Homeopathy in Childbirth - objections from hospital midwife

[Rolf]

I have booked a doula for my (hopefully) imminent labour. We have been to see a homeopath together and plan for her to throw remedies in my mouth whilst I'm in labour.

I was told yesterday by a very reliable source (my hairdresser!!) that a friend of his recently delivered at the same hospital and when her doula started giving her homeopathic remedies, the midwife got very worked up and asked her to stop. I'm not sure whether or not she did, but the hospital is now undertaking an internal inquiry (whether generally or into this particular case, I'm not sure). The patient apparently was perfectly happy with her care from both the hospital and the doula so I think it's for the purposes of clarification rather than a big witch-hunt.

I'm slightly concerned that because of this there will be generally twitchy atmosphere about someone not employed by the trust giving a patient any sort of medication. I've added to my birth plan "I would like to use homeopathic remedies in labour and am happy for my doula to administer them". Do you think that's adequate or should I go further? Should I write out a list of the remedies I'm taking in with me, the name of the homeopath who dispensed them and a more sweeping waiver? Or is that the litigator in me speaking?

I have quick labours so won't be able to waste time debating with them. My doula is well-known at the hospital and I think will be very good at this sort of advocacy. And I have a good relationship with the hospital although as it's a big teaching hospital there's every chance that in labour I won't be looked after by anyone I know.

Any thoughts would be v welcome.

I agree with the last post, if i am paying for a treatment I care about whether or not there is objective evience about whether or not it works. There is none for homeopathy and in scientific terms there seems little sense behind how it is claimedto work. obviously people feel that they get good results and that's great for them but doesn't mean that people have no right to be sceptical or deserve to be shot down for being so. What is so wrong about wanting evidence? Incidentally, my scepticism does not mean that I blindly embrace all things that allopathic medecine has to offer. It is often very flawed in my experience, especially in terms of how HCPs relate and talk / listen to their patients.

I meant I agreed with Binsky's post, spent so long typing that another post appeared! There is much better evidence for aromatherpy, herbalism and vitamins btw altough they are still controversial

I think there's also a confusion about what using homeopathy actually means.

If - as meemar has said you choose to read up on homeopathy/follow a friend's suggestion and go out and buy homeopathy then you can. A 10 years supply of arnica pills will set you back about 4 quid.

If you go for a homeopathic consultation it's much more involved. It lasts about an hour, you talk through whatever you want to - so in effect you're having some sort of couselling on top. It doesn't focus on the physical. It doesn't remotely try to recreate a standard medical consultation. And a lot of the training is in this area. You don't tend to go in and say 'I've got a sore knee what can I have?' (although a GP who uses homeopathy might get that sort of questions and chose to prescribe something homeopathic).

People are entitled to be in full control of their own health. I use homeopathy for various health and mental health issues, I see my doctor /GP if I need a prescription/want something checked out/need a referral. I see a chiropractor if my back goes. I never have the slightest confusion about who I should see. Homeopathy hasn't altered my GP consultations at all -I still see my GP for all the things I would every have seen him or her for. Homeopathy is something that I use additionally not instead of. And this is the way that everyone I know who uses it approaches it.

A good homeopath can be someone who fits in in this role - and not just by prescribing remedies- but by being someone who listens, talks and discusses aspects of your life. And tells you if you need to be referred back to a GP (just like chiropractors/osteopaths etc do).

A homeopath who just shoved a pill at someone would be unlikely to be an effective homeopath. I also happen to think that GP's/consultants who shove stuff at you and don't listen are not effective doctors This was made very obvious to me when I saw 2 consultants over one matter- was transfered half way through because we moved. The first consultant was absolutely brilliant - he didn't actually give any treatment (other than talk) but he did his doctoring and he did it bloody well. The other consultant was one of the most unpleasant people I have ever sat in a room with. He did actually do some physical treatment but I left feeling worse than when I went in.

There are many aspects to health. And some of them can't be judged from p values.

I don't think anyone has been shot down for being skeptical. I don't give a monkeys whether anyone believes in it or not. I think it would be nice to not be met with sneering for using it though.

