# What do you consider NCB--and would you have said something?



## noobmom (Jan 19, 2008)

This actually happened to me quite a while ago, but I just thought of it now.

I was talking to an acquaintance of mine at a kid's function. Her first child was born around the same time as mine and although I didn't know all the details of her labor and birth, she had mentioned several times that she had a natural childbirth.

For this particular conversation we were talking about labor/childbirth in a group of people. The group consisted of mostly crunchy types--all of whom had done NCB, several waterbirths, homebirths, etc. In fact, among the group there was a Bradley instructor and a doula-in-training. Basically, every mom was pretty well-versed.

Anyway, it comes out over the course of the conversation that although this one mom did not have an epidural, she had something (narcotics, I assume?) in her IV. She said when the nurse asked her if she wanted something for the pain she said "heck yah".

You can imagine everyone's reaction because for the last 2 or 3 years we had all assumed that when she said she had a NCB she meant an completely unmedicated birth. Not just "no epidural". Other than the stunned looks, no one said anything.

In hindsight, I'm glad I didn't say anything because it's really not my business, but I am slightly concerned that this woman might be spreading misinformation to FTMs about what NCB actually is. I am not trying to one-up anyone, but to be completely honest, I would sooner take an epidural or spinal than take the IV narcotics that could get into the baby's system.

So, what do you consider a NCB? Have you ever come across people that have a looser definition than you do? Is there an "official" or commonly accepted definition?

FWIW, I had an unmedicated hospital birth. So, I guess that's where I draw my line--no drugs before the baby was born. I did have a shot for bleeding afterwards. If I had had an IV (say with antibiotics for GBS) I think I would still consider that a NCB. Same with AROM although I wouldn't choose to have that done, in general. I sort of dislike the term NCB because it's kinda vague so I usually just say I had an unmedicated birth.


----------



## urchin_grey (Sep 26, 2006)

NCB to me means no pain meds and no induction (though AROM would be kind of a grey area, but mostly I just mean no pitocin or the like).

I've known some people IRL to use "natural birth" interchangeably with "vaginal birth".


----------



## MsBlack (Apr 10, 2007)

I probably would not say anything in a situation like you described....but it is true, in this era people interchange 'NCB' with 'vag birth'.


----------



## MittensKittens (Oct 26, 2008)

I don't think it is my business to say anything to people who think that they have had a natural birth, when in fact all they mean is that had a vaginal birth. I do think the general (hospital?) practice of calling any vaginal birth "natural childbirth" is setting a dangerous precedent of normalizing and "naturalizing" drugs in childbirth though, making it that much more difficult to refuse them.


----------



## MegBoz (Jul 8, 2008)

I consider NCB to be no epidural. I'm honestly not sure on whether I consider that a shot of narcotics eliminates it from being "natural." I dont' know enough about them. (I know nausea is a side effect & I get nauseous easily & consider it a MORE unpleasant sensation than pain, so there's no way I would have opted for it, so I'm not really well informed.)

I think often people use "NCB" = "Vag birth" because they don't feel comfortable saying "vaginal." So I think it depends on the context - such as speaking with the human resources lady at work about time off.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MittensKittens* 
I do think the general (hospital?) practice of calling any vaginal birth "natural childbirth" is setting a dangerous precedent of normalizing and "naturalizing" drugs in childbirth though, making it that much more difficult to refuse them.

Well, I don't think it is "setting" the precedent - I think that precedent has already _been_ set.







The fact alone that like 98% of births in America are in hospitals, over 32% are CS, of the remaining vaginal, something like 60% of those are induced or augmented with pit and I think it's at least 70% that get epidurals. HB is considered dangerous, crazy, and fringe, and "OB" is simply synonymous with "maternity care provider." (I think MWs attend only about 8% of births in the US.)

I think we have already come to that bridge and crossed it a long, long time ago.







Actually, I think we are in the midst of crossing the bridge where CS is normalized & considered just as safe, for both mom & baby as vag birth (a past president of ACOG said exactly that.)


----------



## Happiestever (May 13, 2007)

I don't think I would have said anything to that mom because she is telling people she had a NCB. Even though I may not consider getting any pain relief whilst in labor still natural. She may be saying she had a NCB to others which gives them hope, not necessarily that you can have other drugs (because as you said she never really ellaborated).

