Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

The general feeling here seems to be anti-invervention and medical help. Why, when it has saved so many lives?

415 replies

greenwithyellowspots · 04/03/2009 19:59

I am really interested in this question. I think that Mumsnet is really geat, I love it, but one thing I've noticed particularly on the childbirth thread is that on the whole people are anti-intervention or even that doctors etc are the enemy! With induction for example, but also generally, the consensus seems to be about letting women get on with it because 'their bodies know best.'

But in the past, and still today in many countries, it seems clear that women's bodies DON'T always know best - mortality in childbirth used to be/still is horribly high! It often seems as though the medical profession can't win when it comes to childbirth - if they intervene they are accused of being over zealous, but if they get it wrong, they are also to blame.

I'm sitting here pondering the fact that I'm likely to be induced soon-ish and am reasonably willingly putting myself in the hands of the medical profession. Is there not a danger or harking back to a golden age of childbirth that didn't exist? I hope this isn't a really inappropriate question but I'm generally interested in what people have to say about this, as I kind of feel like I'm missing the point somewhere!

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Northernlurker · 08/03/2009 09:54

Olissa - sorry to read of your loss

Wishing you all the very best if you have another baby.

electra · 08/03/2009 10:03

I haven't read the thread in detail but can only talk from personal experience. Personally, I don't like labouring in hospital at all but don't dispute the need for intervention in some cases...

The problem I have is when the course of labour is changed by routine interventions which are not actually necessary, but which form a part of the particular ethos of the consultant working that day, and consequently the midwives who work under him/her. Decisions are consequently made which are not always in the best interests of the individual at that particular time.

My two labours started off exactly the same way, but they could not have ended more differently and I believe the cascade of intervention I had the first time around coud have easily been avoided if I had taken more control and trusted my body. I panicked when I went into labour, allowed the hospital staff to get me lying on a bed with entenox and quickly found I wasn't coping, had an epidural, my contractions stopped and I then had a totally medically managed birth from there on which traumatised me to the core and ended in a hemorrhage which the hospital staff told me they thought had been caused by all the drugs I had. The second time I was determined not to have a repeat experience and I stayed upright and learned to deal with the contractions by myself. It was a positive experience and could not have ended more differently.

I have a problem with the following in a hospital setting;

-everything monitored by the clock

-ARM

-routine examination

-being stuck in a cramped room (the labour rooms in my hospital are very small)

-feeling that you are in a place which is not your own and that you therefore have to comply with a system that is bureaucratic in nature, and will not necessarily benefit you as an individual.

-midwives working shifts so that you end up seeing 2, 3 or 4+. I have a scar now because midwives changed shifts literally halfway through when one was putting a line into my arm.

I know that there are times when intervention is required and completely necessary, but I also know that often, in an overworked and understaffed hospital setting the overriding concern is getting you onto the post natal ward as quickly as possible.

sachertorte · 08/03/2009 10:13

My impression is that some doctors will take the easy and fastest way out.. deliver via cs in 30 mins or faff around for hours or days waiting for a woman to give birth naturally when pressure on beds is intense...

Induce a baby, which is likely to lead to many interventions and/or, rather than wait and take the risk of an overcooked baby.

The jury is out of lots of procedures. Some doctors I know swear an epis. is the way forward with all women, others that it should NOT be routinely used.

Birthing is not a clear cut thing and medical staff do not always have the mother´s best interests at heart imo. Sad but true.

I agree though that healthy mum and baby is ultimately what every one wants and we are incredibly lucky in the west to survive pregnancy and childbirth when so many women in poorer countries do not.

mrsturnip · 08/03/2009 10:16

I've had 3 c-sections. The last one with a partial rupture and a bit of a mess (trial of VBA2C).

My view is the road to 3 c-sections started with the decision (almost certainly unnecessary) to induce ds1 at 40 weeks.

Of course interventions can be lifesaving, but they're not necessarily going to be cost free.

sachertorte · 08/03/2009 10:41

a case in point.. some doctors believe that you should wait till 42 weeks to be induced.. were you carefully monitored to ensure induction was in the baby´s interests or was 4o weeks selected as a random date?

