trying to spark that debate off in the middle of this, just trying to show how people get over the whole "natural" issue.

How odd - where did she get the needles from?

My NCT teachers weren't like that at all.

Re: needing to educate women about epidurals, my NCT teachers were quite able to talk about C-sections (atleast one of them had had one) without producing a knife.

Cory - good god woman - I was joking! Why are you taking everything I say so literally! Of course you wouldn't tell someone that if they X then Y will inevitably happen. The human body doesn't work that way. But women do need to know that doing X, Y and Z increases/decreases/doesn't affect the likelyhood of something happening so they can make informed choices about what how they want to be cared for in labour.

"I think people forget there is a difference between intervention/ CS rates being too high and them not being needed at all".

I don't think that's true Tink. I think any educated person is aware that there are babies who NEED to be born operatively. "Those of us who would genuinely have lost our babies without intervention didn't ask to be in that situation". Nobody asks to be in that situation - and intervention caused by poor or inappropriate care is also 'necessary' in the sense that once the baby is in distress he or she needs to be born quickly. The fact that the baby might have been compromised in the first place by previous interventions and poor management of labour doesn't change this.

I didn't mean that anyone asks for it, just that sometimes it's not the result of a cascade of interventions which is what some people who are all about natural births think. I didn't mean that everyone thinks that either, again I was talking about these people who push the natural too much.

I wrote more than I thought and in this little box you can't see what you've written as a whole, I normally write my long posts in word so I don't do things like that.

The thing that really winds me up about my own though is that they didn't leave enough room to get my daughter out (4lb 2oz at 31 weeks I'm guessing they thought she would be smaller) and had to change direction and cut upwards. I'm now not suitable for VBAC.

So next time: I go into premature labour, have rapid progression (because both are things I'm prone too) I take Heparin and have bad back so it's going to be another crash situation requiring another GA.

I'm doing as much as I can this time (being careful of my posture) to keep her head down (my others never were and she is so I'm hopeful) so that if I go into premature labour I have her position on my side and premature delivery won't put so much pressure on my scar so I'm hoping to have a better chance. My antenatal teacher said that too much pain relief can mask problems for a VBAC - I'd happily do the whole lot with nothing if it improves my chances!

Sorry Tink - wasn't having a go!

Hope next time around you have a less frightening, easier birth, however it happens.

I know, I could see how those lines came across.

I'm 29 +5 weeks and wishing the baby would hurry up and come. I've been having contractions for 5 weeks today - I've already had to have it stopped and all the steroids but it's only slowed it - which is really draining and I'm on edge as to which one will be the first to start it off properly. Now they're worrying about a notch in my Doppler and she's not as big as she should be. This is all more stressful than the NNU was! On a selfish note I know if she is early and in position I'm more likely to get my VBAC, but I pass off the selfish side of it as we know she is coming early anyway.

Your little girl is a gorgeous fairy baby. She's got great eyebrows! (sorry - I notice these things. My dd also has lovely eyebrows - it gives their face so much character!)

It's funny you say that, I've always been amazed by them. She's not going to need to pluck when she's older they're a lovely shape. It adds to her expressiveness, she is so funny she can say so much just in the way she looks at you.

I am truly spoilt by having her and I've always worried about having another because I don't think I could cope with a child who's not so wonderful! That's not just a parent speaking either, everyone loves her

My two pennorth from the child's perspective! I was born by emergency caesarean in 1967. I was transverse lie, after weeks of being breech and being turned ad=nd turning back, so my Mum's scar is down not across and I have a corresponding scar across my hip. Yes, they were in that much of a rush they cut me too!

I am SO, SO LUCKY to be alive, as is my Mum, not to mention being completely healthy. How we both didn't end up dead or me with cerebral palsy is a mystery. She was weeks overdue and in labour for 2 days before they decided to operate after trying all sorts to get me out.

I don't give a flying fuck that I wasn't born naturally, neither does my Mum and it hasn't affected us one bit. In fact I am amazed at all that she went through to have me, particularly after becoming a mum myself. My scar is something that reminds me daily how bloody lucky I am to be here. Please ladies DO NOT EVER feel like you've failed because you needed intervention. What can possibly be more important in the world than ensuring your baby is born alive and healthy and you survive as well??