I personally don't believe in God. I don't sneer at those that do.

So just to clarify...

1. no-one knows how homeopathy works

2. no-one knows whether or not it works

3. no-one claims that it works

...so why are people taking it?

POM such as prozac are subject to rigourous monitoring and reserch. homeopathy is not subject to the same rigours

fluoxetine (Prozac) is a SSRI Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors. In depression certain neurotransmitters are relatively lacking. One of those is serotonin, also known as 5-hydroxytryptamine or 5-HT. The SSRIs slow down the process of returning the serotonin to the end of the neuron it comes from. This leads to the chemical remaining in the vicinity of the receptors for longer, making it more likely that enough will build up to set off the impulse in the next neuron.

Thus, the SSRIs work by allowing the body to make the best use of the reduced amounts of serotonin that it has at the time.

BUT the New Scientist 26 feb 2008

SSRI are recommended by NICE as appropriate pharmaceutical intervention for depression

GlaxoSmith Kline and all pharmaceuticals companies send millions researching,advertising,promoting these medications

BUt feb 26 2008 The antidepressant Prozac and related drugs are no better than placebo in treating all but the most severely depressed patients, according to a damaging assessment of the latest generation of antidepressants", this of course is majorly contentious and being disputed by SmithKlein

but phew it got people goin

Well to be fair homeopathy doesn't have the side effects that conventional drugs can have- so it doesn't need rigorous clinical trial testing. New remedies go through a detailed process called proving but I doubt that people are that interested in what that entails on here. And if they did they would ridicule it.

binksy- people use homeopathy for the same reasons that people have always used any medications- whether conventional or witchdoctor or talking therapies or whatever. It makes them feel better. This has always been the case. If something works for someone then they will use it. Ultimately as a user of medications/therapies of any type I'm more interested in how I feel that what a clinical trial says.

The only exceptions to this are drugs which make you feel worse (such as chemo) but might have a very profound and potentially life saving or prolonging phgysiological effect. Or drugs which might have potentially nasty side effects- such as seizure medication - but could prevent something even worse happening.

For those drugs I personally would get interested in clinical trial results - and in side effects, and in the risks of not having medication.

But for other less powerful or less toxic drugs I'm simply interested in how they make me/the kids feel.

Jimjams, please don't assume that because I don't hold your point of view I think your opinion is invalid. If you are willing to describe it then I would very much like to hear what proving involves, not to ridicule it but because I have an enquiring mind and am genuinely interested.

Thanks binsky - you may be a lone voice on here though

I can give a brief background as to how I started to use homeopathy. I grew up very conventionally- never used any CAM at all. Until my back went in my early 20's and I started seeing a chiropractor (as well as having some physio).

That was about it until my early 30's. By that time we knew that ds1 was likely to be diagnosed as autistic. He has what I call a 'biomedical' type of autism- in that it was probably environmentally triggered (won't go into that here) and that he has a physiology that deals with things differently from expected. This is quite common in autism- so friend's kids have had to return for operations at later dates because sedatives made them hyper etc, or other research at Birmingham uni has shown that for some autistic children paracetamol is not metabolised in a normal fashion etc. Basically there is a group with autism who appear to have all sorts of metabolic differences (may be one probelm causing cascade effects). Anyway ds1 had had a lot of conventional drugs by the time he was 2 - partly because of repeated infections and partly because of some nasty things he caught.

It got to a stage where I felt we needed to explore a different approach. I bought a 'natural family health guide' and went through it- it pretty much covered everything. There was some basic info about homeopathy and I bought a basic kit.

Fast forward ds2 was born. Ds1 would not sleep (having been a very good sleeper). At bed time he would stand and scream for 5 hours (literally) then would fall asleep exhausted and wake up 2 hours later screaming again. He was distraught. After 2 weeks I was distraught as well. (Especially as ds2 was ill as well). I picked up my natural health guide o lok up some aromaptherapy that I thought relax him. And instead stuumbled across an autism entry which gave some homeopathic suggestions. I picked one that fitted him and gave it to ds1 at lunch time.