Olissa · 08/03/2009 11:32

Thanks Northern... I'm sure I will have another baby, just not yet

I've had struggles with some people who seem to think (although they phrased it more tactfully than this!) that I might be to blame for waiting. I had expectant management, two extra scans, monitoring every second day which was due to go to daily on the day she was born, and as mentioned continuous monitoring during labour.

Aside from having had a previous section, I was a normal, fairly low-risk mum, and as they didn't find anything wrong with my DD, that's how I'll continue to think of myself.

Cases like Lou's are different - there are obvious risks to the baby if you do refuse. But I think there are a lot of cases where things like induction are pushed for no good reason. (Good luck with DC3 btw Lou!)

Electra, I couldn't agree more with the clock watching comment and if I do have another baby I'll be making someone take the clock off the wall! At least then I can't focus on the clock. The MWs will just have to look at their watches.

My two labours were also scarily similar (OP babies, not engaged at onset of labour - got to 6cm pretty quick both times and then it was SLOOOOOW!) I just seem to have had more patient midwives and doctors the second time around...

frasersmummy · 08/03/2009 12:09

Olissa I am really sorry to hear of the loss of Catie

You are in no way to blame for what happened- you did everything you could for your dd. Sadly I know from personal experience that all the monitoring in the world is sometimes just not enough

If you feel like a gab to other mummies who have suffered this awful loss then please pop accross and join us here

bereaved mummies having a chat

sorry will let you get back to your discussion ladies

lou031205 · 08/03/2009 13:30

Thank you Olissa. Sad to hear of your loss

electra · 08/03/2009 13:54

Olissa - so sorry to hear about the loss of your little girl

birthjoy · 08/03/2009 22:33

Olissa I sadly know of many mums who's babies have died and most often a cause is never found. as someone said at the start of this thread this is nature, in all it's imperfection.
we are not yet clever enough to prevent these tragedies even with improvements in medical science. I'm sure thats why the medical establishment suggest interventions. It is painful for health professionals too to deal with these sad situations so we try to prevent them.
homebirth is cheaper for the NHS but it is not under the medic's control so the fear creeps in. doctors seem to think by being proactive they can prevent tragedy and this is not borne out in research.
According to the World Health Organization, "Countries with some of the lowest perinatal mortality rates in the world have caesarean rates of less than 10%. There is no justification for any region to have a rate higher than 10-15%." so the extra 15% don't save lives and may have serious consequences for the mother.
I am not against intervention. My life and that of DD1 were saved by very necessary caesarean. DS2 was an easy VBAC and I know what I prefer on the pain scale and healing frount. Natural birth rules!

piscesmoon · 08/03/2009 22:42

I have been lucky and have had natural births, but I like to be ready in hospital, in case anything goes wrong. I admire women who go for home births and want to manage it their way but it is not for me.

TinkerBellesMumandFiFi2 · 08/03/2009 22:59

I have had three daughters.

My first was bit of a shock at 20 weeks. Completely natural, not even a MW in the room at the time (she was looking for an anaethatist for pain relief for me, although I hadn't asked for it). It wasn't that bad really (don't be fooled into thinking that smaller babies are less work or pain, it's often the opposite because there's less for the body to work with) and the hormones afterwards helped me to bond with my daughter in the three hours I had with her and to deal with her death.

My second daughter was also a shock at 31 weeks. I was 2cm, she was breech and coming fast. I was given an hour to respond to drugs but instead I had already delivered a foot. I was given a crash section with a GA. I praise the hospital for their quick action (the doctor had lined up a theatre in case he needed to pull me in) but it left me with birth trauma and unable to deliver naturally ever again.

My third daughter wasn't so much a shock at 35 weeks as she had spent the last 11 weeks trying to escape! I had to go into full labour before they would take me for an emergency section. The section wasn't life saving for her, just her older sister.

I would never say never as far as intervention is concerned but they are given far more often than they need to be, the statistics are proving this and I feel that we need to see those numbers lowered. Intervention may save lives but it can also take them.

I highly recommend you watch a film called "The Business of Being Born". It's a documentary by Ricky Lake into birth in America and it is very shocking and sad what is going on over there but it also says a lot that applies to any intervention birth.

