Why is unmedicated / "natural birth" glorified

[daffodils123]

It really baffles me the extent to which "natural births" are glorified both by pregnant women, midwives and even others when they ask if you're planning on a "natural birth".

There is no other procedure that people routinely turn down painkillers or pain relief when getting & so it always confuses me that this is even a thing.

I also have a feeling that if men could give birth, this obsession with "natural birth" may not be a thing!

Has anyone else found this to be the case??

First baby: gas and air and pethedine; felt groggy and a bit unwell for a few days.

Second baby: nothing, felt great, bounced back quickly

Obviously, there is no reason not to use pain relief if you need it, but if you find you don’t need it, you won’t have a hang over from the drugs.

@Sittinginthesand

Sleepless - I disagree that we have ‘created’ a culture of fear around childbirth- it is painful and there are risks - a certain level of fear seems entirely rational to me. My born in 1880 Great Grandmother told my mother ‘even the best is ghastly darling’ (kindly passed on to me by my dm just before I had my first), things are a lot safer than in her time - chilbirth was much more worrying and frightening when she grew up, and people didn’t pretend it wasn’t.

You don’t @Sittinginthesand ?

Maybe we’re of a different age but I absolutely think women tell other women horror stories and movies and TV for depicting birth are the worst! Until I did some training as a doula I was convinced if I ever had kids I’d have a section to avoid it all.

I don’t like the comparison of birth and an operation but god we’d never tell someone how awful their appendectomy is going to be before surgery and bash them over the head with all the ‘risks’, tell them horror stories about a friend of a friend who had xyz horrible consequence of an appendectomy, remind them of all the ways they could die or suffer for life, yet this happens ALL the time with birth. There’s informed and then there just plain scare mongering.

I was told I wouldn't be able to do it without an epidural. I'm stubborn and decided to show the fuckers they were wrong. Plus I wanted to get out of hospital as soon as I could.

A live healthy baby should be the main aim …whatever happens to achieve that goal is irrelevant! Cannot actually bare all the competition. Every Mum is absolutely bloody amazing!

I think that in the past, a woman's entire value was in child birth and breastfeeding a baby until it was weaned. That childbirth was 'natural' due to lack of medical technology. I think women now often feel they lack value and so they take pride in doing these traditionally valuable practices. For others I think they feel pride in their bodies being strong enough to do this. That's my observation anyway.

Our bodies aren't really designed for it though, are they? We, rather fortuitously, developed the ability to communicate verbally while we tilted our pelvises 90 degrees and grew foetuses with giant heads. Medical intervention in childbirth has been around for millennia.

Now, some lucky women have the ability to 'birth' easier than others for all sorts of reasons. And to those that do, that must be nice.

@firstimemamma

What *@HumunaHey* said. I had a natural birth and there does tend to be a 'why would you want to do that?' air to things?

I think epidurals can be brilliant but they do come with risks and I personally just didn't want one. Dh is medical and the amount of patients he sees who have some sort of lasting issues with their backs as a direct result of having had an epidural would surprise you.

I think each to their own and no one particular way should be glorified.

my mum had an epidural when she had my brother and her back was fucked for years after that , always had ache in it and pain , it put me right off having one when i was preganant so when i went into labour i made do with gas n air plus that pethidene injection they give you in the thigh . i can well believe your dh about the back issue and epidurals , it was just a risk i didnt want to take

What I hate is the idea that it’s a choice. It’s not a choice. I wanted a natural birth but ended up with a EMCS after forceps.

I would have died without medical intervention. Sometimes the dialogue around birth makes me feel as though I’d be viewed more favourably if I’d have died in natural childbirth than the alternative. That’s a massive issue.

Again, I don’t think people who’ve had successful “natural” births get the same criticism. My mil gets to boast about birthing her large babies with no pain relief like a hero. Meanwhile, I feel like I have to justify my emergency c-section, despite planning a natural birth from the start.

Who cares if some women give birth with absolutely no issue, that’s great for them but that’s not realistic. I was scared of birth before but I was convinced I’d do it “naturally”. What issues do people have with preparing women for all scenarios, so that they don’t experience a horrible shock?

1 in 15 women in Chad die of maternal causes due to lack of medical care. Birth was always risky for women until adequate medical care, and now we’re supposed to shun it all because now we have over paid dulas and a sense that we’ve been overplaying the risk of birth in Western countries with amazing medical care?

Once you start medication/interventions you are more likely to need more interventions...which increases risk to both mum and baby significantly.

It's not martyrdom to opt for the least risk if possible (fully aware it's not always possible and that shouldn't influence people's judgement)

I've had 3 births, no. 1 and 3 ended in c section so epidural was necessary. No. 2 was very quick and painful, no opportunity for pain relief even though I begged for it, so was a "natural birth". I tore so badly I was being stitched for an hour afterwards as they couldn't stop the bleeding.

So while I was up and about quicker after the natural birth, I ended up in bad way for a long time afterwards, very tight and painful at the neck of the vagina and considered having surgery to rectify it but then decided to have a 3rd so waited until after that.

Either way, on all 3 I was torn to pieces and stiched back together again...there was nothing natural about it for me!!!

@Beefmeupscotty

Once you start medication/interventions you are more likely to need more interventions...which increases risk to both mum and baby significantly.

It's not martyrdom to opt for the least risk if possible (fully aware it's not always possible and that shouldn't influence people's judgement)

Yes but surely interventions are there to help the baby if it gets in trouble?!?! So ok yes, induction is more likely to lead to a section. Ok so stop inducing people. What happens? Rise in still births. I’d take an emergency section over a still birth as would anyone else.

