Childbirth- inherently risky or inherently safe? Painful or not?

[WhatTheHellJustHappened]

My friend recently made the fatal mistake of saying in the company of some female colleagues that childbirth was the most painful, horrifying thing she had experienced. An argument ensued and majority of the ladies there believed it was wrong to call childbirth risky or painful. They said they pitied women who looked at such a beautiful and empowering experience in such a negative manner. They said that even sitting on a lawn was risky but sensible people didn't spend time fretting over it. My friend asked me later "When did it become a crime to call childbirth painful or risky? ".
While I personally agree that childbirth can be very empowering and rewarding, I also do agree that it is painful and potentially risky.

What are you views? Do you think childbirth is painful? Do you think it is inherently risky or safe?

Anyway, anybody who's seen farmyard animals giving birth will know that they suffer quite badly in labour as well- they just don't swear as much as humans.

They do!! Just in animal swearing!

I gave birth to my baby 10 weeks ago and it was bloody AGONY! Easily the worst pain I've ever experienced, i ended up being induced by drip and had a 3rd degree tear. I had a really easy pregnancy but the birth made up for it! He's so gorgeous though it hasn't put me off having another...but I'm gonna have an epidural next time!!

Really the argument between your head and your body.
My 6 yr old asked me yesterday 'does it hurt having a baby' ( school has a lot to answer for grrrr)
Given that his sister died during birth, I have to agree with salad,
Yes it can hurt but ( for most of us) nature has a wonderful way of making us forget it when we see our lovely baby,healthy and screaming.

I just remembered some more comments I hear very often from a lot of men and women-

"Your body won't grow a baby that's too big to birth"

"Yes complications exist but they are so rare that it's crazy to worry about them"

"Women have been giving birth for millenia. If birth wasn't safe we wouldn't be here".

"Women's bodies are designed to give birth." ---- In other words, how can things possibly go wrong?!

Sounds like a very good article, do we have a cynical emoticom yet?

How daft of anyone to deny birth is not risky or painful.

How odd to meet a whole group of people who don't agree.

How predictable that the negative responses to my NCT hypnobirthing post skip the part where I said "I was very lucky but was not naive enough to ignore the fact that women do die in childbirth "
I did not get pregnant with the belief that I could deliver my baby by myself at home, but "swallowing the hypnobirthing guff whole" is the main reason why I did - I would have been in hospital scared stiff and probably taken every drug offered. I was fully prepared to be blue lighted round the corner to the very good hospital which would have saved my life and/or my baby's if he got stuck or any other complication arose.

Myleenecrass Nobody is claiming that hypnobirthing can prevent or deal with medical complications.

So it's o.k to deny pain free birth and natural birth experiences at one end of the scale but not that it is painful and risky at the other end of the scale?

mince - does nature really let most of us forget the pain? Or is this meme just a way of making women who don't forget and are quite traumatised by their experiences keep quiet?

Definitely the last one widowwadman. You don't want to frighten pregnant friends so keep quiet which unfortunately means the only line of information comes from the 'lucky ones' or birth worshippers.

The trouble is it can lead people to make very wrong decisions and allows the myth to be perpetuated that somehow you are only a 'proper' mother or woman if you thrash around in pain 'empowering' yourself by 'birthing' without pain relief.

I think in 50 or 100 years time we will look back at some of the episodes of one born every minute in complete horror at the treatment of women.

We are still in the dark ages. I am NOT though saying women who choose natural childbirth should not go for it. What is wrong is the belief that you OUGHT to go for it.

This whole thing of not wanting to frightening the first timers (which I'm guilty of myself, I guess) led me to refusing pain relief for way too long the first time round. I was scared stiff of "the cascade of intervention", so I screamed my head off during contractions, but stubbornly even refused the cocodamol at first. Both midwife and husband had to work quite hard on me.

As it was, I ended up with a CS, and there's no way she'd have come out any other way. My coccyx was bruised and painful for weeks, despite never even having dilated further than 2 cms.

Once I agreed to the CS, which was the thing I feared most during pregnancy, the experience became much better. The drip came off, the meptid had kicked in, and the fetal heart rate stabilised more, so I stopped being so scared.

When I went to hospital, I was expecting the full birthing ball whale music, sneeze it out on a whiff of g&a. Afterwards I knew better. And I insisted on a CS no matter what for No 2.

If anything, having experienced an attempt at VB left me scared of trying that again, worse than I ever was scared of the interventions first time round.

I just wish there weren't so many myths, which build up expectations and leave women scared and/or feeling like failures.

Widowwadman Great post and so so true! They should frame it and put it up in every maternity hospital in the country!

Women who give birth have a longer life expectancy than those who don't so over the life course not giving birth is more risky, in the UK today.

The higher risks in the past and abroad are more due to general poor health, malnourishment, lack of prenatal care and unsanitary conditions.

Also some births will be riskier due to other factors such as twin pregnancies, pre-existing medical conditions, age and parity.

Outside of all these extra risk factors if you take a low risk birth most of the pain and added risk comes from unnecessary medical intervention not the process itself.

Victorialucas You said "Outside of all these extra risk factors if you take a low risk birth most of the pain and added risk comes from unnecessary medical intervention not the process itself."