And yes, I know my birth is long time ago (next birthday I'm going backwards) but some things in maternity care sadly don't seem to have changed all that much.

But nobody's saying in a real emergency, C-section isn't absolutely vital and life saving.

What the NCT and other groups are concerned about is the high levels of unnecessary intervention that are going on in labour and birth.

Nobody has said intervention as a life saving methodology is a bad thing.

Weird how people seem to think that.

"But nobody's saying in a real emergency, C-section isn't absolutely vital and life saving"

Winky - it's a bit stick which is always flourished to beat the NCT and anyone who promotes increasing rates of normal birth with. It's so frustrating. There's a huge resistence to the idea that many women in this country are having unnecessary interventions that damage them and their babies. I know I came out of my first (assisted) birth feeling grateful for having been 'saved' by the staff who cared for me. It was only years later, after experiencing really good midwifery care from an independent midwife that I truly understood how inadequate the care was that I'd had in my first labour, and how these inadequacies had contributed to the complications I went on to have, that I then needed to be rescued from.

Would want to point out also to Technofairy that in the 1960's when she was born there was a 5% c-section rate. Now it's 25%.

The complaint was actually about a remark made by one particular NCT teacher, not by the official policy as a whole.

I did have one of those necessary life-saving emergency Caesarian and I still had one individual NCT teacher whittering on to me about what a shame it was that I had a Caesarian and how bad I must feel and how the NCT wants women empowered not to have Caesarians. Of course this was fine in principle! But hardly a tactful thing to say to me.

I am not suggesting that she had been deliberately set up by her organisation to find a woman in my position and tell her this; it was simply that (like some newly converted religious people) the very fine principles she had been taught filled her mind to such an extent that she could not stop talking about them even when it was inappropriate.

She also went on and on about what a shame it was that I had attended the NHS ante-natal course as that could not possibly have given me enough confidence and choice.

I did try to point out that my course was run by a Baby Friendly hospital which was absolutely committed to giving women choice, to breastfeeding, to water births and were even pretty good at supporting home births.

But to her, having been trained by the NCT was such a wonderful experience that she could not admit that anyone who had done things differently could possibly be well informed or have had a positive experience.

She was always badgering me to give money to the organisation, too, saying how much the NCT had done for me. No errr...actually they didn't...the NHS did. But she was always trying to run down any help I got from the NHS.

I am not blaming the organisation as a whole for this. Of course not. I am just pointing out that it does happen and when it is done in the name of an organisation (as it was in my case) then it does give that organisation a bad name. Just like I would give my church a bad name if I started going round and telling people that they couldn't possibly be saved or happy if they went to any other church.

I think the conversation about interventions is inevitably difficult because the argument (with which I agree) that rates of intervention are too high must inevitably mean that some (many) individual women are having unnecessary interventions. Yet no individual thinks of the intervention(s) she experienced as unnecessary. And at the point at which the decision to have the intervention was made, they were in almost every case necessary interventions, so in each case, the woman concerned knows that the intervention she had was a necessary one.

Yet as gabygirl suggests, in many cases it is earlier decisions, which were often not within the control of the labouring woman, which have produced or contributed to the situation in which the intervention becomes necessary. Pointing this out is more a criticism of the health service's failure to provide the resources to support women eg to be upright and mobile than it is of individual women's decisions--yet it is not surprising that it feels like a criticism of the individual woman, and makes women defensive.

Obviously this is irrelevant to cases like placenta praevia, but most sections are not for such straightforwardly always-were-going-to-be-essential reasons. Personally, looking back on my own antenatal education (through NHS, NCT, and reading, including on mumsnet) I think the most important thing people should try to get across is how bloody long most first labours are. I know so many people (including myself) who were really despondent and surprised to be only 2 cm after c. 24 hours contractions--yet this is a really common experience. That's surely something we could all be better prepared for. I think one thing that most women and most childbirth educations pay too little attention to is the question of how one is going to deal with the bloody exhaustion of early labour, or even that time when you can't sleep but according to the the medical profession you are not in labour. I guess it's undramatic in relation to all the discussions of pain relief technology, but it's so important.

