Unassisted Birth Rights

[Nataliejayne85]

Hi!
I was wondering if anyone could direct me to what my rights are to have an unassisted birth in reality.
I met a nurse yesterday who very bluntly said it was illegal to which I informed her it wasn't!
I am not very far along and I am already being wound up by the medical profession, I don't mind being given the information but I feel that I am being bullied which is why I am relucent to have even midwife present (though may consider if funds allow an indepentant midwife but as I don't want to be checked, I don't want to be causing trouble for a midwife RE her legal responsibilties and requirements). Also having experienced bad medical practice in the past I know saying NO doesn't mean NO to everyone and I do not want to be worrying about people not listening to me.
Also can I have other people in the house at the time of the birth or will they be held responsible if something went wrong, even if I refused their help?
Also anyone know any good legal people to draw up paperwork re unassisted birth if applicable?

Thanks

Chelles girl I can't believe you are still here quoting research at people and scaring the life out of firstimers. Seriously, this can't be fun for you, it seems like a fixation. You sound as though you need some help to get over your birth and move on, have you thought about that?
Anyway, here's what I think about natural birth, having had two very "easy" (but excruciating of course) natural births with no intervention or pain relief at all. I really think that if you want that, you have to be in good shape, fit and healthy, able to walk, run and jump. So many women today have no cardiovascular fitness and zip-all muscle tone.
Labour is very physical and effortful, I am sure it went better for women "back in the day" and even today in the developing world to freebirth because those guys are/were slim, fit, used to making a physical effort and enduring discomfort and pain. Yes pain, of course it hurts, look what is supposed to come out of where and go figure.
OP, if you have any sense, you'll have buggered off long ago, but that's what I think. Go out for some brisk walks, do your pelvic floor stuff and don't pile on seven stone during your pregnancy. That way your birth is much more likely to be reasonably OK. If you are fit and strong, you can have an intervention-free birth because there won't be any problems to make everyone crowd round and start fussing you, will there?
Though as I and everyone here with a brain has said repeatedly, you ought to have someone there who knows what they are doing, JUST IN CASE.

If you feel very strongly that you want to birth without a medical professional present...copy me and ask your midwives to wait in another room while you give birth, that way they are there in case of emergency but aren't in your face...

I have panic attacks when midwives are around me due to DD1's birth, so this worked beautifully for me!

tricky im scaring people??? wow... so 'but excrutiating of course' would not scare a first time mum??? Thats the one main thing that scares women, is that they think its going to be painful, and youve just reinforced it.
My labour and birth were pain free, like you, without meds.

I totally agree about the health aspect, if your not fit and healthy you may come across problems. The comment about 'third world' people being fit??? I thought third world women were starved, most suffering from AIDS, with very little or no medical care? As others have stated, they have women in their communities that help them through the birth. Here in UK, it illegal for anyone to 'help' you through birth other than of a midwife...but then someones DH/sister/mum probably have never helped deliver a baby before.

labour is not painful simply becuase a woman thinks it is going to be

it is painful as the uterus powefully contracts, pretending it is pain free fro the makjority of women is damaging.. the body has a lot of hard work to to, and thta involves pain on some level

it will hurt, i tell my clients it hurts, an we work out ways to cope with the pain. there is no failure in taking pain meds. there is no failure in finding it painful and in struggling to cope

several years on now from my births, i can look back and say that they werent the most painful thing i have experienced.. but at the time, i would not have thanked anyone for trying to tell me it was hurting because i though it wuold hurt

t

Lulu I think you have just totally misunderstood me

One thing that scares women about going into labour and having to give birth to a baby is the pain they will go through.

Im sorry but I think you will find that there are many mums out there who havent experienced pain in the labour or birth.

WHy do you have to try and argue with everything I say? You twisted my words.

