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.

Natural Birth? You can do it!

191 replies

boogs · 12/05/2003 14:42

My sisters' due in two days and it's got me thinking about my labour with dd. OK I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet here, I just want to pass on some info and knowledge I think all women should be aware of. Talking to friends/family who've had babies, it seems that alot of them get caught up in all the 'labour aid' possibilities. There's so much these days that can help us in labour, epidurals, gas'n'air, pethidine, etc, etc, that it's almost seen as inevitable to 'take' something during labour.
After having dd, and relaying my birth story I found that people were almost suprised that I didn't take any drugs, in any form, like 'how did she do it?' During the first stage I was at home, on a lovely shagpile rug on the floor, propped up against the bed. Dh gave me honey and hot water to keep me going cause I was there for a few hours. Each time a contraction came I got up on my knees and leant forward on the bed and got my lower back rubbed by dh. i was like this for hours, and I was really comfortable, and the pain was only bad when the contractions peaked. But when they died down, it was almost pleasurable. When I got to the hospital I was 9cm, and two hours later she was born. I was only pushing for 25 minutes. The crowning was really painful, like fire, but I didn't tear thank god!
I've heard so many scare stories about women who've had an epidural early on, which has lead to other forms of 'painkillers' and ended up having c/s, because they were so drugged up and numbed that they had no strength to finish.
My point is that a natural birth is attainable for any woman, even if you have a low pain threshold. Labour is painful no matter what, and I reckon it's better to feel the pain and control it than to have some drugs control it for you.
'New Active Birth' by Janet Balaskas is a brilliant book that helped me achieve childbirth without intervention and drugs which sometimes make things harder than they have to be.
It makes me feel sad that so many women opt for ceasarians without even trying to do it naturally which is better for mother and child. I'm not putting anyone down for any intervention they decide to take on, of course it's each woman's choice but I think more women should have faith and confidence in their natural ability to give birth.
Raspberry leaf tea, perenial massage, yoga, deep breathing, back massage, upright positions (instead of lying back on the bed in a pasive position) are all natural ways of controlling the pain of labour.
I hope this doesn't sound like a lecture, but I know I've given my sister confidence to try it naturally, and wanted to give anyone who's in doubt or scared some encouragement and advice.
Good luck to everyone who's expecting, and just trust in yourself!

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
morocco · 14/05/2003 20:26

sorry - meant ds obviously!!

nobby · 14/05/2003 20:38

Pupuce

I, too, have had communications with Michel Odent for work and I have to say that at all times (and I KNOW he's done lots of wonderful work) he came across as mad as a hatter. I'm afraid that quote didn't convince me otherwise.

Sorry if this is blasphemy to some.

ks · 14/05/2003 21:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Rhubarb · 14/05/2003 22:10

Pupuce, that just makes people like me, who were practically forced to have an epidural, feel even guiltier! As I said before, there is nothing you can do right as a mother, from birth control during labour, to discipline! Everyone has their own opinions, but reminding people of how damaging an epidural can be surely just upsets mothers like me who had them? We can't change the past sadly. Although I have to say that neither me nor my dd suffered any kind of side-effects due to the epidural.

bubbly · 14/05/2003 22:52

to go back to something Jude said about induction andlength of term all my babes were 42 weeks and the last was 43. I had 2 and 3 at home but I was bullied by the hospital consultant and told I was endangering my childs life as I refused induction on the grounds that I wanted the baby at home. The midwives supported me> I asked for a risk comparison on induction leading to intervention leading to c-section and the threat that that might pose to my child versus the risk of going to 43 weeks and having a home birth. No one could give me one.

However I have to say I tried Raspberry leaf tea homeopathy curry castor oil and champagne as alternative and often unpleasant methods of home start. None of which worked . I can also say that a posterior birth is the most painful thing I have ever had to endure in my life,.Long and painful. I was deeply distressed and in shock for a long time after and very very glad that I was in my house with my family looking after me and loving me. I still spontaneously shake now if i think abut it in too much detail. Thus the poor typing

pupuce · 15/05/2003 09:51

I did hesitate to post the M. Odent quote because I knew some people would not like it. We are all entitled to our opinion... M. Odent is also regularely published in the BMJ and Lancet so he must not always seen to be mad
He is regularely invited to be a speaker at proper medical conventions.... still now at 73. And regardeless of his views he is still a scientist and - believe me - will only use proper scientific data. So for ex. he will refuse to draw conclusions from studies which are note from controlled randomized studies.

I am afraid we've been through the "made me feel guilty" debate several times recently. I am sorry if you feel this way but it's like for women who say the BF brigade make them feel guilty for bottle feeding.... so should society say... breast is not best? Pain relief in chilbirth is better for baby and mother....in neither case this is the true BUT that does not mean that you are a 2nd rate woman/mother for bottle feeding or having an epidural.... we all make decisions based on many things which are not simply "what's best physiologically" but also waht is best "psychologically".

KS you asked what I meant by :
There are complex connections between birth physiology and the physiology of lactation.

