in not fully understanding 'natural' birth

[edd021208]

A lot of mums I know talk about how they had 'all natural' births but then talk about how fantastic they found using gas and air .....I've no big issue one way or another (had epidurals) but wonder if using gas and air constitutes an 'all natural' birth?

Am I missing something, but surely everyone has the right to be proud of themselves after they give birth whether it be drug-free or they had g&a, pethidine, water, tens, epidural or whether they had an instrumental delivery or cs. We all had to go through 9 months (approximately) of pregnancy to create the little miracle thats placed in your arms at the end of it and we all had to go through some uncomfort (to put it mildly) in order to give birth.

I laboured for 14 hours on g&a and then ended up with an emergency ventouse delivery as dd had a double nuchal cord. Do I feel any less proud with myself that the consultant stuck a local in my lady bits prior to putting the suction cup up there, no I'm bloody grateful.

So basically we should all be proud of ourselves no matter how the birth played out and we shouldn't feel ashamed about it.

P.S. When having any form of dental treatment all forms of analgesia should be taken!!!

I thought the term Natural Childbirth was coined by gurus such as Sheila Kitzinger and referred to women's right to reclaim childbirth for ourselves, ie:

• feeling in control of the experience
• being able to labour and give birth in a position optimum for them, not flat on their back with the lights on
• not being shaved/given enemas
• being able to make decisions about the birth process themselves rather than having them made for them by a doctor
• being able to decide what is best for them in terms of pain relief

etc

(Sez she the 3 x casearean woman)

That's a really valid point, BalloonSlayer.

I've had 2 DCs. My first was pretty much textbook delivery (with a shot of pethadine) no g&a as I didn't like the way it made me feel. On all fours, rather than on my back. I recovered quite well too.

The second was 10 years later. I'd had a cone biopsy in the meantime, but was told that I could still have a "normal" birth.

[Hmm] I ended up with my waters going 4 weeks early, managing to stay out of hospital for a week as long as I took antibiotics every 6 hours and took my temperature every 6 hours. I went into labour 2 or 3 times to have it stop. I had to go to the day clinic to be monitored and have bloods done, which was OK.

Come the day, and after a couple of hours on the drip and then my body kicking in for another few hours, I'm getting nowhere. The pain was quite intense by this stage, but I'm happy to say that the midwives & nursing staff - and the consultant, thankfully, all spoke to me and made sure that I knew what was going on and I was given the choice of a CS. In the end, I had to have an emergency CS as it turned out that the surgery I'd had previously was more radical than I was led to believe. I shouldn't have been able to get pregnant again due to the extent of the surgery.

I don't feel that I did any "better" with my first birth than my second.

The reason for the back story to both my births here is that I think that the competitive stories is more of a thing for first time mums. Also, that the policy of the hospital I had both my DCs in, was that you had a say in what went on (which I do know I was lucky as its not the same in many hospitals).

ah
still don't understand the duck thing, but pleased it's probably not a childbirth term

I believe it originates with cricket, where if you don't score any runs, that's called a duck - you are out for a duck. Breaking your duck is scoring your first run - so having your first child could be described as breaking your duck, in childbirth terms.

My understanding of natural childbirth is the same as yours BalloonSlayer.

If you want to be shaved and emema'd, you have to go somewhere special and pay!! [hgrin]

i wondered if it was a euphemism for breaking waters

So unfair to accuse women lucky enough to have had non-medicalised births of being smug. My first delivery was fairly ideal on paper but I still managed to generate an unhealthy amount of 'trauma' and also experienced the 'your birth experience doesn't count' sentiments.

As for competitiveness in either direction, horror surgery or lentil homebirth, sounds like just a boring conversation. If you are sharing your experiences equally with someone else who cares about and considers what you say - fine, but if you are just an audience - dull. They might as well be banging on about their great new car/holiday/house etc.

i think 'natural' i s one of those words used for want of a better one.

if a woman gave birth without any advice or assistance, i doubt she would necessarily coach herself through it, know to stay mobile and calm or do any of the other things that aid a birth.

behaviour in childbirth is yet another thing that is influenced by socialisation.

In fairness, some people just are smug - so if they have a birth with little or no intervention, they'll be smug about that. If they end up with lots of intervention, then they'll either be smug about how much they put up with, or they'll find something else to be smug about - the car seat they chose, or the buggy, or when the baby sleeps through the night.

Most women, though, aren't being smug when they talk about their births.

Isn't it sad that women (in our liberal Western modern societies) still get judged on the basis of reproductive success? So, "natural childbirth" = Properly initiated into motherhood, and you're damned if you don't fit the bill.

So many times I've heard a mother say that she feels like she didn't have a real birth experience because she ended up with a C-section -- how can people buy into this myth so blithely that it makes them inferior if they didn't get their ideal birth experience? And where does that leave mothers who adopt or used surrogates: are they not proper mothers, either?

We haven't progressed that far from the days when a woman's social status was determined only by the number of living sons she had .

Well I had a CSection and that was the only type of birth experience I was interested in having! Guess that makes me unnatural!

