Childbirth rights globally

[PeaceAndHope]

I've spoken about this earlier on mumsnet. I think that the rights of women while giving birth are an integral part of the feminist movement, and I know that a lot of you agree. Until even a few years back, these rights were thought to be limited to women being able to choose a home birth, a natural birth or a VBAC. I've always believed that it is equally a woman's right to choose an elective caesarian or an epidural, as long as it is an informed choice.

In the UK, I am seeing a more balanced debate about this now. Most of my feminist friends here agree that it is wrong to deny women the right to choose how they want to give birth, even if what they choose is artificial pain relief or a surgery. Her body and her choice.

Unfortunately, I haven't noticed a similar trend in other countries, particularly the USA. I have relatives there and so I visit the USA quite frequently and the attitude of the self-proclaimed "feminists" there really surprises me. A lot of them think that women should be denied epidurals and caesarians. They even think that women should be denied repeat caesarians and be forced to VBAC.
In fact, I was told by a friend that the American pregnancy forums will delete any post that speaks positively of an epidural and/or caesarian.

Americans IMO have always been more ignorant , but isn't this a bit extreme even for them?

I fully support a woman's right to have a hands-off, non-medical birth if she prefers that and I find it horrifying that women are being forced into caesarians or forceps without consent. But how will we solve this problem by denying other women their choices? The answer is to enforce an adult, sane woman's right to both refuse and request reasonable treatment while giving birth.

Some women want a medicalised birth and others want a natural birth. Why oh why can't we just leave all of them alone to make their own choices as adults?? And why does the American feminist movement align itself only to an all-natural birth? Doesn't that actually put pressure on women to do things in a certain way and maybe even set them up for disappointment if that does't happen?

For a movement with a motto like "her body and her choice" sometimes we sure like to tell women what to do with their bodies!

Xpost with your second link.

But why don't you contact famous feminists to ask them as they may blog or write more about the issue if they are fit.

Bunnylion

I don't understand why you are deliberately choosing to not see what is obvious.
The link to anthrodoula's blog anthrodoula.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/feminism-and-birth.html

has a post about how epidurals and elective caesarians are not feminist. Did you bother to read the post or did you just read her introduction?

I have now given you three more links, so please read them before giving me your opinion.

It's difficult to measure access in the US because it differs so much by state, poverty levels, rural/urban and according to whether you have insurance.

I'm not saying in the US you can just rock up to an OB and she'll give you a section no problem. But many section situations are borderline and it seems like it's easier to fall on the section side of that border in the US.

For example, I had 3 scans in the last trimester showing a huge baby. In the US the recommendation is to offer a section and this means insurance will usually have to pay for it (this is my understanding anyway). There is no such guideline in the UK. I would also be very surprised if there is a maternity hospital in the US that does not offer epidurals full stop.

But my point really is that if you support natural childbirth and think too many women are having epidurals because I think more than half of women in the US do have them then you are not going to fight for improved access to them. Your starting point is that there are too many already.

I have Bunnylion. I don't think they have yet taken me up on that suggestion.

dreamingbohemian

I am alarmed by your recent post. Why would any feminist think that too many women are having epidurals and start a campaign based on that? Why fight for reduced access to pain relief?

"I'm not saying in the US you can just rock up to an OB and she'll give you a section no problem."

Exactly my point.

So how many feminists in America do you see who are campaigning to make access to elective caesarians easier? Let me answer- none.

I do deny that 'famous' feminists have influence -- or rather, I think their influence is quite small really. Most women in the US don't even want to self-identify as feminists, that's how removed their agenda is.

I think a lot of these trends are due to broader issues in society and gender politics.

If you want to explain why an upper middle class woman in Berkeley is horrified by the idea of an epidural you'd do far better to look at social network theory than the feminist agenda.

x-post

Well I don't understand why any feminists would be against epidurals personally but apparently they are. Isn't that what you're saying? I'm just trying to explain why from their point of view they wouldn't want to fight for women to have them.

The issue of electives is always going to be more complicated in the US because somebody has to pay for them directly. It's a non-starter issue. No one is going to waste political capital fighting for it.

I honestly don't think you are interested in anyone's opinion so I will stop giving mine now.

I read your links. I don't agree with you.

dreamingbohemian

Well I don't understand why any feminists would be against epidurals personally but apparently they are.

Thank you for finally admitting that. Can we now agree that they are wrong?

The issue of electives is always going to be more complicated in the US because somebody has to pay for them directly. It's a non-starter issue. No one is going to waste political capital fighting for it.

They can waste political capital fighting for their right to get Catholic tax payers to pay for abortion, but they can't fight for the right to elective caesarians? Doesn't make any sense to me.

Why should tax payers then pay for tubal ligation or birth control or abortions or any other procedure that isn't 100% medically necessary?

If you want to explain why an upper middle class woman in Berkeley is horrified by the idea of an epidural you'd do far better to look at social network theory than the feminist agenda.

Interesting point.

Bunnylion

I read your links. I don't agree with you.

Then you probably agree with the people who wrote those links and actually agree with them and their agenda (I suspected that from the onset).

Another one of your gigantic jumps in logic. No, I think all women should be able to choose how they give birth - including c-section and epidurals. How you managed to hear the opposite from my posts I have no idea.

You've been on the defensive from the off and seem to be spoiling for a fight - totally unnecessarily.

In terms of why fight for one thing and not another -- they are really completely different issues with different constituencies and histories and social factors. I could give a big explanation but jesus it would take forever!