M. Odent said that, I didn't and while it isn't my statement.... here is what I believe he means....
It is the oxytocyn release which helps lactation (releases prolactin) so for example when one has an elective cesarean the mother does not produce natural oxytocyn (which is the hormone you release when you contract).
Also when you have analgesia again you do not produce natural endorphins. These endorphins are an opiate. They have now demonstarted that elective cesarean mothers do not have that opiate in the colostrum which would explain why their babies (generally) are not as hooked on the breast milk as others and tend to bf for not as many weeks. This was demonstrated a few years ago and published. I am about to go out so I can't search the web for the study... but it's an Itlaian study if you want to search.

aloha · 15/05/2003 10:50

But we are totally different to animals. We have very different brains, and our bonding with our babies is very different because of that IMO (and because of my scientific reading about maternal instinct). We relate entirely differently to our babies than bucks do. I just don't believe these animal studies are relevant to humans and their offspring. Anyway, human women give birth every single day in their millions, why on earth is Odent relying on animal-based studies? Not enough human case studies???
Yes, I know that individual cases do not prove a general point, BUT my friend who had two chosen c-sections b-fed both her babies from the first minute and has just finished feeding her second child who is over two. All my friends who had c-s b-fed their babies successfully. I b/f my own son until 13months. I would be interested if you could find one single study (as I have been unable to) that shows that women who choose c/s for non-medical reasons are different in their b/feeding patterns to the general population. The problem with c/s & b/feeding stats is that the vast, vast, vast majority of women who have a c-s, and that obviously includes electives, do so because there is a problem with the baby or the mother - pre-eclampsia, placenta praevia, multiple births, small babies, babies with neural tube defects, baby in distress etc etc. I think it is highly likely that babies in these circumstances would be more likely to have b/f difficulties through ill, weak having to be tube fed or due to the mother being ill or exhausted. I have not seen any studies that take this into consideration, and believe me, I have looked, as I am very interested in the politics of birth. I am not 'against' natural birth. I am not against choice in this matter. But I also have found no studies showing any long-term ill effects of c/s birth on babies. Indeed some studies show that c/s babies feel pain less intensely and are easier to settle. Not the case with my bubba, but, as I said, individual cases don't prove anything scientifically!

aloha · 15/05/2003 10:52

BTW, I don't feel guilty a bit! And I gave my son solids at 4 and a bit months, and don't even feel guilty about that, just a bit stupid for caving in under MIL pressure (and the hope it might make him sleep longer, which it didn't).

Croak · 15/05/2003 11:16

Think I should start teaching ds (six months but he's obviously dead clever) italian so he can read that he's not supposed to be addicted to my milk and can therefore stop waking up every two hours at night for a hit! Sorry to be so chippy - it must be sleep deprivation - I think this thread is absolutely fascinating.

wiltshirelass · 15/05/2003 11:41

I must say, with all respect to Michel Odent, having to use the example of 60 birthing Kaffir bucks to try and scientifically prove your point about human childbirth seems to do the entire opposite. ie he could get no data from human births (or hell, even closely related mammals like chimpanzees or monkeys) to back up his claims.
Do you think he disqualified certain of the birthing Kaffir bucks based on circumstances like you would do in a normal randomised trial - eg "were you seriously abused by a child which may impair your ability to bond with your buck-let? yes? sorry, can't use you in the trial even if you fancy a whiff of ether". Do you think the fact that he anaesthetised wild animals (must have been fairly traumatic for them) without fully explaining the risks and getting an informed consent, may have affected their view of birth and adversely affected their bonding with the baby bucks? What the hell is a Kaffir buck anyway?

Sorry, slightly tongue in cheek response (can't get away from those years of legal training), but I think some valid points here perhaps?!!

wiltshirelass · 15/05/2003 11:42

obviously that should be "abused as a child" and not "abused by a child", although I suppose if a baby bick-let had given them a really hard time in the past they might not be too interested in developing a relationship with a new one.....!!!!

boogs · 15/05/2003 11:57

Wiltshirslass, what's being abused as a child got to do with child birh? Isn't every childhood experience part of who we are? I'm puzzled by this!

OP posts:
wiltshirelass · 15/05/2003 12:11

Absolutely nothing. Well about as much as wild animals responses to ether has to do with human beings abilities to breastfeed!
Just saying that if this was a scientifically randomised trial of mothers ability to bond post drug-managed childbirth, various questions would have been asked of the participants to see whether any failure to bond could have any explanation other than the use of those drugs. I presume those questions were not asked of the animals!

boogs · 15/05/2003 12:12

OK, I get it, you were just using that as an eg., sorry!
I agree that using animals is a bit dodgy, because we can't communicate with them, so don't know what they're really feeling. In humans, I think childbirth is about science, but also has alot to do with our emotions, and our general outlook on life.

PS, dsis hasn't gone into labour yet, to those who are interested. Still waiting!

PPS, I have grown to love this thread! I wonder if I can print it up for future reference!

OP posts:
SoupDragon · 15/05/2003 12:15

I remember watching a giraffe give birth on TV once - it seemed to walk about with baby giraffe feet sticking out of its nether regions for quite some time! Made my eyes water.