I've been thinking about this and talked to a friend recently who had a very 'unnatural' birth, major unplanned surgery which went wrong, damage to the baby, damage to her, she didn't see her DD at all for the first 4ish days as they were in separate counties, but was in a PN ward with other people's newborns, expressed milk (while recovering) and is still breastfeeding months later...I think she should be very very proud of herself and her DD! Amazing she didn't suffer from PND as well.

Thank you AnyFule - maybe it did sound like a bit of a judgement the way I put that. It was not meant to sound that way at all.

TBH though I don't know how some people manage to get through labour with nothing. I remember the agony I was in after 7 hours and if they hadn't said that I needed a c-section I would have possibly begged for one. Howver I was induced and then needed an amnio.

Ali I have got through two labours with only G&A and paracetamol and TENS with the first one.
Last time (the one that would be easier ) I went into hospital at about 8.30 convinced I was fully dilated and ready to go. I was 2cm!! I then had a sweep and went home, and the contractions got much much more painful. I sent DH to bed at 10 and woke him up only 40 mins later saying I wanted to go back in. he said there was no point as I wouldn't be much further on, to which I replied that I didn't care, I was going in and if I was no further on I would demand an epidural as I simply couldn't stand the pain! As it happens I was further on and so didn't need any more, but I wasn't coping like a trouper with the pain, I was just lucky enough to be ready to push when the pain really was unbearable iyswim.

Oh, and I almost offered to drive to hospital as DH was so half asleep I was worried we'd crash - looking back, maybe not the most sensible of ideas

My (ex) friend had all 6 of her children without ANY pain relief at all, and didn't she like the whole world to know

She was the type that if you had a headache, she had 2!! Some people just like to show off!!

I had nothing, no pain killers, no gas and air nothing.....

although I do give birth like shelling peas
DS1 15 minuets
DS2 19 minuets

I'm with Chynah - I had two sections. Only thing I wanted. Not that I foist my choices on anyone - I don't care if you give birth swinging from a chandelier. And if you want feel smug about it that's fine too - have ten gold stars from me. (Though lollopops ex-friend would probably annoy me too. There again, just think of any man and a cold oops sorry raging flu dear...)

Epidural man arrived 10 minuets after DS1 with my lovely drugs far too late.

With DS2 I walked in to the hospital at 8.30 am and he arrived at 8.49am

How does the hierachy work anyway?

So the person who had a straightforward labour lasting only 8 hours did better than the person who had an epidural after 24 hours of contractions?

But the 24 hour labour person had a much longer labour, and endured more labour without drugs than the non epidural person.

There really should be a rule book so we can sure who gets the biggest gold star.

I got no gold star, just 80 stitches and a blow up pillow to sit on

Just checked in - all very interesting. Slushy06 - you sound like you were working with a very clear definition of what a natural birth is down to the episiotomy etc - thanks for sharing that.

violethill
'But I don't think you really wanted to know that did you OP - I think you were looking to be contentious'

No, as I've already explained a couple more times I genuinely wanted to know if there was a working definition as it is a term I've heard a lot of people use - sometimes in a vaguely medical sense (e.g. the last midwife I saw used it in relation to vaginal delivery, other mums have used it in relation to pain relief (typically if they had used gas and air but not pethidine/epidural etc.)

It would be nice if you could not attribute some ulterior motive to the asking of the question - as some of the replies have suggested, it all sounds fairly subjective.

FWIW at my first 30+ hours labour I had an epi about 6 hours before the baby was born, for the second 5 hour labour about 2 hours before.

Clearly birth experiences are down to a number of factors and the sense of naturalness or not just one aspect, and something that might be more meaningful to some people than others.

EDD
I didn't actually know all that until labor I was just told I can sign on to the natural birthing team as I had no complications on my first birth. Then when I asked her to break my waters because it was taking so long she horridly explained all those things to me.

Apparently I had signed that they were not to be done unless medically necessary I remember thinking oh s**t. She would not even check me when I started pushing but talked me through how to recognize when it was ok to push. She was a great mw though.

She wasn't allowed to use the belt either (only Doppler )or ask me to move for her to examine me she had to move herself.

So many times I've heard a mother say that she feels like she didn't have a real birth experience because she ended up with a C-section --"

" how can people buy into this myth so blithely that it makes them inferior if they didn't get their ideal birth experience?"

Please can we stop talking about this as though it's a moral issue. It's not! It's a profoundly different experience having a normal birth, compared to having a surgical or instrumental birth. I know this for myself - having had one forceps birth with an epidural, and one homebirth without interventions. I don't feel morally inferior about the first birth, but it was a less satisfying and empowering experience than the homebirth. I was physically and emotionally in a very different place after the forceps birth - not a very nice place, and that was down to the experience of the birth itself. There are no moral hierarchies when it comes to childbirth - but women who have normal births, particularly those who give birth at home and in midwife led units are generally much happier and more satisfied with their births than women who have surgical and instrumental births. Doesn't mean that a birth involving interventions is 'bad' - how can it be if it's necessary for mother and baby?