That night he went to bed straight away with no screaming. Erm coincidence I thought. Anyway he woke up in the night screaming again.

I'd read in the book that you give the minimum so the next day I didn't give anything. Bed time again. Screaming the place down. So I gave one. He did his screaming until midnight routine then fell asleep but slept all night and didn't wake.

So the next day I gave one at lunch time and one at bedtime. He went to bed straight away and slept all night.

So I was left with a situation where I didn't really quite believe what I had seen. But to be honest I didn't really care. In ds1 I had a child who I didn't feel comfortable giving any conventional medication to unless he really desperately needed it. He had apparently responded to something I didn't believe in and in a very dramatic way.

So my thought process was that I didn't understand how it could possibly have worked, but with the exception of leg about to drop off scenarios it was probably worth another try if something arose in the future.

So I tried it again - and it's continued to work for us with results that make it worth using again. And a big one for me - it hasn't actually damaged any of my children (ds1 is non-verbal aged 9 - which we think was related to conventional medicine- obviously with genetic predisposition).

That was rather long. And I'm aware that I've opened myself to ridicule. And no doubt someone will provide it But recently I was talking with someone who works in Health Psychology and he said that people have always used what works best for them. That's how medicine evolves and how a new method usurps an old. (It's how conventional got bigger than homeopathy - it saves more lives- I don';t think anyone would deny that). And for our family using homeopathy at times when conventional medicine can't offer us anything has improved our health. So we continue to use it.

I'm hoping to get ds1 some shiatsu soon as well- as he craves deep pressure. I have found someone who has worked with severely autistic kids (which in actually the most important factor) and I hope he will be able to benefit from it.

Ds1's issues and difficulties with conventional medicine has meant we've had to take a different approach. And for us it has worked.

binksy there are a lot of people making money out of it..

binsky - I have used homeopathy for myself and my children because for various reasons.

When the babies were teething and I didn't want to keep giving repeated doses of paracetamol. When DS2 suffered from eczema we tried it because creams from the GP were useless and I didn't want to give steroids.
I used it for morning sickness and I tried if for DS2's hay fever.

In some cases the homeopathy helped, and in other cases I didn't notice any difference in symptoms. I personally don't care whether it is scientifically proven to work or not. It is another tool in the first aid kit as far as I'm concerned. And if it helps then that's great.

There are some conventional medicines which don't actually do anything either - cough syrup is the most obvious one.

And Bundle,yes, people make money from homeopathy without doubt - they are selling a product and that's business. But as long as those using it are clear about what they are doing I don't see a problem with that. As mentioned before, homeopathic products aren't allowed to be labelled as a medicine on the packaging. People who go looking for the remedies are those who have researched or been recommended to do so. There is no hard or misleading selling getting people to use homeopathy.

I don't know any homeopaths who drive a BMW

If your motive in life is to make money then I wouldn't touch homeopathy with a barge pole.

You have the same approach as me meemar.

but

"binksy there are a lot of people making money out of it.. "

Yes - and there are a lot of inadequate GP's earning 125K and more a year out of the public purse to patronise, and misdiagnose their patients, but nobody seems to worry particularly about that.

Luckily for me I've now found one who's got good clinical skills and the ability to listen - a rare beast indeed. Of course you have to wait 3 weeks for an appointment with her because everyone else has sussed out that she's an outstanding doctor, whereas most of the other doctors in the practice are half-wits very poor.

"If your motive in life is to make money then I wouldn't touch homeopathy with a barge pole."

No - go into general practice where you'll spend your day handing out unnecessary prescriptions for antibiotics and antidepressants instead.....

You'll be quids in.

bundle, I know what you're saying. I watched the Horizon programme which showed the solutions were so diluted they were literally nothing.

But, the chamomilla teething granules helped both DSs instantly. I have seen an egg-size bruise on DS2's head disappear with arnica. And I have seen a dramatic change in an acute flare-up of eczema in DS2 after a course prescribed by a homeopath. (Of course sceptics will argue that it wasn't the homeopathy that made any difference).

I also found that it was not helpful for long-term help of the eczema, It made no difference to my morning sickness and when I used it for chicken pox the symptoms were not relieved.