I find this article very interseting

if i have misunderstood you, it is hardly the same as twisting your words

you and i have the same goal.. women being supported, nurtured and cared for in labour by respectful caregivers, using minimal pain relief and intervention

but i find that a lot of what you post and reserach you link to at odds with that

i am not arguing with you , we are having a debate/argument

i am not twisting your words, perhaps you need to look at how you ocmmunicate, if i am misunderstanding

other posters have picked up on the way you interpret research and the manner in which you post, maybe the issue lies with how you are saying thigns?

you said
'Thats the one main thing that scares women, is that they think its going to be painful, and youve just reinforced it."

yes it is going to be painful, i fully accept some women experience little / no pain, some women eevn have orgasmic birth, but let's not pretend that is the norm

most women will experience a level of pain, and that needs addressing before hand in education about pain relief options, place of birth options, IM or NHS midwife, doula or not... and so on

it is nmot about reinforcing the notion of pain, but being realisitc, which i find to be far more helpful than aiming for a pain free birth without drugs

as i have said before, i applaud your passion and drive, but i am not picking on you, it is interesting tah we have similar goals in this arena, but seem to be at odds.

should have said

i am not arguing with you , we are having a debate/argument about a topic, it is not just arguing for the sake of it. but exchanging our different viewpoints

surely you odon't expect everyone to always agree with you?

no I dont expect everyone to agree with me.

my main point is that: I feel that many people really think that even though people realise birth is a natural process, they want to try 'tame' it or 'not go through it', which in my opinion has only been reinforced by people like HCP's who say 'medicalisation' is better and safer...we know its not safer for healthy women, it saves lives of babies who arent as healthy as others, gives mums protection from complications...the debate is secured in the fact that 'natural birth' is the best for low risk mothers and thier babies, intervention is safer for mothers and babies at risk...quite a few women that are healthy think that intervention is okay for them, that it wont hurt them or thier babies...and I think its all to do with the way socity is changing..such as the way in which we 'discipline our children' the way in which we promote stick thin models, how we let porn be a massive part of society, how technology practically over rides everything nowadays...why do most people think that these are a good things??? It boggles my mind.

the point is also that a woman might know lots about birth, and be educated and aware, and decide she wants an epidural or a c.section

and that is hr choice. and must be respected. if that is a choice borne out of fear, then the correct resopnse is to address that fear, but at the end of it she migh still want the epidural or c.section

not everyone has a burning desire to expeirnce a natural birth

technology has made huge strides in advancing medicine and that has made a huge difference to birth outcomes.

the flipside is, like you say, is the unecessary intervention because the machine indicates their might be a potential problem, medcinie generally seems to be practiced more defensively , hence more cautious interepretation of a ctg or doppler.

some women feel totally comforted by the technologyu and want to emrbace it, others don't

but it does not mean teh woman opting for a medicalised birth is somewhow less worthy, which is a tone that seems to creep through from your posts.

the soceity we live in has changed our expectations and we are consumers, who want a choice and guaranteeed outcomes, that is hard to extrapolate into the arena of childbirth where the answere to many quesitons is 'how ever long it takes'

women have driven up the rise in IOl and electives. care givers have responded to that and vice versa

and it becoems a self fulfilling prophecy with c.s rates touching 30 % in some areas.

technology will have it's place in birth, even in a n MLU , most places use an electronic doppler rather than a pinard stethoscope

"not everyone has a burning desire to expeirnce a natural birth" this is what im trying to address...why is this??? what has changed peoples minds so easily, when women have been giving birth 'naturally' for so long.

To me, giving birth without drugs when your low risk has better outcomes for mum and baby.wont go into them again as we both know what they are.So why is that alot of 'low risk' mums want to have drugs pumped into thier body??
I have no qualms with people having c sections when they are seen as needed.

dont be subective (sticky out tongue face) I never said that these mums were less worthy (putting words into my mouth)

Every woman has the right to whatever birth she wants...fair enough, its how its meant to be...so why does a elec c section with risks not get looked down upon as a mother who wants to freebirth???

human deisre/wants /needs are far more complicated than thinking ' you are a woman, you need to feel that desire'

it might be due to many complex reasons,

same as some women don't want children at all, or just want one.. some wnat c.sections

i suggest you do a serach re electives, you will see plenty of women being sniffy about it to other women

i was more than likely a bit sniffy about electives too, but my experiences have taught me that that is the wrong attitude, women are entitled to ask for and make infomred decisions about their birth choices.

many a thread on here about elective c.s esp for primips and social reasons get plenty of strong opinions.

I've had 2 birth experiences, 1st prosterior presentation, I was doing fine at home, didn't go to hospital for days was 4 cms when got there and then it all became a nightmare.