And yeah people do have a problem saying vaginal


----------



## hippiemama76 (Jun 11, 2009)

I consider NCB to be unmedicated, vaginal, and with no interventions. Like the OP, I would still consider an IV to be natural, if it were just abx for GBS or just saline.

Where I live, which I think is a fairly high C-section area, natural just means "out the vagina," regardless of what drugs or interventions were used.


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

lol One friend of my MIL's told me she had a drug-free birth because she only got nubane (or something - I can't remember now), since she'd had some sort of spinal injury that the anesthesiologist determined made epidural too risky. I don't really worry about what people consider "natural". It's none of my business. I don't personally consider drugs "natural" but I don't really care what someone else wants to call their birth, you know? I have always thought it was hilarious, though, that the particular woman I'm referring to didn't just call her birth "natural" but actually called it "drug-free" even though she got IV narcotics. That's so funny to me.


----------



## MiaMama (Jul 21, 2007)

I had no epidural, no pain meds of any sort, but I do not consider my daughter's birth to have been natural because it was induced and augmented. I think induction drugs are wayyyyyyy less natural than pain relief because they are by definition meant to make the labor proceed differently than it naturally would.


----------



## MamaMelis (Oct 23, 2009)

Maybe the "stunned looks" and "everyones reaction" is what keeps her from talking more about her experience. Maybe she feels judged, and if so, my heart goes out to her, it would be hard to feel that you were judged by your friends for how you chose to birth.


----------



## katelove (Apr 28, 2009)

I agree there are lots of definitions. For me *personally* I would describe my birth as natural if I had no pain medication, no augmentation of labour and no instrumental assistance. As some other PPs have said, I would still describe my experience as natural if I had IV ABs or fluids.

I was a bit surprised to read, on another forum I frequent, an update on some one who had had a baby. The person posting the news said "... a lovely natural birth, with just a bit of help from the vaccuum". I personally do not consider a vacuum delivery a natural birth. I guess maybe she meant that up until that point there had been no intervention but, if she considers vacuum extraction natural then I really don't know for sure. I wouldn't say anything to them but privately I disagree with that definition of natural.

ETA - if someone said to me that their birth was "drug free" but they had NO/narcotics/epidural then, yes, I would say something but I would try to do it in a nonjudgemental way.


----------



## Chamomile Girl (Nov 4, 2008)

I dunno, I think in so many ways this sounds like a spitting contest YKWIM? Its like women need to compete to see who has the "best" birth...with "best" having many definitions depending on the crowd. The OP sounds very judgy to me ("stunned looks" and then producing her credentials). Why do we all feel such a need for one-upmanship? So many crunchy mommies are tramatized because their births do not go as they wished, and then they/we are made to somehow feel impure because of it.

So now that I have probably offended everyone...sorry.


----------



## CorasMama (May 10, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chamomile Girl* 
I dunno, I think in so many ways this sounds like a spitting contest YKWIM? Its like women need to compete to see who has the "best" birth...with "best" having many definitions depending on the crowd. The OP sounds very judgy to me ("stunned looks" and then producing her credentials). Why do we all feel such a need for one-upmanship? So many crunchy mommies are tramatized because their births do not go as they wished, and then they/we are made to somehow feel impure because of it.

So now that I have probably offended everyone...sorry.


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katelove* 
ETA - if someone said to me that their birth was "drug free" but they had NO/narcotics/epidural then, yes, I would say something but I would try to do it in a nonjudgemental way.

But wouldn't you be afraid that would hurt their feelings? I don't really care what someone calls their own birth. It's their experience and they can define it however they want. I thought it was funny that someone said a birth with narcotics was drug-free. I didn't say anything to her, though. I just giggled about it when I was alone later. If I'd said something to her, she would've felt like I was calling her stupid or something, I think.


----------



## Kidzaplenty (Jun 17, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chamomile Girl* 
I dunno, I think in so many ways this sounds like a spitting contest YKWIM? Its like women need to compete to see who has the "best" birth...with "best" having many definitions depending on the crowd. The OP sounds very judgy to me ("stunned looks" and then producing her credentials). Why do we all feel such a need for one-upmanship? So many crunchy mommies are tramatized because their births do not go as they wished, and then they/we are made to somehow feel impure because of it.