I'm not sure I understand your point about Catholic taxpayers. What feminists are arguing is that organisations and health care providers should not be allowed to opt out of federally mandated health coverage based on religion. Again, that is a big issue that is not just about reproductive rights but also ties into important and contested issues within the US about religion and state.

I am very pro choice and also atheist, so let me clarify. I agree that abortion should be available free for those who can't afford it and if that bothers somebody's religious principles then I don't really care.

My point was, that if these feminists are avoiding supporting elective c-sections on the basis of being controversial then I call bullshit on that argument based on the passionate campaign they have fought for abortion rights.

OP

I'm UK based but I'd be surprised if any doula, whatever her location or politics would be campaigning for elective c-sections and increased medical intervention. it's against the raison d'être, isn't it?

TheDoctrineofAllan

But my question is, is it then fair for those doulas to call themselves feminists if they can't support all birthing choices without a bias?

Well, if I were a doula and a prospective client came and said she wanted an ELCS, I might suggest that she didn't really need my services.

It's fair for Sheryl Sandberg to call herself a feminist when she focusses most of her attention on working women. If she actively attacked SAHMs, then that would not be a feminist act. Isn't this similar?

I mean, isn't focussing on one set of choices rather than another similar?

I'm not saying they're avoiding it because it's controversial, but because there's just so little likelihood that it will go anywhere.

On abortion, there is a large and mobilised community to work with to fight for abortion rights. There is PAC money for lobbying. There are also activist groups to fight for better health options for the poor. These are all things they can tap into. And, there are many people like you (and me) who are pro-choice and non-religious, who will also care about this because of the religion/state issues.

None of this exists for elective sections. It would be harder to get any traction going. And what exactly are you fighting for? That insurance companies should have to cover them? It's very hard for the federal government to mandate anything to the insurance companies, especially given insurance lobbyists. That the government programs should pay for them? Difficult in an age of austerity.

I'm not saying it's not a worthy thing to support, but worthiness is not enough. It's always about the politics.

Actually, my doula was very pro-supporting women who wanted a natural birth. She was also very pro supporting women who wanted an elective section (though there are practical issues with that if they want their partner in surgery as most hospitals only allow one person in theatre so it can be mostly pre and post support). I'm fairly sure she would identify as a feminist.

Second, no feminist has to do everything. You can focus on pro-choice campaigning and not campaign directly on support for single parents (which can be two aspects of the same issue for some women).

Thirdly, I'm home now. I've looked at Woolf. You have said she has gone on record as saying electives shouldn't be allowed and said that is in Misconceptions. You've said she loathes the procedure. You've said she thinks all interventions are the work of the devil. I am afraid that if you think her book says that then your own feelings on the issue must be skewing how you read her. Some quotes and comments (from a quick skim using the index):

-"As women we should have an inalienable right to choose how we give birth. But we can only make that choice when we are empowered by the facts". This does come at the end of a section on women being pushed into 'emergency' sections. But that's about money and litigation risk and protocols and lots of things where she is talking about care not being women centred, and about under-explaining to women the nature of the surgery, not about evils of the procedure.

-Here (if my link works) is her most negative section I could find on elective sections. But she's not saying that they shouldn't be allowed. Yes, I will admit it's a bit dismissive of elective sections, but there is a world of difference between not pushing one particular procedure and hating it, considering it evil and saying it shouldn't be allowed.

• She stages a pretty aggressive take down of what she considers the extreme wing of the natural childbirth movement.

-One of the major issues in her manifesto is to give women full information about her right to accept or refuse any treatment or procedure after the risk and benefit has been explained to her.

No, she isn't fighting your corner. She's not staging a campaign for elective sections. She is arguing against a birthing system in US where many women who want to give birth naturally are prevented from and not supported to do so. It's her personal journey (to two emergency sections). It doesn't cover all bases, but that doesn't make it an invalid point of view.

dreamingbohemian

Actually, it is very possible for federal governments to mandate insurance companies to do certain things. Such as Obamacare mandating that women with prior c-sections be given coverage, people with pre-determined conditions cannot now be refused coverage, and women cannot be charged more than men for insurance.

I still don't get why you want to debate the detail of US views on a UK board. Surely you aren't going to get lots of people with detailed, location specific, comments to make? They are mostly going to be UK slanted.

Amanda

Let me put it this way- why aren't any feminists fighting for the right to choose c-sections? No, they don't all have to do it, but isn't it disappointing that there isn't even one?

Why are they all so dismissive of it?

You can interpret Naomi how you like, but the fact remains that she is dismissive of the choice and is rather patronising of women who make that choice. She assumes that we are all misinformed and "too posh to push", and is convinced that if we were "educated" we would choose differently.

I am not saying that her POV about her own births is invalid, but that doesn't mean that her agenda is necessarily helping all women.

I appreciate why the majority of the feminist literature focuses on the right to have a natural birth, but that doesn't justify them dismissing women who want to choose differently.

The trauma faced by a woman forced into a vaginal birth is ignored by most of the existing feminist literature. They only focus on women forced into c-sections.

On the subject of informed consent-why aren't Naomi and the others equally concerned about women not being given full information about vaginal birth?

There are so many FTMs who have no idea about the kind of damage that a VB can do to the pelvic floor and realise it much later, only to wish that they had had a c-section instead.

I'm all for informed decisions, but I would argue that many women don't know about the real risks of a VB either.

TheDoctrineAllen

Many doulas support women who have to have c-sections as well. As they should.

I wouldn't say it's very possible. Obamacare was a nightmare to get passed. The insurance lobby in the US is extremely powerful.