I had a emcs but I absolutely love this!

[RubyBuckleberry]

"When women understand what?s available to us at birth, then we won?t ever give that over to an expert? the birth power, the orgasmic power that?s in our bodies. When you meet a woman who has had an ecstatic birth, you can?t talk her into taking drugs that aren?t good for her body. You can?t talk her into a hysterectomy that she doesn?t need. You can?t talk her into a crummy diet. She?s come home to her body. She knows what this body is capable of. She loves this body. This body loves her. And there?s nothing like the transformation available at birth to nail that in there in such a way that she becomes illuminated, because she?s a channel for life. And then she becomes a channel for life in all its forms."

and

"What we?re finding is that it does matter?it absolutely does matter?how somebody comes into the world. And it doesn?t mean all babies should be born this way or that way. It just means that we have to pay attention and recognize that those babies are having experiences. And the way that birth happens when it?s left to happen naturally, without drugs and without forceps, is really what the baby?s body is expecting. There?s a biological readying that?s happening. So it?s incredibly important that we start thinking about this time period in a new way, and we start caring for moms and babies and families around the birth experience in much more thoughtful and mindful ways than we are doing right now."

from this website

ELCS babies are 80% less likely to suffer oxygen deprivation though than those birthed naturally aren't they?

I'd rather lose my womb than brain damage my baby.

Sounds like a load of hippy dippy 'if you've had a caesarean you've failed' bollocks that makes those of us who didn't or couldn't give birth 'orgasmically' are going to have children who start life at a disadvantage.
Both, by the way, BOTH of my children who were born by c-section are bright, happy confident and what is more, have a mother who is contended about her births and doesn't piss herself when she goes on a trampoline.

Sorry Smayach, didn't mean to worry you!!!! I went into labour with exactly your attitude and when it went pear shaped I didn't have anything to fall back on - no plan b - and I ended up agreeing to loads of things I would otherwise have refused. I ended up traumatised - ptsd - the full works.
A work colleague of mine, on the other hand, made her mind up that she would go for a natural birth if possible but if it started to go wrong, she was going to decline all other interventions and go straight for a caesarean. Go wrong it did and she ended up with a c/s but she said the whole thing was fine. It was all quite calm and she was up and around with four or five days. Tell me to stuff my advice if you like but I reckon thinking about what you might do if you have a few complications is quite helpful:)

PS Violet, there's masses on it but this is a starting point - consensus.nih.gov/2006/cesareanstatement.pdf

My best friend had 3 c-sections and I don't think she failed, I'm bloody glad we live in this century because otherwise, my lovely friend would in all likelyhood be dead.

C section was not a failure on her part, nor does she consider it so.

I on the other hand managed 4 natural births, 1 terrible, but with a healthy out come, 2 that were ok, and the 4th was fantastic I managed it myself until I called for the midwife to catch the baby and I had the full post birth high.

I don't think anyone can possibly judge anyone by how they gave birth. I most certainly don't. The important thing is to make it through the experience in 1 piece with a healthy baby in your arms at the end of it.

And just for the record I don't piss myself on the trampoline either

The 1st paragraph in the op does make sense to me. Since I had my babies I am much more content and happy with me and more I don't know, content with myself.

But I suspect I would have felt that way if I'd had c sections too.

LOL KickArseQueen - yeah sorry about trampoline comment but that kind of holier than thou birthing shite makes me so angry. Just seems to forget to mention the side effects that can occur from a 'natural' birth which can be as distressing as the side effects from a birth that has necessitated medical intervention. At the end of the day a healthy baby and mother is the ultimate success story, however it happens.

'Weeeell, I do think that some births can have a negative effect on babies.

My first DD was very distressed after birth and as a newborn and I'm sure it's related to being stuck, having a ventouse stuck to her head til it bled, then being delivered by forceps.

My second DD is the most chilled out, happy little baby ever and has been since the moment she was born. She was born by ELCS so I don't for one minute believe that natural birth is the only 'good' birth experience a baby can have.'

• I don't think anyone has suggested that every baby who has a medicalised birth is going to be traumatised by it!! But it may well be the case that both babies described here could have been chilled and happy if they'd had natural births! Caesarian section, or having a ventouse stuck to your head, or being dragged out by forceps - none of these are natural. Of course many babies who undergo them may be chilled and not distressed - but it doesn't necessarily mean that these things are better! And they certainly aren't for the mother

No Worries ED :) I know exactly where you are coming from. I just hate people judging people when something wasn't their "choice" iyswim?