So now that I have probably offended everyone...sorry.

Actually, I quite agree.

Personally, when I say "natural childbirth" I mean just me doing what is natural to make it all happen. However, if for some reason I felt the need to actually take some sort of pain med (which I was actually really wanting for the first time with this birth), not an epidural, I would have still considered it "natural" since it was not induced, augmented, or "assisted" and produced a baby vaginally.

I actually had this very discussion with my OB about what she considers "natural childbirth" (which, by the way she totally interchanges with vaginal). I don't really have a problem with someone having that concept of "natural". Who am I to judge them?


----------



## katelove (Apr 28, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Plummeting* 
But wouldn't you be afraid that would hurt their feelings? I don't really care what someone calls their own birth. It's their experience and they can define it however they want. I thought it was funny that someone said a birth with narcotics was drug-free. I didn't say anything to her, though. I just giggled about it when I was alone later. If I'd said something to her, she would've felt like I was calling her stupid or something, I think.

I guess it would depend on the individual circumstances and how well I knew the person.

I think people have the right to make their own decisions but I kind of do mind when people say inaccurate things like narcotics = drug free. I don't like myths and misconceptions about health care being started/perpetuated. I am *totally* ok with a person making an informed decision to have a narcotic during labour but, they can't have it both ways. Either they had the drug *or* they had a drug free birth. Either is their choice but I don't see that distinction as being subjective.

The term "natural birth" however, I think is more subjective and I would be interested to explore what people's definitions were and why. But only because I was interested, not to prove them wrong or judge them or anything. So, in that, case I might say something to find out more about their views.


----------



## JorgieGirl (May 13, 2006)

Nope, I would never have said anything.

If there is anything 'un'natural about a birth, necessary or not, it's not NCB. Just simply by definition. Regardless of how I, or anyone else, birthed.


----------



## mntnmom (Sep 21, 2006)

I know people who use the term "natural" because they can't stand to say "vaginal", as opposed to a section. I try to be specific and refer to "vaginal" birth or "drug-free" depending on the conversation. I consider "natural" childbirth to mean no medical interventions. Something I've only done once, arguably twice out of 4, and I'm ok with that.
I think the OP's issue was the usage of the word. If you have an epidural, is it a natural birth? Personally, I wouldn't label it that way. I really do hope this lady didn't "hide" that fact out of fear of being judged. Every woman has the right to her experience, and the "crunchy" tendency to judge is just as bad as the mainstream one.


----------



## laughingfox (Dec 13, 2005)

To-may-to, to-mah-to.

NCB is defined differently by everyone who says it, even if it's just in subtle ways.
Even your unmedicated birth might not be "natural" by some peoples' definitions, since you were in a hospital.

I wouldn't have said anything.


----------



## Tofu the Geek (Dec 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chamomile Girl* 
I dunno, I think in so many ways this sounds like a spitting contest YKWIM? Its like women need to compete to see who has the "best" birth...with "best" having many definitions depending on the crowd. The OP sounds very judgy to me ("stunned looks" and then producing her credentials). Why do we all feel such a need for one-upmanship? So many crunchy mommies are tramatized because their births do not go as they wished, and then they/we are made to somehow feel impure because of it.

Agreed.


----------



## Bokonon (Aug 29, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chamomile Girl* 
I dunno, I think in so many ways this sounds like a spitting contest YKWIM? Its like women need to compete to see who has the "best" birth...with "best" having many definitions depending on the crowd. The OP sounds very judgy to me ("stunned looks" and then producing her credentials). Why do we all feel such a need for one-upmanship? So many crunchy mommies are tramatized because their births do not go as they wished, and then they/we are made to somehow feel impure because of it.

So now that I have probably offended everyone...sorry.

I totally agree with this. To take it a step further, one could even argue that a hospital birth at all is not "natural". Others might say that a homebirth with assistance is not "natural". I think getting hung up on the semantics is putting more energy into placing judgement than is called for.


----------



## Cheshire (Dec 14, 2004)

This subject comes up on this board every few months - do a search and you'll find lots of opinions.

Some like to say natural so they don't have to say vaginal, especially in mixed company.

To each his own.