So I fully accept that there is no proof that it works in the laboratory sense of 'proof'.But while my personal experience has shown that it can make a difference, I will continue to use it if I think it's worth a try.

Definitely homeopathy is not a 'get rich quick' scheme - has anyone seen the French movie "La Crise"? Just reminded me of the scene where a wife is screaming at her husband for becoming a homeopath because they don't make enough money any more.

I second jimjam and meemar's experiences with homeopathy, just wanted to add a few more of mine.

I mentioned that I used it in childbirth & didn't need anything else and someone said that I'd clearly just used willpower plus placebo - but I wasn't taking homeopathy for pain, it was to speed the labour, get things moving. Since labour was only 3 hours, I guess it worked for me. Of course it could be my enormous pelvis that helped

I had interstitial cystitis for 5 years - gp prescribed course after course of a/bs and eventually said 'You're just going to have to live with this, it's the way you're made'. My homeopath sorted it out and I haven't had cystitis since - I've gone from having one attack per month to having had none for 7 years.

DS (aged 2. He can't say 'placebo') was in and out of hospital with wheezing/asthma attacks needing steroid tablets and nebuliser, plus up to 20 puffs of salamol per day. He's been seeing homeopath and hasn't even needed his salamol for the past month.

I had night cramps - before pregnancy - about 5 years ago. Dr couldn't explain it initially, but eventually prescribed quinine as I was waking with leg twisted wrong way around with muscle cramp within 2 hours of falling asleep & was exhausted - it happened every time I fell asleep, like torture. The quinine caused major side effects - I lost the sight in my right eye (temporarily thank god! But I still don't have night vision in that eye). I went to homeopath and she sorted the cramps out without my needing to go blind. Occasionally the cramps come back - I take homeopathic remedy and it sorts it out.

And finally... I was told by many doctors that I would never be able to have children. A combination of PCOS and damage from when my appendix burst as a child. I told my homeopath I was sad about it, she said 'Well, no promises, but let's try something...'. And my little DS was conceived that month (after never having used contraception with DH in the previous 6 years of relationship, since I knew I couldn't get pg).

Homeopathy might not be scientific. But I find it's darned useful when we're poorly.

i never said it was a get rich quick scheme. but it's literally selling "nothing" but placebo (which of course has a v powerful effect), an effect which i think the nhs could use to good effect

Thebecster - am I reading this right? Have you stopped your son's asthma medication and giving him homeopathy instead?

Not to be judgemental but you're not treating your son's asthma with homeopathy in lieu of asthma medication...?

It's essentially a glass of water, certainly won't do you any harm but if a doctor has prescribed medication for a medical condition I would trust him/her and take it.

thebecster - You have seen some very bad doctors. Who says this for cystitis: 'You're just going to have to live with this, it's the way you're made."?!?!

I had monthly cystitis, just like you. Then went to a gynecologist, who said the microbe was probably in the vagina, reinfecting the urinary track during every month's mestruation.

Treatment took a week or so. I haven't had cystitis since then. This was eight years ago.

Moral of the story: Change your GP. His incompetence does not mean the whole medical profession is useless.

And re conception and PCOS - PCOS does not mean total infertility.

A friend has this. She didn't have periods for years. Then she got pregnant (surprise!), had a DD. Pregnant again, had M/C. Pregnant again, had a DS.

A woman's psychology contributes significantly to fertility and even timing of her periods. I know couples who TTC'ed for years without success, then finally gave up and decided to adopt and got pregnant right away. Several times, when I thought I could be pregnant, my period just wouldn't come. Then I did a pregnancy test, saw the negative, and menstruated within hours.

So, it sounds like you got pregnant because you believed in the powers of your homeopath, not because whatever she gave you cured the PCOS.

Haven't read all of this so excuse me if I am repeating something but if somehting happens in childbirth that has a negative effect on the mother or baby how the hell are they going to know if it is the homeopathy that has done it or the conventional medicine and then it could all become difficult if one had to be prven over the other in court etc....?

If something happens in childbirth they usually just lose the notes.