Sorry, a bit off topic there but it just sprang to mind when thinking about how easily animals give birth compared to us poor humans. I'll go now...

aloha · 15/05/2003 12:19

I wonder if there is any evidence of damage to bonding in women who were forced to have an unmedicated birth against their will? Going through something you have chosen is quite different to enduring something you really don't want to happen to your body. Unplanned babies are b/f less often than planned ones (though of course, this is all statistics and the vast majority of unplanned babies are adored) so maybe it is the element of lack of choice that is the problem not the drugs/cs or whatever. I know that there are women on this site still struggling with the physical and emotional after effects of natural birth - some of whom sound like they had Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. That can't help bonding, surely?

aloha · 15/05/2003 12:22

Yes, as I understand it, we are not designed that well for birth as our offspring have huge heads for our massive brains (comparatively) and we have narrower pelvises for standing upright. If we were still on all fours with smaller brains birth would be a lot easier and less painful, but there has been a compromise in evolutionary terms which has made us clever and upright, but not so good at reproducing. Compare the shape of a baby sheeps had with a baby human's head - one seems a lot more 'tunnel-friendly' than the other!

lisalisa · 15/05/2003 12:44

Message withdrawn

SoupDragon · 15/05/2003 12:46

Aloha - I heard that's why human babies are so dependent on their mothers for so long. If they were born with their brains fully developed, we'd never get them out!

ks · 15/05/2003 13:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

ks · 15/05/2003 13:39

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Rhubarb · 15/05/2003 14:55

Before hospital intervention and pain-relief, the death rates for mothers and babies during birth were much higher. So whilst we can all agree that in an ideal world a mother should be allowed to give birth naturally and without intervention, it is not always that simple. It is easy to say that many sections are not necessary and that women over-dramatise when they say that the surgeon saved theirs and their baby's lives. But the fact is that no doubt lots of women's and babies lives are being saved during childbirth. These days it is very rare for a mother to die in this way, but go back 100 years and it wasn't, go back 200 years and it was fairly common!

I do think that women should be encouraged to have natural births wherever possible, but ultimately it should be the woman's decision to make.

And as for feeling guilty, yes there are breastfeeding organisations out there who will make you feel a failure for choosing the bottle, I remember a nasty incident with a friend and La Leche. You're also frowned upon if you start weaning early. In my first experience as a mum, I found people were very unwilling to give me constructive advice such as when to start solids, when to put the baby to bed, when to wean off the breast, but as soon as I made a decision about something, they were practically queuing up to tell me how I should have done it. There is so much conflicting advice around about what is best for both mother and baby, that you are bound to get it wrong somewhere. And when you are a first-time mother you are very vulnerable to people's criticisms.

For example Pupuce, I am sure there are many other Doctors out there who disagree with Michel Odent and can back their arguments up with just as many observations and impressive looking statistics - how are we supposed to know who is right and who is wrong? And what the hell does it matter anyway?

Rhubarb · 15/05/2003 14:57

KS - that is funny! It took me a whole week to learn how to latch dd onto the nipple! She just wouldn't open her mouth wide enough! I would say that if it wasn't for the help and support I got from the midwives in latching her on at every feed, I would have given up straight away!

florenceuk · 15/05/2003 20:37

The point is, humans aren't like ducks (or sheep). The bond between parent and child is much more complicated - a mixture of chemistry and psychology maybe? - but as the anecdotes here indicate, certainly not dependent on immediate skin-to-skin contact post-birth. I recommend "Mother Nature" by Sarah Hrdy - really worth reading!

pupuce · 15/05/2003 20:58

I knew I'd regret posting

This debate is the same as the BF debate.... you can never win... you will always upset some... make some feel guilty, etc

The point I was trying to make is that as an individual you make the choices you make from the information and the beliefs you have... As a society we notice things that change or stats like cesarean babies have a lower rate of succes at breastfeeding ... and I also have friends who have had sections and BF very long as well as vaginally delivered baby who never BF.

For those of you interested here are some studies you can look into (all abstracts).... it is NOT intended to make anyone feel guilty... (sorry I can't do links!)
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8842644&dopt=Abstract

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2378525&dopt=Abstract

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2363774&dopt=Abstract

Aloha, you say : "But we are totally different to animals. We have very different brains, and our bonding with our babies is very different because of that" - I totally agree and so does Michel Odent... he goes on and on about the activity of our neo-coprtex which animals do not have and which help us bond and which also make our labours harder....

Rhubarb - Let's not talk individuals but society... And of course Michel Odent will have a different opinion from another Dr who will himself have a different opinion to another Dr....

More generally I do wonder why in some countries we have a MUCH lower rate of epidural, cesarean section,... and others where it is much higher (and even hospitals WITHIN 1 county have very different results!)....

There are studies that links c-sections with health problems... but if you need a section, you need a section.... there isn't two ways about it! And it's not because your child was born healthy that it proves that there are no issue with cesareans ! You can also have a poorly child born vaginally.
Also I do not think that forcing a woman to deliver vaginally if she wants a section is anybody's business.

Anyway... I thought this nice thread was about discussing natural childbirth.... maybe I should stay out of this one