----------



## columbusmomma (Oct 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chamomile Girl* 
I dunno, I think in so many ways this sounds like a spitting contest YKWIM? Its like women need to compete to see who has the "best" birth...with "best" having many definitions depending on the crowd. The OP sounds very judgy to me ("stunned looks" and then producing her credentials). Why do we all feel such a need for one-upmanship? So many crunchy mommies are tramatized because their births do not go as they wished, and then they/we are made to somehow feel impure because of it.

So now that I have probably offended everyone...sorry.

Well put! I don't like the word "natural" birth, to each her own whatever natural may, or may not mean. How about just using the term birth??


----------



## Juvysen (Apr 25, 2007)

The term "natural" can just mean so many things... I dunno. I mean - even on food labels, "natural" is a stretchy word. Meh. My first baby was induced but I had no pain meds. I call it "an induction with no pain meds"... the second one was a home birth. I call it a "home birth"... if people want more information, I'm happy to share.

I guess I mean that "natural" could be describing the endocrinology involved, the endurance involved, or it could be describing the physical means by which the baby was born. That is, "natural" could mean that you only used your own hormones (i.e. not at all induced, but possibly with use of pain meds), it could mean that you had no pain meds (like you took on all the pain "naturally", even if you were induced or whatever) or it could mean that you had the baby come out your vagina (even by means of vacuum and flat on your back with a gigantic episiotomy or whatever - which isn't exactly natural either). It could also mean that you walked, pushed in different positions, squatted... blah blah blah. I dunno. "Natural" is just not very descriptive, imo.


----------



## finnegansmom (Jul 15, 2007)

I would never have said anything about their label for their own birth.

But in terms of "natural", you can push the lines in either direction. I gave birth to my second son in a tub. Is that natural? Do other primates normally birth in water? Is it a form of pain relief and therefore not natural? The cord was cut and clamped a few minutes after birth - are only lotus births natural?

the word natural is really subjective.

I think if someone said, "I had a pain med free birth. I also had a constant IV of demoral" or whatever, then maybe I'd raise a brow...(then again maybe not)


----------



## AlexisT (May 6, 2007)

There was an interesting debate in the UK over how to define a "normal" birth. I think their basic criteria were no induction and no epidural. Pethidine (Demerol) and gas and air were okay. Episiotomy, forceps, ventouse were all out.

Interestingly, "normal" birth (obviously this is not the same as "natural" but it shows the difficulties in defining this) included augmentation with pitocin and AROM, provided that it was't done as a part of induction. It also included managed 3rd stage. Some members of the working group wanted these excluded and there was talk of a tighter definition of "natural" birth. If I were drawing up a definition (and the point of the debate was that there had to be a single, clear, consistent definition of "normal birth" so that statistics could be collected and analysed) I would exclude augmentation and probably opioids. Entonox is dicey for me, really. Excluding managed 3rd stage is difficult, almost purity at the expense of sense. It's the NICE recommendation and standard practice.


----------



## Juvysen (Apr 25, 2007)

My SIL was given some sort of narcotic, but told it wasn't a pain med, it was just to help her relax. Fenta-something? She claims to have had a pain med-free birth. I'm not convinced... Her description of the drug sounded exactly like descriptions I've heard people give of Stadol


----------



## bobandjess99 (Aug 1, 2005)

NCB means completely diferent things to different people. In my area, which is ATROCIOUS for birth, "natural" childbirth usually refers to having the baby vaginally, )versus surgically), regardless of whether epidurals, pain meds, or otehr interventions galore are used......ya, it's that bad.
Personally, I refuse to use teh term "natural" to describe ANY hospital birth, because I don't believe going to a hospital to birth to be at all a "natural" thing to do. I will say"she had an unmedicated, low-intervention hospital birth" to describe, for example, the births a few friends have had with the one good hospital midwife.


----------



## bobandjess99 (Aug 1, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Juvysen* 
My SIL was given some sort of narcotic, but told it wasn't a pain med, it was just to help her relax. Fenta-something? She claims to have had a pain med-free birth. I'm not convinced... Her description of the drug sounded exactly like descriptions I've heard people give of Stadol









Fentanyl is an extremely potent narcotic, about 100 times stronger than MORPHINE.
Uh..ya, she had pain meds.