2nd birth as i said somewhere back on this thread was an accidental home birth so I hadn't been checked at any point and although stressful in ways I remained calm and it was a relatively unpainful and actually fantastic experience. I would never plan to do an unassisted birth, and since I live 50 miles from hospital would not be allowed have a homebirth (I'm in Ireland, you have to be half hr drive to hospital for homebirth). My GP had recommended that I actually have an elective c. section because of trauma left from 1st birth. I wasted time and stress considering his option which I knew, I would never really go for.

I think women can birth, skillfully almost painlessly, but this knowledge is being kept from them because there is not much money to be made in teaching breathing for example. Drugs companies have the power, it's a consumerist society. I don't see it changing anytime soon.

I did feel, birthing as I did recently, that I had stumbled upon a secret but I would never recommend an unassisted birth for anyone.

I think this is a really interesting thread by the way.

Although Op is obviously lone gone.

Chellesgirl, I've been trying to find the research that says that fetal monitoring leads to fetal distress and like Lulumaam the only references I can find is to fetal monitoring leading to unnecessary intervention because of false readings giving the perception of fetal distress. Which, though undesirable, is clearly not the same as genuine fetal distress.

But would be very interested to see any links you can provide.

I imagine there is a big difference between how fetal monitoring is applied in different hospital: I felt my local hospital were very sensitive to my needs.

Seahorse, 'Every woman has a right to the kind of birth she wants' sounds lovely, but coming from the other end (health problems of my own, two children with chronic health problems and disabilities) just a tad facile. You would also think that every child has a right to spend their childhood without constant pain as well- but mine don't. And that every woman has the right to see her children grow up- but my friend won't. I find in life it helps to roll with the punches.

Saying that you are convinced that women (in general) 'can birth skilfully almost painlessly' seems to imply that this includes all women and in all labours (regardless of state of health of mother or baby). It makes it sound like the skill of the woman is the only factor involved. Which makes you wonder what went wrong when a woman has a succession of untraumatic births and then dies or loses the baby in her fourth or fifth labour (not uncommon in Victorian times, nor in the Third World today). Did she suddenly lose her skill or something?

No doubt, most women do not need intervention in labour. Just like most children do not have special needs. But some do, and then there is absolutely no point in thinking about rights. My right to the perfect labour was probably about as strong as my dd's right to get around without using a wheelchair, or my friend's right not to get cancer. Unfortunately, Life has been a little lax about honouring our rights. Either that or we've just failed to stumble on the secret.

cory can I just point out that someone else said that I said it 'causes fetal distress' I catually said 'electrical fetal monitoring for over a certain amount of time can actually put a baby into distress???

I did not say elec fetal monitoring itself had physical risks to the baby for e.g electrodes giving baby electric shock (very obsurd yes, just a e.g please dont take it as serious)

I said it can put a baby into distress, not it does all the time...the reasons behind this are that if a mother is lying on her back and contracting the placenta can get squashed and thus effecting oxygen flow to the baby, also that if a mother is not moving around her oxygen supply can decrease, therfore resulting in baby not getting as much oxygen - too much CO2 and too little O2 can slow a babies heart rate considerably, also affecting the brain if it is over a long period of time, putting baby into distress.

Cory, I never said 'Every woman has the right to the kind of birth she wants,' which I completely agree slights the issue, will answer rest of your comment later, no time now.

Apologies to Seahorse, I see that it was Chellesgirl who said "Every woman has the right to the kind of birth she wants".

To which I say, firstly what I said in my previous post that your rights don't always match what life actually hands you. You could argue that every woman has a right not to have a stillbirth/disabled child/pre-eclamptic fits during labour, but that doesn't mean you're always going to get
your rights. Sometimes noone is to blame; shit happens.

Secondly, that sometimes it is a choice between your wishes for the birth and your child's right for a safe delivery. And in that case I at least would find it difficult to explain to a severely disabled child that my rights to have the kind of birth I wanted took precedence. I would hope that I would at least be in a situation where I could truthfully say, "we didn't realise the risks" or "it was a mistake". Not "my rights are absolute".

Thanks Cory, it's a long thread, who can keep track? I guess your middle paragraph was for me so - no, by in general I didn't mean all or most women and certainly only a heartless person would say a birth with any kind of tragic outcome was caused by the woman's lack of skill. That is certainly not how I feel about anything to do with birthing.

This is about freebirthing? and obviously only a woman in perfect health would consider such a thing, so in my comment I may have sounded like full health was a given.