TinkerBellesMumandFiFi2 · 08/03/2009 23:03

Also, my sister was born at 44 (forty-four) weeks, regular scans as Mum had previa from the start and was kept in all the way through so they knew her dates were right. My sister wasn't huge considering her gestational age, she was ready to be born. I do think that a lot of induction of postmature babies are done out of fear when they may just not be ready to be born.

greenwithyellowspots · 09/03/2009 13:46

Hi everybody, not been logged on for a couple of days so only just caught up with the messages. Blu, I'm a reasonably intelligent woman, I think! And no, it's not so hard to understand that other intelligent (or otherwise for that matter!) women can be in favour of birth as a natural process when possible and science in other cases. I was just finding it hard to understand what I considered to be quite a cynical view of the medical profession here overall and I'm really glad to say that thanks to everyone's responses, I think I do understand that better now. For me a particularly interesting point that I should probably have thought of myself is that past deaths in childbirth were often due to infection. I guess there's no 'perfect' system/approach, on a national scale at least.

OP posts:
birthright · 09/03/2009 13:50

I agree tinkerbellesmumandfifi2 i have a copy of the business of being born and think it illustrates the point of unnecessary intervention really well.
also my younger sister was born at home at 44 weeks gestation to my 5ft 2 mum, and weighed 11 1/2lbs. I'm glad the longest I carried was 42 weeks

electra · 09/03/2009 13:51

'It is painful for health professionals too to deal with these sad situations so we try to prevent them.
homebirth is cheaper for the NHS but it is not under the medic's control so the fear creeps in. doctors seem to think by being proactive they can prevent tragedy and this is not borne out in research.'

This is a good point, and really, not one that I had considered.

charleymouse · 10/03/2009 13:50

Funnily enough I read this this morning then popped in here and saw this thread. I am sorry to whoever the excerpt below belongs to as I can not find the reference but really think it rings true.

FYI I had a completely natural home birth first time round and a highly medicalised birth ending in emergency CS second time round. I second the view that intervention when necessary is appropriate but when not necessary is appalling. I was told after my first birth by my MW that if I had been in hospital I would have had interventions as my labour was not on schedule. I did not meet the targets of so many minutes/hours for the different stages, but as I was progressing, albeit slowly, there was no issue. As I was at home I was exempt from the hospital targets. This appalls me that I would have had interventions if in hospital just to meet targets.

Olissa so sorry for the loss of Caitlin, hopefully I will catch up with you on the other thread.

Here goes:

Imagine if you will, that about a hundred years ago, people began having great difficulties having bowel movements (BM for short). It all came about because of some very unhealthy lifestyles. People weren't eating correctly because they were desperately trying to be thin and beautiful. They had malnutrition and took a lot of pills and other drugs to help them become and stay thin. People were so concerned with looking good that they put their health aside to get there.

As a result of this lifestyle, many people had a terrible time having BMs. Some people even died. Something had to be done to save these folks. So instead of changing their lifestyles, people flocked to the doctors to have their problem fixed. The problem became so prevalent that people became fearful of having BMs. Everyone dreaded going to the bathroom because of all the horror stories of pain and death. This normal, natural bodily function was labelled dangerous and hazardous and needed to be monitored and controlled to save lives.

Over time, it became the "norm" to go the hospital whenever someone had to have a BM so that doctors could monitor the process and intervene if they needed to. This continued through the years and is still practiced today. An onslaught of new life-saving technology and machinery was invented for us in aiding people to have a BM. It has become such a common practice to go to the hospital to have a BM that people have become uninformed. They don't trust their own bodies to have a BM on their own. People are scared to have a BM that having one anywhere besides a hospital is considered irresponsible, dangerous and risky. Even though the old, unhealthy lifestyles, which caused the problem in the first place are no longer practiced, having BMs is no longer considered a normal event. Even the healthiest of people go to the hospital to have BMs out of fear that something might happen. The go "just in case".

