why are people so against epidurals

[porcamiseria]

I am just curious, as the general vibe here (MN) and with the NCT and some midwifes is they are a bad thing.

I had one as was induced and literally could not cope with pain. I wont go into the whole story but its the usual ventouse, stitches etc. But baby was healthy and fine

My point is for me the epi was a godsend and the intense pains were not bearable.

If it happens again, I will have an epi if I can't cope. am due August, so its pertinent for me

It upsets me rather this attitude that they are to be avoided, as if you DO have one some people might feel like a failure?

iamwhatiam - I guess that's why then - on balance, a safer option, as you're able to keep the doctors fully informed about the pain. As an aside, I found the pain with my VBAC very much centred on the scar, rather than more generalised (first time was abdomen, back, everywhere!). That made it feel pretty scary, as I think psychologically you just feel like the scar area is 'weak' and could give way.

I was probably about half an hour away from another CSection, but fortunately managed to push the baby out before it got to that. Again - probably another factor why it was good to not be numbed up and to be able to feel it.

Of course the NCT teachers are different. It would be impossible to 'police' and enforce a party line - just as with politics or customer relations teams in corporations.

Our NCT teacher didn't really let our group have a discussion about 'drugs'. We were told [as I saw it] by her what should be and cut short when an attempt was made to discuss.

Ours also gave inaccurate stats/information about medical and legal issues [I don't want to say she lied, but...] despite there being a knowledgeable GP and a lawyer amongst our group.

Even a privately communicated correction with supporting evidence to a statement by our NCT leader was ignored by her. This was then communicated to the group members by us and it became clear at least one mother had become quite anxious about the inaccurate statement.

Regrettably I have heard other poor reports [though some good as well] of NCT teachers. And of course some people are more gullible than others and/or less likely to read around the subject for themselves.

As to epidurals - got there in the end! - my wife stated at the outset she was having one for DD1, and did. No problems with midwife [who was superb with us and other mothers we knew whatever their inclination to pain relief] or hospital, though I felt obliged to apologise to poor anaesthetist who was sworn at by wife! She doesn't recall, but dockers have nothing on her language that evening!

And the birth came quickly - 4 hours all told from arrival at hospital to birth.

DS1 and 2 came together by emergency CS regrettably.

Wildorange your NCT teacher sounds like ours!

She couldn't abide it if people had already done some research and new something about a particular topic - she'd go out of the way to belittle it in fact.

I had already considered homebirth and the one thing that really put me off was on the home birth website - talking about the (very rare) risk of cord prolapse. I raised it in the class (looking for reassurance about it) and she basically denied it ever happens!

I'd certainly echo (in my experience) NCT being against epidurals and giving misleading facts. My NCT teacher was completely dismayed by my unfaltering desire for one and continually tried to tell me to "try for natural" backed up with facts and figures that were not born out by published NHS stats.

My argument has always been there are many things (childbirth being only one) that are "natural" that the human race has developed effective and easy methods of pain relief and intervention for, and as far as I was concerned my birth choice would be to have an epidural asap - that's all my birth plan said - "epidural please (and yes, I understood the chances could increase for instrumental deliveries"). I have a high pain threshold but I saw no need for testing this out, nor did I want to endure what I see as unecessary pain to experience a "natural" birth. I was 5cm when I got to hospital, had a mobile epidural where I could move, feel all my limbs but not the pain and 5 hours later he was out. It was lovely, relaxed and I was showering 10 mins later and home 5 hours after that (first birth). For me, this was perfect and I really don't understand why people are against them. They're great.

I completely support anyone's choices - and I would think planned epidurals (from about 2 weeks pregnant!) are probably far less likely to result in complications than those where people feel upset to be having one in the first place. Or if a woman needs one after 30/40 hours of labour or some other problem, perhaps there are reasons other than the epidural as to why that delivery may end in intervention / CS?

Okay, so I'm not disbelieving these stories about the NCT teachers, but I am wondering what on earth they have to gain from deliberately giving women misleading facts about epidurals or trying to persuade them to do things 'naturally'.