Anyway, this is not about the OP directly, but hopefully relevant to the larger discussion.

In my case it was a combination of my own health problems, which I had long before I was pregnant, and the genetic joint disorder which affected both my children.

I felt I had been extremely well prepared by my antenatal course as to possible length of labour, the importance of keeping active in labour, the benefits of things like water births etc. The hospital was very open to women's choice an very supportive, but unfortunately the one thing I would have chosen differently was out of their control.

If I had insisted on a natural birth I don't suppose either I or dcs would be here. And that had nothing to do with the managing of the early stages of labour: things were going wrong long before I got near the labour ward- in fact, I spent a substantial part of each pregnancy in hospital and was really quite ill. Shared a room with a woman who had already lost two babies to longterm health problems.

This is the situation where you can do without friends whaffling on about general statistics about childbirth. My complaint is not with what the NCT are trying to achieve in general- far from it, I honour that, as I honour the enlightened attitude of my local hospital.

It is with the insensitivity of individuals who are so hung up on their Cause that they cannot see beyond that to the individual circumstances of the person they're talking to.

I am also very strongly in favour of the current anti-obesity and fitness campaign. But I would still take issue with a friend who kept going on obsessively to me about how all children must be involved in sports and how a child who is not doing this is being failed by the system. Yes, very true and proper- but ...errr ... perhaps you don't need to choose the mother of a disabled child to talk to this about.

Cory - is this NCT teacher a friend of yours? I'm just wondering because you seem to have had loads of contact with her. TBH I'd love to hear her side of the story - because the way you describe it she must have been a complete dunderhead with an IQ of about 50 to have said the things to you that she did say.

What did you say to her when she told you that it was a shame you had a c-section, even though she (I assume) knew your c-section was life-saving? Did you challenge her? And when you say she always 'badgered' you to give money to the organisation, what do you mean? Did she suggest you become a member or donate money directly? I don't know many people who donate directly to the NCT - they donate through their membership fee or through giving things to the Nearly New sales. How many times did she suggest you give the NCT money? And did you put her straight that the organisation had done nothing directly for you as a mum? I'm wondering if she felt the NCT had helped you by lobbying so hard for changes in maternity care over the years that we've all benefited from (like having our partners with us during childbirth).

Ruth - I think what you say is really helpful. Agree with you about long first labours. Most emergency c-sections are for 'failure to progress'. I also think though that a lot of women go into childbirth with an understanding of the process that is.... how can I say this?.... they see it as a mechanical process. They don't understand the complexity or subtlety of the hormonal 'dance' of labour, and the possible impact of disturbing the labouring woman by moving her/talking to her/taking her into a strange environment, surrounding her with anxious, stressed and unfamiliar people. They understand a bit of how these things work with other mammals, but not with humans. Does that sound really mad? I hope you know what I mean!

I really valued being a member of the NCT but our antenatal course too was led by a loon of the "nobody need have an induction/epidural/Caesarean or bf for less than 2 years - you just need to make the effort" school. Very undermining.

Yes, I did keep putting her straight on all those points. She is a neighbour, so I have had a lot of contact. She is actually a lovely woman, once she got over that bad bout of missionary zeal. But it was very annoying at the time and did little for my self-confidence.

She both wanted me to become a member and put money in collecting tins.

She seemed to forget from time to time that I told her I had had all my help from the NHS. And when I did remind her, she switched too 'oh, but I do wish you could have had the experience of doing the XYZ with the NCT instead, it would have been totally different'.

As I said, she is actually a lovely person, but it was just like an atheist suddenly getting religion, that complete I-have-seen-the-light-thing. Very similar to when another lovely friend of mine converted to Jehovah's and I was still going to the bog standard state church.

TV births don't help of course. 'She's in labour, get to the hospital immediately!!!' I'm sure they have a subtle influence on how we perceive our own labours, even if we know in our heads that they are completely unrealistic.