I only speak from my own experience which since it's recent I am still processing. My rational mind says no, why would anybody decide to freebirth? I certainly wouldn't. I only found out about it (after my accidental home birth) when I googled unplanned home birth and I was really surprised such a thing existed. Then there's a part of me that wonders why I only went into transition when I happened to be left alone? even just the presence of my doula seemed to slow contractions.

Really what I think women need is a Michel Odent approach, to birth in a quiet place with a single unobtrusive mw.

Also I think that there is a culture of fear surrounding childbirth and I was really surprised to find that with this birth I didn't have much pain whereas the hospital one was awful. I meant in my case in particular, that since my gp had recommended an elective c. section, that woman's birthing skills are being ignored or at the very least not encouraged. Had I chosen that option I would have missed out on a very special experience and anything could have gone wrong for both me and ds during what my gp called an 'easy' procedure.

Cory I think you misunderstood the context...every woman by law has the right to any type of birth she wants, she can not be made to have a cs, she cant be made to give birth vaginally, she can have a homebirth if she wants or she can freebirth..this what I meant...bringing stillbirth/disablilty into it is throwing it way out of context.

I get your second paragraph...of course as a mother you would hopefully choose what is best for your child...the point of this thread is that a woman has the right to do what she likes. By law its her body and she can do what she wants with it. In a woman with a heart she wouldnt put her childs life at risk...some women feel free birthing doesnt put their babys life at risk...which is thier choice to make.

Cheelsgirl - there are precedents in law whereby a court CAN rule that a woman must undergo a CS :

thejsms.com/539/

sassybeat if your going to tell me what the courts can do try quoting the 'law' and not an article. I know full well a woman can be court ordered to have a cs if they feel she is incompetent of making a rashional decision. This has to be very clear though, the courts can not grant a cs if the mother has no physchological problems that would stop her from making a personal, rashional decision.

If a mother has not been proven to be incompetent -thats by phychiatrists then she can not be forced to have any kind of medical intervention - no matter what.

It is seen in the law that until proven incompetent a woman can birth in which ever way she wants.

"A doctor must respect the competent pregnant woman?s right to choose or refuse any particular recommended course of action while optimising care for both mother and fetus to the best of his or her ability.A doctor would not then be culpable if these endeavours were unsuccessful.
The best defences against any retrospective claim that the woman did not fully understand the risks are good communication, interprofessional teamworking and, most of all, meticulous record keeping.
It is inappropriate to invoke judicial intervention to overrule an informed and competent woman?s refusal of a proposed medical treatment, even if it seems to others to be irrational.
If an adult with capacity makes a voluntary and appropriately informed decision to refuse treatment this decision must be respected, even where this may result in the death of the patient and/or the death of an unborn child, whatever the stage of the pregnancy"

"The Act cannot be deployed to achieve the detention of an individual against her will merely because her thinking process is unusual, even apparently bizarre and irrational, and contrary to the views of the overwhelming majority of the community at large." (Lord Justice Judge, [2])"

SO even if she is acting irrational, a doctor can not simply take her to court to order any type of medical intervention. He can apply to the courts, but then the female has to be given time to get a solicitor and the courts have to arrange a physcholigist to examine her. She has to lack mental capacity.

Cheels - if you care to read the 'article' you will find the references to the legal precedents

Yes I know...as I said you didnt 'quote' the law...you gave an article. Yes the references are there with one piece of legislation relating to the above -the mental act 2005- And I like the way you keep changing my name

Cory, I also meant to say bringing cancer into this just muddles things, pregnancy is not an illness, but it's hard to answer your post cause of mix up between mine and Chellesgirl's.

All I mean is that birth is very mysterious, if you read some of the articles in the bornfree media you'll see these women are not embarking on anything with intent to endanger their babies.

What I meant by stumble on a secret was that freebirthing isn't something I would ever set out to do but I did share some similarities with their reports - overall lack of pain, enjoyable experience etc. And I tend to agree with them that is is how birth is meant to be.

But that said unfortunately we live in a society that opts for definites at the expence of other damages to the woman's and sometime babies bodies. I'm just saying things could be different. Most of the women who freebirth seem to usually have had a very bad previous birth experience.

I think freebirthing is regressive, but I also think the present system doesn't work.