I do know that you have to have a passion about a subject to teach it, and I wasn't overly impressed with MY NCT teacher for various reason, but knowing a bit about the curriculum I know that it is supposed to be about facilitating the group to come up with the issues and solutions themselves whilst bonding, and the teacher has to go through quite rigourous testing and reflection the whole time she is qualified in order to ensure she does not place her own values onto her class.

I just wonder if interpretation of classes after the birth is skewed BY the birth experience. In fact I fail to see how it cannot be.

'I do wonder what it would be like to have this burning desire to have a natural birth, but I feel quite lucky not to be dicated to by that feeling.'

I had a burning desire for natural births, but didn't feel dictated to by those feelings. It was a strong urge, a craving; hard to describe! I think one of the midwives on OBEM described it as 'an itch that needs to be scratched' and that's how it felt for me. But I appreciate not all women have that experience.

And no, I didn't know how good the rush of hormones would feel until after the event, so that wasn't why I wanted natural births.

Some women have a burning desire to be in hospital; near 'equipment and Drs' (this is the way I have often heard it described'). I can't understand that at all, I hate hospitals and associate them with sad and distressing events; but other women feel differently- fair enough.

A natural, drug-free birth can be an empowering experience...it certainly was for me. I've been derided for saying that in the past, which I find very hurtful. I never said all women should do it; just that, for me, it was incredible and wonderful.

I gave birth in France where it was epidural or nothing - the anaesthetist laughed out loud when I mentioned gas and air and said something about the NHS not having moved on since the time of Queen Victoria. I was hesitant - having read lots of English books making the kind of claims many people are making on here, but thank God I went with the flow (when in Rome (Paris actually) and all that). I had two relatively speedy labours (7 hours and 5 hours) let the epidural wear off a bit towards the end and pushed them both out with about six pushes. My midwife was adamant that length of labour is predestined - some people take ages others are more lucky. I can't help wondering if our ideas about epidurals slowing things down is because not so many people have them here and those that do ask for them are likely to be having a prolonged and difficult time. Rather than thinking an epidural leads to a long labour we should conclude that someone having a long labour is more likely to ask for an epidural. I would have one again like a shot - in fact I'd probably go back to France for the birth (as many of my French friends here have done) to ensure I could have one without having to argue the toss .

Olifin, I'm sorry you've been derided for that. I am extremely happy for people who've pursused natural birth, got it and felt happy as a result. I think that that's a fantastic thing and I can see that just because it's not something I want for myself it's still a fantastic thing.

Angrywasp - interesting that you should say that people's views on their NCT teachers are all coloured by the birth. Our very opinionated teacher couldn't teach the last two classes, and we had someone very balanced do the last two classes. We all met as a group socially BEFORE the birth and every last one of us agreed that the first teacher was overly opinionated, pushy and dismissive about pain relief (and also formula feeding).

Totally agree with AngryWasp. I have friends who thought that childbirth would be fine and didn't want any painrelief and yet ended up begging for an epidural. At the same time I know others who were terrified and actually found that it wasn't as bad as they thought. Everyone is different and every birth is different. The most depressing things are women judging each other and, worse, women being left alone and ignored when they need pain relief. And, having had my second baby abroad, I also agree with some of the 'foreign' comparisons here. Gas and air is regarded as fairly barbaric in France and Belgium. No one judges you for having an epidural. Why are we British so hard on each other? Are our lives beyond childbirth so dull that we get our kicks and self-validation by preaching to other women about what they should do on the labour ward? dunno.

I had an Epi with DD, didn't intend on having one as such (although hadn't ruled it out) but she was back to back and was also on a Syntocin drip so the pain was pretty harsh and labour was very long.

Unfortunately it didn't take fully and one half of my body wasn't as pain free as the other, but still, I don't think I could have managed without it, and I actually relaxed and took notice of the amazing experience I was going through once I'd had it.

So, I would have one again, in a heartbeat, if things were getting too much anyway. In an ideal world it would be a few lungfulls of gas and air and pop, but you have to go with what you feel comfortable with.

WASP: I just wonder if interpretation of classes after the birth is skewed BY the birth experience. In fact I fail to see how it cannot be.

NO NO NO!!!! from day 1 I wanted an epidural, and was slightly bemused that NCT did not give them airtime. Clearly I should have been French!