----------



## Mamatoto2 (Sep 2, 2002)

Well, I generally don't use the term "NCB" I say drug-free birth if that's what I mean, in large part because I think it more clearly communicates what I mean but also because "NCB" may imply that birthing in any way other than drug free is "unnatural" which to me has negative tone (sounds like I'm judging to me). I think that technically one could make the argument that a baby coming to live on the outside after cooking in-utero is the natural progression of things, even if the vagina is not the exit route or drugs were on-board (not suggesting that drugs are a great option or that they don't have negative effects on mom/baby, etc., just that they don't necessarily "contaminate" the birth, rendering it "unnatural").

When I refer to my births, I generally say that I had a drug-free midwife-assisted water birth for my first (and many folks would, and did, suggest that birthing a human in water is not natural). Of course I also hemorrhaged after she was born and again a couple days later and had TONS of drugs and blood transfusions and ultimately surgery as a result, so in my head the experience of the birth in totality did NOT feel very natural to me. When I speak of my second, I say that I had an emergency c-section (or surgical birth) as my DD was very intent on staying transverse breech. Her being transverse breech was just as "unnatural" as me trying to deliver her vaginally would have been. Likewise, the "unnatural" classical incision left on my uterus as a result combined with the "unnatural" pregnancy complications that have marked my current pregnancy will require another c-section. My birth will be a natural progression of my pregnancy to result in a safe delivery for me an baby even though it won't be a vaginal or drug-free delivery.

To be clear, I personally would always opt for a drug-free vaginal delivery if possible, because I think that it represents the best overall scenario for mother/baby, but I wouldn't want to suggest to any woman that the way they brought their child into the world was "unnatural."


----------



## tinyshoes (Mar 6, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *noobmom* 

I was talking to an acquaintance of mine at a kid's function. Her first child was born around the same time as mine and although I didn't know all the details of her labor and birth, she had mentioned several times that she had a natural childbirth.

For this particular conversation we were talking about labor/childbirth in a group of people. The group consisted of mostly crunchy types--all of whom had done NCB, several waterbirths, homebirths, etc. In fact, among the group there was a Bradley instructor and a doula-in-training. Basically, every mom was pretty well-versed.

I think you were smart to not say anything to "correct" this woman who seems like she was proud to have a NBC just like the crunchy crew she was hanging out with. I'm sure she knows that drugs at the hospital isn't "as natural" as the other birthing styles you've mentioned.

In these situations, sometimes I like to try to get the mama to talk more about her birth experience--questions like, 'so what made you want to have a natural birth?' or "what did you like best about the experience?" or "what would you change if you could do it over again?"

Then it becomes less of a contest and more of a discussion, which is what I think we all want and are trying to do when we Talk Birth.

Bring on the Natural Ruffles Potato Chips!!!!


----------



## caned & able (Dec 8, 2005)

NCB is something that is never seen in a hospital maternity ward. There is always an intavenous solution with something in it or a heplock, a fetal monitor of some kind, a mother put to bed, no eating, a catheter, and threats of drugs, forceps, or vacuum extractor or surgery.

Nothing natural about those.

Unfortunately, NCB is usually considered anything short of a c/sec by most people.


----------



## Juvysen (Apr 25, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *caned & able* 
NCB is something that is never seen in a hospital maternity ward. There is always an intavenous solution with something in it or a heplock, a fetal monitor of some kind, a mother put to bed, no eating, a catheter, and threats of drugs, forceps, or vacuum extractor or surgery.

Nothing natural about those.

Unfortunately, NCB is usually considered anything short of a c/sec by most people.

I dunno... my friend just had what I'll call the "perfect" hospital birth... no harassment, intermittant monitoring (so i guess not completely perfect), no heplock, ate when she wanted, no cath, no mention of drugs, and baby was born in the caul... I was shocked and thrilled for her - she had wanted a home birth but couldn't get a midwife (they were all booked up







).

Of course - there's the argument that even leaving your "normal" (home) environment makes it unnatural, by definition...


----------



## noobmom (Jan 19, 2008)

Thanks for all the replies.

Just to clarify a few things. I don't judge anyone for their birth choices. In my area most people have epidurals, it's almost unheard of to not have one. So truly, no one would bat an eye no matter what kind of birth is being discussed.