I can understand why some midwives would tend more towards avoiding epidural IF things are going to plan and mum has said beforehand that she wants to try without one.

Epidural means a catheter, and a catheter means you have no chance of going straight home after the birth. This is the one and only reason why I tried to have my second without an epidural - I'd had an extremely traumatic first birth and me and my baby had both almost died and we ended up in hospital for a long time. it was awful. For my second I was determined to try and avoid a long hospital stay as much as possible. Unfortunately there were some complications so it wasn't possible, but assuming you are having a straight forward birth and you are happy to try it without the epidural, it will increase your chances of being able to get that 6 hour discharge that so many people dream of.

Obviously no one should be pressured into not asking for pain relief - that is simply wrong. I would always fight against that attitude. But there are some disadvantages to some of the pian relief options, and it is disingenuous to pretend they don't exist.

I agree. I don't understand why it is glorified. I had a natural birth, by choice. It was painful and sometimes I wonder if I should have just taken that epidural. There are no medals, no honours. It's just as natural as all other births. Each has their own goal and birthing goals. It's like having a dental procedure, some people choose local freezing and others want to be completely under. I would never judge someone on their choices and say one is better than the other.

Because it saves the NHS money basically.

There was a thread in here a while back in a similar vein, some really shocking stories on it. It's basically medical negligence legalised.

'Too posh to push' is another money saver.

Yeah, cos having a section means you're getting ideas above your station. You know, the health of you and your baby.

Incredible.

In the end, there are risks involved with all our choices and epidurals also bring problems.

I had an epidural and my baby's heartbeat slowed right down after it. Fortunately there were no lasting consequences but it was quite a fright. I also have a friend whose epidural went wrong and ended up with a constant headache for about three years.

I remember reading stats 15 years ago, on completely medically unaided births (taken from Yemen, if i remember). 1 in 10 women die, 3 are injured. 6 are fine. We are not perfectly designed for natural delivery, we just have more options if it goes wrong.

It was just before my first, in which i was induced after over 10 days overdue ( memory hazy now) and then an emergency C.

Who cares what other women do, how their babies are born.
Really.
My first born was EMCS and sadly died 2 days later - we wouldn't have had that very brief time with her if she wasn't delivered the way she was.
Please stop shaming other women for not having the same ideas/opportunities/intentions or whatever that you have yourself.

Born is best,
Alive is best
Choice is best
Fed is best

You do you, and leave others to make their own decisions

This was my experience with my first. I had managed days of low level pain about 16 hours of agony and then got an epidural ( an emcs a few hours later ). I think I would have started dying at that point through exhaustion
Baby number two had some pethadine and plenty of gas and air and left it too late for an epidural because she was almost out

I think because- whether this be fact-based or not- there’s a prevailing theory that the pain is in order for you to realise the gravity of the situation and prepare for the baby/put yourself in a safe space. In doing so, Back when we lived in caves, that pain would have been very useful and meant we sought help from others. The pain also means when the good hormones hit after birth, we feel them twice as keenly and (in theory) bond with our young all the more easily as a result.

Therefore, I suppose the prevailing idea that the pain is “useful” continues (in a way that pain of a tooth abscess isn’t) and that we are tapping into our earlier, more primordial selves by experiencing it and generally giving our offspring and our bodies a better shot at doing it all right.

Agreed though that in this day and age it’s probably not that useful for any of the process.

I find that when HCPs talk about ‘natural birth’ they tend to just mean vaginal, nothing to do with pain relief. I was recently hoping for a vaginal breech delivery with DC2 (didn’t happen in the end, I had an EMCS) and all of the consultants and midwives I came into contact with asked if I’d had a ‘natural birth’ the first time. I was slightly surprised that they use that term routinely because it seems a bit like a value judgement, not that it bothered me, but they definitely just meant ‘vaginal’ as opposed to ‘vaginal with no pain relief/augmentation’ - I had a sweep induction, gas and air, morphine, an epidural, a syntocinon drip and eventually forceps with my first but was still considered a stronger candidate for a breech VB because my first birth was ‘natural’, despite being, in reality, anything but.

In straight forward births I think the choice is often more pain now or pain later.

First birth: the drip, epidural, forceps and tearing
Second: induction, gas and air 2nd degree tear

First labour was grim and recovery was hard and long but there was no way I would have chosen to do it without pain relief. Epidural only half worked, I would have gone out of my mind without it at all.

Second once they broke my waters it happened too fast for anything other than had and air and actually, it was fine. The pain was manageable and I felt in control and empowered. Up and about in hours and back I softplay with toddler in a week. Better by far!

Yes it’s a natural process all mammals go through but it can be bloody painful and women and children die. Women need weigh up what works for their specific birth and circs free from judgement and people sticking their oar in.

But of course it’s women giving birth so everyone has an opinion.

On the face of it the readily available info seems to suggest that epidural increases the risks of forceps etc. Given the choice between forceps and long recovery/permanent damage and short term intense pain I would choose the latter…

In reality I had some morphine, didn’t progress for ages, had an epidural and dilated from four to ten centimetres in an hour and pushed the baby out easily. Poor baby was too drowsy due to morphine so close to birth and didn’t breathe properly or breastfeed. I would have been much better off just having an epidural first. I also credit the epidural with being able to push in a controlled manner and avoid tearing. I watched baby come out in a mirror and if I had been able to feel that I would NOT have been calm

It's more that I hear other mums saying they want a natural birth not to be induced etc as it hurts more...

Having had a full term loss I was keen to be induced early with my second baby