Now from coming on MN I have read that vast rafts of women could not have coped with their induction without an epidural. So I havce stopped feeling like a failure, and now accept that it was that way. moved on.

I am not "blaming" the NCT for my birth. My birth was OK, if somewhat scary!

But I do think (and given from what people say here I am not alone) they are bloody irresponsible preaching their natural birth mantra, hence making people perceive epidurals as bad

They DO have a "natural" bias and most people dont know that when they book the class, and whilst there are good teachers there are MANY that preach this mantra to
first time Mums who know fxxk all

But then as someone else pointed out earlier, The National Childbirth Trust evolved from the Natural Childbirth Trust, and it arose out of the teachings and ideas of professionals who actively promoted natural birth.

Therefore, is it more the case that the ethos behind the NCT should be better marketed, so that women are clear about the aims, and can choose whether or not to buy into this particular brand of antenatal preparation?

I am not in any way excusing poor teaching, or unprofessional methods, but it does seem as though some women have been genuinely confused about the origins and aims of the NCT. I confess - I didn't even know til yesterday that it was originally called Natural not National! I did, however, know that although facts and risks of various interventions would be covered in classes, the main focus would be on promoting natural methods. I was happy with that, but it seems some women feel they were mis sold the NCT.

their bias towards "natural birth" is not on their website, their mission statement or anywhere in fact. So how are people supporsed to know this!!

Dont get me wrong, I have nothing against people that gently encourage natural birth, not at all.

I DO think its wrong to make it sound like epidorals are the DEVILS work, as clearly many have

Sounds like they aren't marketing themselves as they should be then. Or perhaps their philosphy has become blurred and isn't as clear cut as it once was. I guess there is a reason why they changed from 'Natural' to 'National' after all.....

I agree, if people don't know what they're buying into, they are far less likely to be happy with their experience of NCT. It's a shame, because at its best, I think it can be a valuable resource. I found the relaxation and breathing techniques incredibly helpful with my first baby.

I don't understand why you would go to NCT classes as well as hospital birth classes if you weren't at least interested in the idea of natural birth? I'm not sure you can blame them if you were ill-informed.

My classes covered all interventions, without judgement, including emergency and elective cesaerian, but quite clearly indicated that their experience was that most people had a better experience of birth with as few interventions as possible. I agree with that. However, there were people there that were having elective C sections but they still felt it was beneficial for other aspects like breastfeeding, meeting people, baby care. There were also 2 women there who were extremely anti-breast feeding which I found a bit strange but they still got something out of it.

I don't think they lie do they? - reseacrh does show that epidurals increase the chance of interventions and can delay labour - it's up to the individual whether they consider that to be a bad thing (the NCT, me) or aren't worried by it - in which case have an epidural, why go through the pain.

FWIW I reckon my NCT class money would have been better spent on hypnobirthing, from a birth experience POV.

But I went to meet people, so not sure if hypno is as good for that.

I don't think the NCT perceive themselves as being pro-natural, but more pro-informed-choice with the aim of women having optimal birth experiences. However, the easiest route to this is to avoid putting yourself into the clutches of the 'system' which is currently failing a lot of women.

I am not so naive to think that NCT teachers are without an agenda, after all they would need something to push them through their 3-5 years of training, but I genually believe that for the majority it is about equiping women with the skills to increase the chances of them having a birth they are subsequently happy with. The course tends to weed out teachers who have the potential to be toxic. However, like in any job a few must get through, or perhaps they were okay when they started and became nutters half-way through I don't know.

Also, there isn't really a lot you can say about the benefits of a well-sited epidural. Certainly not enough for 16 hour of classes.

iam I'd have to agree with you there actually. But that is where hypnobirthing has the advantage. It is specific. NCT classes try to be everything to everyone (including men) and I wonder if that means disatisfaction from all at some level.

I must say, my local NHS ante-natal classes in Fulham were very honest and discussed all sorts of pain relief. Maybe I was just lucky - this was over ten years ago and before the recent rise in the birth rate which must have put a strain on resources and MW time. Have never been to an NCT class so can't comment, except to say that surely fabhead's comment re blaming them if you are not at all interested in a natural birth might be a little fairer if the organisation actually reverted to its original name. If they have removed all reference to 'natural' from the name and the website then how can class attendees be blamed if they think that all options will be discussed/given equal value? Not every pregnant woman knows the full history of the NCT (I didn't until I read this thread).