I am always an eternal cynic. I had to have an emergency section with DD1. I never ever regretted the fact that I didnt have a natural birth because I felt so incredibly lucky to have a baby in my arms that was alive and beautiful.Its only years later when you here comments from other mothers or through the NCT groups that get you thinking about it really. In the county that I live in the maternity units are scaling down their midwifery support in terms of appointments and scans etc which I think is highly dangerous and I see it as a money saving scheme and nothing else.So sometimes I wonder if the NCT approach for women to have naturals births is more about saving the NHS some money as intervention is very expensive. Sorry but as I said I am cynical and havent had a positive experience of NCT.

I really don't believe that the NCT are commissioned by the NHS to save them money Oonagh, if that is what you are suggesting.

WinkyWinkola generally that's true and it certainly is of any company, but you will always get people getting fanatical about the natural way - whether it's birth or feeding - and totally miss the point that it's sometimes necessary to not do things naturally to save mother and/or child.

Cory, I found out today that the NHS course at my hospital is run by NCT, I thought it all felt familiar! The NCT teacher was good about it but pointed out that there was less time at the NHS one. TBH I felt that the NCT one was more geared towards new parents whereas I went on a course for 2nd time + parents at the NHS so it didn't have to cover it all so deeply and we did have plenty of time to talk.

Ruth, of course it stays with us for many of us it's the only time we see a baby being born, how are we supposed to know without having our own that that's not quite accurate?

OonaghBhuna I totally disagree with you. The NCT (when not led by the loons mentioned here) is about empowering women to make decisions for themselves and not just going with what their told at the hospital. I've recently found out that doctors are now being paid for the work they do rather than just hourly, so there is no incentive to cut back on the numbers for intervention. Also NICE have decided that Third Stage management shouldn't be discussed with the mother because a managed Third Stage is safer than a natural. Again that costs.

"I'm 29 +5 weeks and wishing the baby would hurry up and come."

I shouldn't have said that, I went into labour 4 hours later! It's stopped - again! But in a way I would have been happy if it hadn't I can't stand all this messing now and if I have to have any more doctors sticking their fingers in me...!!! (And why the short ones? I'm 5'9", you'd think they could find a doctor with long fingers )

Cory, I'm constantly hearing women's birth stories. What I notice is how grateful and loyal they generally are to the NHS. Mums tell me about how wonderful and kind the midwives were, about the great doctors who came in and rescued them when they experienced problems in their labours etc. But they also unwittingly reveal things about their care in labour which, as a antenatal teacher, make me despair........ I know that so many of these women are cared for in ways which make a difficult birth so much more likely. But what can you say? 'It's a shame that the midwife left you pushing flat on your back for an hour and didn't help you get onto all fours or stand up and see if that helped, so that you ended up with a difficult ventouse birth and an infected episiotomy'? Of course you don't. You just nod and listen and hope they feel better now, and go off screaming inside from having had to hear birth stories from 6 women who were all healthy and low risk at the start of labour, of whom not one has emerged without loads of stitches/an infection/an abdominal wound or a baby who won't feed well because of a difficult birth, or if they're really unlucky all of these things. And I know they look back on their antenatal classes and think - 'oh that was all NCT idealism'...... So I can understand why people like your neighbor get evangelical about it. The only women I see who come out of birth in reasonable condition tend to be those with independent midwives, those who are lucky enough to get into the local birth centre, those who have homebirths or those who give birth on the back seat of the car on the way to hospital. It's almost always the case that if a woman has a labour of normal length and goes to our local CLU then she'll have problems. It does make you depressed - it really does. Because there is a human cost to all this.

Oonagh - I can't believe anyone would think that of the NCT. The NCT promotes normal birth because it results in healthier mums and babies - full stop. How many women do you know who would prefer and episiotomy to an undamaged perineum? Or a ventouse to a spontaneous delivery? The NCT lobbies for better care for women so that more of them can achieve an uncomplicated birth. It's not rocket science - really basic things make a difference: give women one to one care in labour; employ enough midwives so this is possible; give women the option of homebirth or birth centres; allow women freedom of movement in labour; encourage midwives and doctors to provide evidence based care. All these things cut the c-section rates and rates of assisted birth and results in healthier mums and babies. It's as simple as that.