So, you have to have a BM and even though you are a healthy man and having a BM is a normal, natural physiological function that your body was designed to do, we go to the hospital. We grab the hospital bag and head out the door in a hurry. During the car ride you get very tense because the cramps are coming on strong and you can't get comfortable. You try breathing through them but this only helps a little with all the stop and go traffic and bumps in the road. Not to mention that you just wish you could be at home and have privacy. Upon arrival at the hospital, you are wheeled up to a room and instructed to put on a gown with nothing else on (it has a large opening in the back which will show you rear end if you get up and walk anywhere). You are told to lie down so that a nurse can examine you. Then a strange female nurse comes in and explains that she is going to have to insert 2 fingers into your rectum to check the progress of your feces. You obviously feel humiliated because someone you don't know has just touched a very private and personal part of you.

Then the nurse straps a monitor to your belly to measure the severity of your cramps and stick an iv in your arm. This is very distracting and makes the pain of the cramps even worse. Soon, your cramps become stronger and you are getting very uncomfortable. At this point, the nurses change shifts and new nurse comes in. She says she needs to check you again since it's been awhile and you don't seem to be making any progress. She inserts 2 fingers again and shakes her head from side-to-side and gives you a very disapproving look. You have not made any progress. You want to try so badly to relax so you can make progress but with the iv, the strangers, the fingers in your rectum and the negative attitudes of the staff, there are just too many distractions and you can't. By now your cramps are very painful and it takes all you've got to just stay on top of them.

The hospital team decides to insert a wire up your anus to determine if, indeed, your cramps are as bad as you say they are. They again insert 2 fingers to check the dilation and faecal decent. They tell you that if you don't make any progress in the next 30 minutes, they may have to cut the faeces out. This causes you to be even more tense and you have a hard time trying to relax just knowing what may happen if you can't push it out yourself. After another hour of laying in bed, the female doctor comes in and does yet another exam with 2 fingers because she says she wants to be sure the nurses were doing it right. She feels it is time for you to begin to push. So you are in bed, flat on your back with your feet up in stirrups trying to have a BM and pushing with all your might while the strange nurse and a doctor intently watch your anus. The faeces are not coming down fast enough so the doctor decides that your anus must not be big enough for the feces to pass through so they make a large cut in your anus to make it bigger. They also need to use a vacuum extractor to help pull the faeces out.

You finally manage (with the help of a large cut and vacuum) to push the faeces out. You are in a lot of pain, you're bleeding, exhausted, spent and humiliated. You feel like something in your body is broken and didn't work correctly. This must be true since you needed all this help for a normally natural bodily function right? The nurse then pushes on your abdomen to make sure all of the faeces has been expelled. This is VERY painful but thankfully you were in a hospital or else something bad might have happened. Someone stitches you up and are given instructions on how to aid your healing.

So, you made it through. You're alive and that's what really matters right? Is it though? What about your pain? What about the humiliation? What about the violation of privacy? What about the anger you feel towards the whole damn thing because your experience could have been completely normal and uncomplicated at home?

Now, this scenario is absolutely and utterly ridiculous right? It seems absurd to go to the hospital for something that could have easily, and much less painlessly, been done at home. The same is true of birth. This scenario is exactly what happened to birth (the "unhealthy" habits were obviously a bit different) and many women are suffering, needlessly, as a result. I can attest to the fact that this scenario is VERY common in hospitals today?I have even experienced it with my own hospital birth.

People have been raised to fear birth and to think that it needs the medical community to make it happen. Birth interventions have become so common that people accept them, and every side effect that comes with them, as necessary for a good outcome. And most don't believe it when someone tells them that it can be so much better if those things weren't done routinely.
A healthy, informed woman who is knowledgeable in birth had just as slim a chance of dying in birth as someone does while having a BM. All you need to have a safe birth is to be informed and to listen to your instincts (something that is very difficult to do with people watching you? just like it is difficult to have a BM with people watching you!). Birth is safe and simple. Just like having a BM is safe and simple. I need as much assistance while birthing our children as you do while having a bowel movement!

electra · 10/03/2009 13:57

I am reading 'Childbirth Without Fear', in the hope that this time I will be able to have a positive experience.

The last time I gave birth I did not have intervention, but I was still very frightened, definitely not relaxed and the midwife said she could tell that I was subconsciously trying to keep the baby in. So there is definitely room for improvement, WRT how I approach the whole thing when I go into labour.