You shouldn't be judged for a c section and I shouldn't be judged for having a VB. They are just the way things turned out for us both.

You are happy, I am happy :) Lets have a party >

ROFL about the trampoline comment! It's quite possible to have a natural birth and a fabulous pelvic floor you know!

Thanks!
Actually my 2nd section was a choice after an emcs the first time. BUT I believe it was then right choice (as I was told I would most likely have the same problems again that resulted in first emcs) but even so, if I had just wanted a section because I didn't want to give birth vaginally I would not expect to be made to feel I was give my child a disadvantage from the start. FGS parenting is a guilt-ridden business, there is no need to make mothers feel they have failed from the second their child is born.

Violet - yes, and it's perfectly possible to have an elective caesarian and a happy baby. It's a load of betty swollocks if you ask me. As I said before, healthy baby and mother at the end of the birth is the ultimate success story. Success is not defined by whether you experienced an orgasmic birth or a jolly nice consultant called Derek delivered your baby by section.

'Success is not defined by whether you experienced an orgasmic birth or a jolly nice consultant called Derek delivered your baby by section.'

• absolutely agree, but then I didn't start using the terms 'success' and 'failure' (or orgasmic birth or jolly consultants called Derek!)

All this sort of nonsense detracts from the facts - and the evidence shows that natural birth is safest for mother and baby where a vaginal delivery is the best option. Of course, where there are complications, a CS is sometimes recommended as it's safer than vb - I had one myself for DC2.

Women have a right to transparent, clear information (unclouded by talk of orgasms!) so that they can make informed choices

Hey Ushy, thanks for the advice. Don't worry, I'm definitely well researched when it comes to the birth and have thought/researched/planned long and hard about different options and my wishes in various circumstances etc.

It's more that now it's hard to switch those thoughts off and just enjoy my pregnancy without totally freaking out! So reading positive, beautiful things about birth (as well as keeping up to date with relevant info about things going pear-shaped!) is helpful to me so I can stay relaxed and in a good frame of mind.

Right now I want to look forward to the birth with excitement and happiness, instead of a mounting sense of terror and dread. So I try to think positive thoughts about it every day, to counter balance all the scary stuff :)

YY, hands up to the use of success and failure

"What we?re finding is that it does matter?it absolutely does matter?how somebody comes into the world. And it doesn?t mean all babies should be born this way or that way. It just means that we have to pay attention and recognize that those babies are having experiences. And the way that birth happens when it?s left to happen naturally, without drugs and without forceps, is really what the baby?s body is expecting.'

It's this bit that makes me feel that there is an implication of success or failure. The way the birth happens when it's left to happen naturally ...is what the baby's body expecting' - is the baby also expecting to have a mother at the end of the birth because sometimes, if left to happen naturally, what will happen is the mother or baby will not survive.

And this 'She knows what this body is capable of. She loves this body. This body loves her' - so then if a woman's body doesn't work the way she is expecting (ie having a natural birth) should she feel her body doesn't love her or doesn't work properly - thoughts that might leave a mother who require intervention feeling a failure?

I'm not saying the premise of caring about births and mothers is wrong, of course it isn't, but there has to be care taken so that women who can't achive a 'natural' birth because they need medical intervention or can't cope with the level of pain are not made to feel that they have not given their baby the best possible start they could.

"So it?s incredibly important that we start thinking about this time period in a new way, and we start caring for moms and babies and families around the birth experience in much more thoughtful and mindful ways than we are doing right now"

I saw the comment as a plea for society and for health professionals to have more respect for the emotional health and welfare of mothers and babies in childbirth.

The first paragraph I interpret as a comment on the sense of autonomy, self-sufficiency and euphoria that some women experience from having a normal, unfucked-about-with birth.

Elspeth - how do you get from the comments above to "there is no need to make mothers feel they have failed from the second their child is born".

"healthy baby and mother at the end of the birth is the ultimate success story"

Well yes - and there are tens of thousands of women in this country who're emerging from birth with avoidable serious birth injuries, and babies who are born unable to breastfeed and already dosed up with anti-biotics before they've even left hospital, because of our over-reliance on modern medicine to put right the damage our system of maternity care causes.

"if left to happen naturally, what will happen is the mother or baby will not survive"

Yes, sometimes, but not anywhere near as many as most people think.

When I was born in the 1960's the c/s rate was less than 5%. It's now over 30% in many UK hospitals. Did one in four mothers die or experience severe problems in labour in the 1960s in the UKs?

"there has to be care taken so that women who can't achive a 'natural' birth because they need medical intervention or can't cope with the level of pain are not made to feel that they have not given their baby the best possible start they could".

