Has post-natal care improved over the last 50 years?

[Wormshuffler]

I recently got chatting to a lady in her late sixties about how things were in "her day" now I only have her word for these facts, so sorry if they are wrong/exagerated, feel free to add to / correct them!

These were the highlights:-

All women had to stay in for a week after the birth.

Salt baths were prescribed for helping stitches heal.

CS for at least 2 weeks.

All babies were taken away at night to allow Mums to sleep and recover.

Babies were fed some sort of glucose based drink at night, and when they went home would be used to sleeping through the night.

When I had my DC's both by EMCS I found the post-natal care to be horrific, as a first time Mum I had never even held a baby, let alone fed/ changed one. I was left alone with a baby I had no idea what to do with , after having been labouring for 24 hours. Lets then throw into that being on a ward with 3 other Mum's and their babies, add to this the baby blues and you have the recipe for hell on earth!!
I am now 16 weeks PG again and dreading the hospital experience, absolutely dreading it as a CS is probable.

So my question is was it better in the olden days?

post natal was better

with my fisrt stayed in 10 days took babys away at night if bf they would come get u ff they would feed were taught how to bath feed change etc on the last night they would babysit for 4hrs y u and other half went out for meal

2nd one dreadful experience and third, diff hospitals

nowdays people are anxious to get home etc and midwife does not visit as much as they use to

65 years ago you were lucky to get a place on a postnatal ward. My gran went round all the 'nursing homes' as they were called then to register herself for a place, and all were fully booked. She'd only just missed her period. Luckily she managed to get a place eventually and my dad was born safely.

You have to remember though, worm, that before the 1950s (I think) you wouldn't have got your EMCS, or if you had one of the first ones it would have been very dangerous indeed, so overall I think I'd rather give birth now, even if you don't get the free babysitting and conveniently sleeping baby!!

FWIW I was in postnatal for 5 days, so they don't always shove you out the door. Sometimes the midwives would take DS at night to let me get some sleep, although he looked at tutus on ebay rather than being put in a nursery and fed glucose!

I think lying-in was much more a part of society. My mum is in her sixties and she struggled to think if anyone at all from her mother/aunts' generation who had given birth in a hospital. Everyone had a homebirth, end of. My great grandmother acted as a midwife - she had had 10 home births herself - and was fairly philosophical about death in childbirth. It was just one of those things. A proper, qualified midwife was a rare thing. The local GP assisted at births too. This was in heavily industrial Lancashire in the Irish community.
I think it was accepted that for the first few weeks the families would have to rally round to support each other, and didn't get too hung up about farming children out to various relatives as required, popping them all in the one bed.

Just thinking about it, my Grandad delivered a couple of my mum's siblings - Grandma just got on with it, Grandad was at home and I remember she said as my uncle was born, she had hold of Grandad and pulled the front off his coat! She had 6 children, all over 10lb!

My mother is 65 and had all three of her children in hospital (three different hospitals). She had hideous care with her first during delivery (was left haemoraging in delivery room for she doesn't know how long) but was transfered to a nursing home for two weeks which she said was more like a hotel. Had brilliant deliveries and post natal care with next two and actually felt recovered from the birth when she was discharged. Even with me (completely straight forward VB with no tear, instruments or anything else) she was in for four days. She simply cannot believe I am having a C section tomorrow and in all likelihood will be discharged the following day.

cattleprod I did ask one of the midwive before My first labour ended in EMCS what would have happened in the olden days, to which she replied " you probably would have stayed in labour for a week while they waited to see which one of you died first!! yes definatley better for the babies now-adays, just not so much for the recovering Mums!

Good luck with todays CS georginama !!

MIL showed us all her baby paperwork recently. She was admitted to the local 'maternity home' when she went into labour. According to the pages telling the woman what would happen in wonderful 1960s civil service speak, being shaved and having an enema were compulsory, ditto lying on your back for giving birth, but 'gas' was available.
She got to stay in for a week, which certainly by births 3 and 4 was muchly appreciated! Baby was brought to her at regular intervals for breastfeeding.
Then there were daily visits from a mw/hv until the babies were about 3 weeks old, and weekly for a while after that.

She couldn't believe that I had my baby dumped on me in hospital for three days even when I was stuck to the bed with a drip and catheter (admittedly once someone came in, saw me crying having had no sleep for over 48 hours plus the panic of ds being in special care for a few hours, and said they'd take him for a bit - cue me sending the terp running to find out who on earth they were!), and had one home visit from a MW which I had to arrange myself (and another about 6 weeks after I went to the clinic and burst into tears on the HV). But all through the long labour the staff were fantastic at taking my wishes into account and explaining the options - totally faultless!

Verdict: actual birth bit, greatly improved in 2008. Postnatal care, much better in the mid to late 60s.

Post-natal is worse IMO. My mums generation seemed to stay for a wek after a normal birth and longer after a CS. Babies in the nursery overnight and bought to the mums for bf . I've spoken to a few older women and they said it was fine, lots of rest and chatting with the other mums.