PrettyCandles · 10/03/2009 14:24

As medical science advanced over the years, and interventions were found that saved lives, the interventions became the norm. Whereas birth was once a normal women's activity, supported by midwives experienced women, it gradually became a medicalised activity, controlled by men - because once virtually all doctors were men - who saw their authority as paramount.

Midwifery was once an art, as medical practice also was hundreds of years ago. But in the last couple of centuries, as medicine became a science the practitioners became ever more and more authoritative and controling, and people began to give up authority over their bodies to the doctors.

In reclaiming our bodies and our rights to our bodies, we have relearned that not all interventions are necessary, and that one intervention may well lead to another. Interventions when necessary save lives, and many women are perfectly happy to have had a medicalised birth. But they should not be the norm.

With my first dc I had a medicalised birth, which caused me lasting damage and a lot of distress. Over the years (and another birth) I learned to trust myself and my ability to give birth. My third birth was completely natural and hands-off. Because I followed my instincts and did not accept the consultant's seriously negative attitude to my ability to birth this child unassisted and unmonitored, the birth of my 11lb baby was the easiest and gentlest of my three birthings. A world apart from my first, and a glimpse of how I might have done had I been supported in a way which accommodated my needs rather than the medical establishment's protocols.

electra · 10/03/2009 14:55

PrettyCandles - so eloquently put. I couldn't agree more This is why I want to have a home birth so much.

salome64 · 10/03/2009 15:11

When pregnant with dd, my only birth plan was an epidural. a modest little request. Was surrounded by lovely girls all planning natural births, no intervention etc. In the end I got induced (hideous) and but ended up the only one not to have pain relief, emergency c-sections etc! I really did not enjoy my birth experience, but maybe we concentrate a bit too much on it. we are so privileged. I wish I had had a better time of it, but hey, got a healthy baby in the end. And really, birth is just the first, tiniest part of being a parent.

birthright · 10/03/2009 15:15

Charleymouse i really enjoyed that. I've read similar comparing it to making love but this is funnier. you really need the privacy and feeling of safety for the right hormones to flow in labour. labour is stopped by fear which is why more and more women are choosing to give birth in the safety of their own home supported by people who love them.

Prettycandles absolutely. women's bodies know how to give birth but our heads sometimes need reminding of this. reclaiming our bodies and owning the responsibility that comes with that is really where it's at.

electra have you got a strong-minded female birth supporter (someone who's given birth herself is ideal) if not a doula or Independent Midwife may be the way to go.

wasabipeanut · 10/03/2009 15:31

I haven't read the whole thread but in answer to the OP I would agree with others that most posters in the childbirth forum are against unnecesssary intervention for very clearly stated reasons.

In my case an induction that was necessary in the opinion of the NHS because my waters had started to leak led directly to a c-section via an epidural because I couldn't cope with the pain with G&A and breathing.

I've just finished hypnotherapy and EFT to help me get rid of the birth trauma which I had been carrying around, along with vast amounts of anger and guilt for a year and half.

Unnecessary intervention can have pretty severe consequences.

electra · 10/03/2009 18:22

'And really, birth is just the first, tiniest part of being a parent.'

I'm afraid that for me, this wasn't the case at all . My first experience of childbirth left me with physical and emotional scaring. Some people can move on from trauma more easily than others.

lou031205 · 10/03/2009 18:25

I'm really sorry, but 'trusting your body to be able to give birth' is only applauded after a successful birth. The woman who 'trusts her body to be able to give birth' and ends up with severe compromise of her health, or that of the baby, will have regretted that decision.

I had two inductions, both for IUGR. No-one can tell if left alone my babies would still have come out well, because I 'pulled the plug' both times as soon as I was aware of the complications. I may well have laboured spontaneously, with good outcomes if left alone. Instead, I was induced, and fortunate enough to have smooth, successful inductions with only gas & air and TENS, and pethidine.

Intervention is something that saves lives, and I am grateful for it. Who knows whether you would cope with natural labour if you didn't cope with an induced labour? No one can tell you. I think that intervention gets blamed for a lot of things which may have happened anyway.