I have seen this argument lots of times before but never ever seen a shred of substantial evidence to back it up. It is a belief and the confusion of causality with association.

e.g. If women who give birth have longer life expectancy, it has probably nothing to do with the maternal death risks of birth in uk which are very very low. It is much more likely to be to do with the fact that healthier more attractive women find a partner more easily and having children is a happy state and means they are more cared for in old age.

What I would like to see is evidence is that the pain of low risk birth comes from unnecessary intervention. I speak from experience. Medical intervention in the form of an epidural SAVED me from all the horrific pain I suffered in my first birth which was natural.

victorialucas statements like yours are simply factually incorrect.

"Most of the pain and added risk comes from unnecessary medical intervention not the process itself" - there isn't a stitch of evidence to back this up. The "cascade of intervention" is a terrible myth that has no grounding in medical data, as there is no way of proving whether interventions are a cause of a difficult delivery, or a symptom of a birth that was never going to go the way "nature" would have it.

"Women who give birth have a longer life expectancy than those who don't so over the life course not giving birth is more risky, in the UK today. "

I do not disbelieve this (ave heard similar) but i wish I could find out more about it.

How much is down to:

-the decreased risk of breast cancer from breastfeeding?
-the way it was counted (I'd hope not) - did they count "women" who died under the age of 25 (or whatever) who were a hell of a lot less likely to have given birth simply down to age?
-the fact that elderly people without support from adult children have a shorter life expectancy anyway due to a lack of care/advocacy (if infact they do - I am speculating)

I'm sorry but the process of your cervix dilating to the circumference of a dairy lea triangle box hurts. How much it hurts depends on lots of factors but to suggest that process is or could be pain free naturally is just bloody stupid and misleading and potentially hurtful.

"Women who give birth have a longer life expectancy than those who don't so over the life course not giving birth is more risky, in the UK today. "

That's not true. What they have found is that women who have been pregnant live longer. Which is an important distinction here as is has nothing to do with the risks of birth.

The theory is this:

"The cells from the developing baby pass into the mother's bone marrow during the early stages of pregnancy.

The scientists say these cells may rejuvenate the mother's own, repair damage and fight disease, prolonging her life. The findings, in today's Lancet, could explain why women who have had children are less likely to develop arthritis, multiple sclerosis and breast cancer."

link

did they separate out any benefits of giving birth, breastfeeding, and parenting?

"Outside of all these extra risk factors if you take a low risk birth most of the pain and added risk comes from unnecessary medical intervention not the process itself."

But many many women are not "low risk".

Illness and disease are part of life, not a rare occurrence (in fact there's a theory that the very reason mammals bear live young is possibly because our ancient ancestors contracted a virus - passed through our DNA - which affected their ability to lay eggs but I digress!)

People are high risk simply if they have big babies, for example!

I would have loved an intervention free birth. But the simple fact is DS and I would probably have died without it, in screaming agony.

"Outside of all these extra risk factors if you take a low risk birth most of the pain and added risk comes from unnecessary medical intervention not the process itself."

This is what I used to think. I was at home in labour for about 10 hours in productive labour. It was painful but manageable; thinking g positive thoughts, listening to calming music, dancing, the birthing pool, etc., really helped. The midwife arrived for the home birth and said the baby would be coming soon. It was all textbook, and straightforward.

Then I went through about 12 hours of further labour, with the pain getting more and more intense. Eventually I began to get panic attacks at the start of each contraction because I didn't think I could endure it. They measured me after 12 hours and I hadn't progressed at all. This pain was totally natural and absolutely unbearable, despite my lovely home surroundings and my positive expectations. When we finally transferred to hospital and I had an epidural, the pain relief and sense of being looked after was overwhelming.

The main thought that kept going through my head wondering what this must be like for women who know there is no relief, no hospital round the corner, just hours and days more of this until the end, which may be death for them and/or their child.

Ummm, all I had was G&a and no medical intervention. But Victoria it really, really was painful. I was incredably lucky to have a straight forward labour but it irks me that other women tell me it should
Not have been painful as if I just did not try hard enough to make it painless. Even thinking about crowning makes me cross my legs at the memory (my DD had her arm wrapped around her head, I don't think there was much I could do about that).

iismum too right - the thing is, you can't predict whether you're one of the ones who'll have a smooth ride or one of those who'll need every intervention under the sun.

My first pregnancy was textbook easy, and everything went fantastic - until my waters broke without prior warning and were a yucky green.

As a midwife of 23 yrs, I never cease to be amazed at the variety of women's experiences. The very anxious 39 yr old who was amazed to find on admission she was already 9cm with her first and slipped her out laughing a couple of hours later. And the stalwart well-prepared 30 yr homebirther whose labour appeared to be horribly painful to my eyes and needed all her reserves to keep going and get that baby out. Both were normal and low risk but utterly different.

It is true, in my opinion, that your mental attitude affects your subjective experience but it does not control it.

See the thing that really pisses me off is the implication that having a complicated birth is somehow the mothers fault because she didn't try hard enough for a "natural birth". Birth can still be a dangerous process for mother and baby.