My first baby was born after a horrendous labour involving an epidural, pethidine and forceps. She was bruised and sleepy at birth and had major problems breastfeeding. I've no doubt that my dd didn't have the best start in life, but it was the best start I could have given her based on what I knew at the time and the care that was available to me.

I'm not going to say these things don't matter just because I couldn't do anything about them at the time. Why would I?

I'm sure your DD is fine tittybangbang, try not to worry yourself so much about it.

Tittybangbang - did you have expectations of a natural birth? Your birth sounds very traumatic and you obviously realise you made the best choices you could at the time. Of course you shouldn't say your baby's condition after the birth doesn't matter BUT at the same time should you feel guilty, do you feel guilty?

"So it?s incredibly important that we start thinking about this time period in a new way, and we start caring for moms and babies and families around the birth experience in much more thoughtful and mindful ways than we are doing right now"

I agree, that statement is great and I entirely agree with it, I never said otherwise.

I just hate to see women - and there are many of themm who so desperately want the amazing, natural experience that their body 'is capable of ...their body loves them' and when it doesn't happen feel that it is their fault. You are lucky if you don't know any of those women.

"Tittybangbang - did you have expectations of a natural birth?"

Yes.

" do you feel guilty? "

No, I feel angry that something bad happened to me and my baby that with better care probably could have been avoided.

"and when it doesn't happen feel that it is their fault. You are lucky if you don't know any of those women."

I do know women like this. But I don't accept that emotive rhetoric about the very real benefits of normal birth is necessarily smug or cruel or guilt-inducing. We need to say that 1) it's possible for vastly more women to have normal births than are currently doing so, and 2) that it DOES make a difference to mothers and babies, even if that difference isn't always quantifiable.

YY I agree with this:

'We need to say that 1) it's possible for vastly more women to have normal births than are currently doing so, and 2) that it DOES make a difference to mothers and babies, even if that difference isn't always quantifiable'

But:

'But I don't accept that emotive rhetoric about the very real benefits of normal birth is necessarily smug or cruel or guilt-inducing'

I don't think this is what you find in the article. What you do get is this:

'When you meet a woman who has had an ecstatic birth, you can?t talk her into taking drugs that aren?t good for her body. You can?t talk her into a hysterectomy that she doesn?t need. You can?t talk her into a crummy diet. She?s come home to her body. She knows what this body is capable of. She loves this body. This body loves her'

This ,to me, is incredibly smug. Lucky, lucky women who can have this experience, LUCKY not clever, not because her body loves her because she is lucky that her birth went that way, just as others are unlucky if theirs doesn't. I'm not ignoring the time and effort that women put into achieving a natural birth (hypnobirthing classes etc) but at the end of the day if your baby stops breathing or comes out foot first then that won't help, medical intervention will.

I think a more positive emphasis on yes, a drug free, natural birth is optimum BUT wanting pain relief, needing assistance to deliver is not because your body is at fault or doesn't love you. These things happen, they always have.

Some of this is clearly a load of rubbish. Does anyone really believe that medical professionals are out there trying to talk women giving birth into hysterectomies they don't need? Really? Never ever seen that happen - and the obstetric team looking after me worked incredibly hard and well to avoid that outcome - 7 litre PPH and still got my womb!
Yes, it would be lovely if we all had natural, straightforward biths. No, it isn't going to happen for everyone. And it is very, very hard to pinpoint exactly the right times and the right ways to intervene so that we have intervention when we need it but not when we don't.
But honestly, "this body loves her"? Well my body must absolutely loathe me then!

Agree Elspeth - SIL had a drug free natural birth and she stuffs herself full of pies, cake and booze so I think it's safe to say that a lot of that statement is wrong!

Tittybangbang - you wrote 'When I was born in the 1960's the c/s rate was less than 5%. It's now over 30% in many UK hospitals. Did one in four mothers die or experience severe problems in labour in the 1960s in the UKs?'

You are right about the difference in caesarean rate but there has been a massive change in the population giving birth. The average age is much older, women are bigger, they are giving birth to bigger babies and there is more IVF but despite this perinatal mortality has fallen.

Some women might WANT interventions if it means the outcome for their baby is better - - the decision should be theirs. We shouldn't take that choice away from people in order to match the caesarean rate of 50 years ago.

Also things like scans for placenta praevia (which I accept is rare) presumably weren't around in the 60s?

I don't know much about ultrasounds but my Mum said she had one in 1976 to determine if she was carrying twins or not and they couldn't even tell that, so I'm guessing not.