I found my modern PN care pretty miserable. My mum marched off to the head midwife after my EMCS to find out why I wasn't being helped, cue much apologising from the (actually very nice MW) and promises to do more for me.

hmm, i was in 2 days post birth first time, though they wanted me to stay another night, and i was in 6 days after my section, followed by 2 nights in the parent room in SCBU with popping back to maternity ward couple of times a day to be checked over.

i'd been up 72hours straight by the time my dc1 was born so they took him overnight to give me a break. i just lay there crying at how awful i was to give him away at a few hours old and knowing they'd be back within 5 minutes to tell me he was simply to loud for them to put up with. (they didnt, she had him about 4 hours i think and he even slept!)

dd, she was in SCBU first couple of nights but even 3rd night the mws took her because i wasnt fit for anything, DH did it all within visiting hours and they let him stay a few hours late because they were too busy to take over. first night i had her on my own was her 4th night i think, and that was because Evil MW was on and i didnt cope.

i think taking them away from mum as a matter of course was daft though, as was staying in a week regardless of how you were. and babysitting while you go for dinner is very nice, but i didnt want to go out days after giving birth, i wanted to get to know my babies. i do remember feeling 'wtf do i do with this???' first time, and i was just amazed they let me take him home when i clearly had no idea how to look after him. best way to learn is to do it though, not to have them taken away.

I think it's swings and roundabouts really.

When my mother had my elder siblings she was encouraged to stay in hospital, there were strict visiting times and babies were kept in the nursery.

But, saying that... it was recognised that you had just given birth, which is a huge thing. Nowadays you're expected to pop them out and get on with it.

Funnily enough I was talking to my Nan about this yesterday - she had 4 children over 12 years in the 50's and early 60's. Obviously there have been major medical advances since then - but the care was definitely better in my Nan's day from her experience. She had her children in 'nursing homes' under the care of the family gp who delivered her babies. She was in the nursing home for 2 weeks and was properly looked after, not just given a bed and left to get on woth it like I was.

my older brother was born at the local maternity home place but it had closed by the time i was born. you cant give birth in the town i live in unless you have a homebirth (and i did try) so i had to go 10 miles with DC2. because i didnt qualify for the midwife unit with DC1 i had to travel 40 miles from home. sucks big ones.

I have been told that one reason for "fast turnaround" now days (esp post cs) is the increased risk of infection in hospitals rather than your own home. In particular life theatening "super bugs"

I think the idea of bed rest is a good one. But don't feel this needs to be in hospital. And while there seems to have been a lot of support in the past alot of it seems misplaced to me (eg the sugar solution, taking the baby away etc)

I'd prefer todays quality of support (when it works as it's meant to, eg, taylored to individual needs, home visits and evidence based) but in the quantities described in the op if that makes sense.

A proper, qualified midwife was a rare thing. It depends what time you are talking about BagOfHolly My husband's grandmother had a qualified midwife for her birth in 1940 - it cost her 10/-, (which was quite a lot of money for a working class family to find in those days, although being war time, grandfather was getting lots of overtime on war work). I think unqualified midwives got phased out with the coming of the NHS.

Although a lot of people are commenting about how women leave hospital within a day or so; had they been giving birth in the 1950s they would have had a home birth - hospital was only for emergencies or those with problems. From what I have heard, post natal care was much better in the 1950s - women were expected to 'lie in' for a couple of weeks and the midwife came each day.

Breastfeeding support was pretty rubbish from what I have heard - bottle feeding was modern and scientific and there was no need to 'test weigh' before and after a feed to find out how much the baby had taken in!

It's a pity they have deleted the message from WomansHourBBCR4 - I suppose they decided that it was advertising but other than that I can't see why.

I was born in 1960. My mother says that only she and one other woman on the postnatal ward wanted to breast feed. The staff were resentful and unsupportive and unsurprisingly she gave up. She did not even try with my brother.
When I had my daughter, she felt very emotional seeing her happy feeding. It stirred up deep regrets. She also had to stay in for a week after a normal delivery and felt very lonely and desperate to be home.

My mum was thrown out of her hospital a few hours post delivery as she was unmarried. A midwife walked int he room, pulled her blankets off and told her to 'get that bastard off her ward'

1975. No word of a lie.

Support was really an issue.

When I had my daughter, she felt very emotional seeing her happy feeding. It stirred up deep regrets.

Absolutely the same with my mother, mayhew. She was knocked out to have forceps with my brother, and didn't even see him for 24 hours, so he never got the hang of breastfeeding. Bottle feeding was pushed as being modern - even though the formulas available then weren't all that good. It was only when I had my children that she realised it could have been so different.

...and now I'm a midwife and it's odd readign all these posts as I seem to spend half my shift gently tring to encourgae women to stay in hospital so I can help them learn to breastfeed and baby care in between visitors, as well as benefit from electric bedsand walk in showers/no stairs for sore bits and bellies.

In the main they ignore me and ask to go home for lunchtime

Yes & no. My MIL thinks that the quick turnaround now is a bad thing but my Mum, obv of the same generation disagrees. My Mum's view is that the old 10 day rule was good in that it forced you to rest but that family should take care of you rather than hospital. What they both agree on (as do I ) is that expecting women to pop a baby out on Monday and be making tea for everyone on Tuesday night is neither right or fair.

After I had dd I begged to leave straight away, no tears and no problems so I left after 6 hours. The care that I got in those 6 hours was horrific, the tea lady refused to give dh a cup of tea even though he'd been awake for around 40 hours by that point until my aunty (who works in the hospital) said it was ok as we were family . I was told I knew how to bath and change a baby and the mw spent two minutes with me going through a checklist before leaving.

As it happened when I arrived back to our old two bed flat the whole of dh's family were there, all 12 of them ordering pizza and drinking wine which was just as relaxing as being on the ward. I think nowadays in general post-natal women are ignored and expected to get on with it.

We should take note from China and their way of confinement. I will absolutely be staying in bed for a week or two this time and my family will come and look after me!