I think you have to look at the original aims of the association back in 1956 for the NCT to understand where the charity are coming from. From their website:

'The original aims of the Association as published in 1956
1.That women should be humanely treated during pregnancy and in labour, never hurried, bullied or ridiculed.

2.That husbands should be present during labour if mutually desired.

3.That analgesia should not be forced on women in childbirth (and) nor should labour be induced merely to save time.

4.That more emphasis should be given to self-regulated breastfeeding and rooming-in allowed if the mother wants it, and that future maternity units should be designed with this in mind.

5.That a mother trained for natural childbirth should be allowed and encouraged to carry out her training fully during labour.

6.That all mothers should be encouraged to use natural childbirth for the benefit of themselves and their babies and that posters to this effect should be displayed at all antenatal clinics.

7.That the idea fostered by many medical people today that natural childbirth includes routine internal examination, routine administration of analgesia, routine episiotomy should be dispelled.

8.As childbirth is not a disease it should take place in the home wherever possible. If impossible the maternity units should be homely and unfrightening and in no way connected with hospital.'

From this I view it as mothers wanting to remove the increasing medicalisation that was happening to childbirth and taking back some of the decisions that were automatically being made. I feel it has probably worked to some extent and not in others - If a woman has been able to receive information to make an informed choice about having an epidural then surely the charity have succeeded in it's aims? That it is the woman making the choice and not having it forced on her?

I think to take some of the fear out of childbirth is a good thing? And removing the medicalisation of birth can help sometimes? Although it is true that sometimes information can have the opposite effect depending on the individual - and that some individuals will want birth to be medicalised.

It is true that birth has been made 'safer' when you consider maternal deaths ( and that of the babies). However I believe not enough is now being done to consider the psychological implications - ranging from birth trauma, PTSD, PND to the overwhelming guilt discussed daily on these boards either felt or implied. Epidurals have their place - I feel the NCT acknowledge this, unfortunately individual teachers may have their own axe to grind and participants should complain if they feel a subject has not been dealt with.

However if you don't like hearing about the negatives associated with epidurals in a class and end up having one anyway it can be a real challenge to reflect on this after birth. We as mothers have to deal with 'negatives' all the time and this is not always easy especially as we can be our own worst judges!

Haven't read the whole post.

I had an epidural. I asked for one as soon as I got to the hospital. There's no point being a hero, if you want an epidural, have it.

As someone on here said once, you wouldn't have a tooth out without a local anaesthetic, so why have a baby??

All options were discussed at my NCT classes. They simply indicated that your chances of medical intervention were higher if you had an epidural. Up to the individual to decide what that means for them. I think the name change reflects the fact that they are pro-informed choice - of all the choices - now. That is what I was expecting and that is what I got.

The hospital classes, on the other hand, were very descriptive but did not really give a clear picture of how you do get swallowed up by "the system" and how a lot of people's births are ruined by this (mine included, not to mention my babies). The NCT classes at least gave me a clue of what I was in for the first time around.

Personally, I think the NCT's approach to pain relief during childbirth borders on quasi-religious fanaticism. I cannot abide the attitude (perpetuated by some on MN as well, it has to be said) that a woman who gets through childbirth with a bit of chanting and maybe some paracetamol is somehow "better" than someone who has every kind of pain relief under the sun just to get through it.

Yes, there are risks associated with epidurals. There are with most things. If we want to get into it, there are even greater risks associated with home-births, but I don't use that as a justification for bashing anyone who makes that personal choice for themselves, so why should anyone who advocates minimal intervention feel that the existence of clinical risks arising from epidurals somehow gives them the right to preach to others...?

Live and let live, I say. Whatever gets mum and baby (and partner!) through the experience is fine - the ends justify the means (and it's not like you can go back and have another go using different pain relief, to see which way is better - even different labours with the same mother fail to give a sound basis for comparison, as all labours are different).