As for listing my "credentials", I actually mentioned my own birth for the opposite reason: I had a hospital birth, which I believe some people would not consider "natural". So personally, I don't usually use the term NCB--I refer to my birth as non-medicated, which I believe to be completely accurate as I had no epidural, IV, shots, or pills during the birth. So, that was my purpose in mentioning that.

The reason for the stunned looks was because this woman had previously said did not have an epidural and made comments about her high pain tolerance. So, it was really just surprise on my part that she had the IV drugs. I had assumed that NCB would mean no drugs. I think the moral of the story is to not make any assumptions about what someone means by NCB.

I'm trying to think of an analogy. I guess it might be like someone saying that they EBF and then later mentioning that they give the baby a bottle of formula when they put her down to sleep. I don't care or judge if other people give their babies formula, but I would be surprised if someone said they were EBF at the same time.


----------



## AlexisT (May 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *caned & able* 
NCB is something that is never seen in a hospital maternity ward. There is always an intavenous solution with something in it or a heplock, a fetal monitor of some kind, a mother put to bed, no eating, a catheter, and threats of drugs, forceps, or vacuum extractor or surgery.

Nothing natural about those.

Unfortunately, NCB is usually considered anything short of a c/sec by most people.

Um, this is not true. (Don't forget, "never" is an absolute: a single natural birth would disprove your statement.) They are not as common or available as they should be, but they DO happen (and in some other countries are quite common).

I don't think fearmongering and exaggeration is the best way to promote natural birth.


----------



## philomom (Sep 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Bokonon* 
I totally agree with this. To take it a step further, one could even argue that a hospital birth at all is not "natural". Others might say that a homebirth with assistance is not "natural". I think getting hung up on the semantics is putting more energy into placing judgement than is called for.

Actually, my hospital births were entirely without intervention.... just a little listening in on the handheld doptone.

But yeah, I think folks confuse natural with vaginal because they can't bring themselves to say that word.


----------



## Tofu the Geek (Dec 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *caned & able* 
NCB is something that is never seen in a hospital maternity ward. There is always an intavenous solution with something in it or a heplock, a fetal monitor of some kind, a mother put to bed, no eating, a catheter, and threats of drugs, forceps, or vacuum extractor or surgery.

Your statement is inaccurate from my personal experience in two different hospitals.


----------



## MamaMelis (Oct 23, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *caned & able* 
NCB is something that is never seen in a hospital maternity ward. There is always an intavenous solution with something in it or a heplock, a fetal monitor of some kind, a mother put to bed, no eating, a catheter, and threats of drugs, forceps, or vacuum extractor or surgery.
.

I completely disagree. Rarely? Perhaps. Never, no.


----------



## philomom (Sep 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *caned & able* 
NCB is something that is never seen in a hospital maternity ward. There is always an intavenous solution with something in it or a heplock, a fetal monitor of some kind, a mother put to bed, no eating, a catheter, and threats of drugs, forceps, or vacuum extractor or surgery.

Nothing natural about those.

No, that's not true at all. I had amazing natural births at a hospital with none of those things. I ate, walked around naked, did pretty much whatever I pleased and gave birth standing up.


----------



## Cheshire (Dec 14, 2004)

Quote:

NCB is something that is never seen in a hospital maternity ward. There is always an intavenous solution with something in it or a heplock, a fetal monitor of some kind, a mother put to bed, no eating, a catheter, and threats of drugs, forceps, or vacuum extractor or surgery.
My third birth would also be the needle to the bubble of the "never" part of your statement.

Walked into observation in full blown labor, changed clothes, and water broke all over the floor. Rushed to delivery room, got on the bed and pushed out my baby in three pushes, The midwife didn't even have a chance to get all geared up. No monitoring, no heplock or IV, didn't even have a chance to sign any consent forms until after the birth.

And, I disagree about being in a hospital making a birth unnatural. Many mammals seek out safe locations other than "home" to give birth. If a woman feels the hospital is her safe place I would think of that as natural for her.


----------



## Materfamilias (Feb 22, 2008)

I also would call my hospital birth natural, but agree the term is misleading. Perhaps if I had been outside in a treehouse with no attendants it could truly have been called NCB?








I would probably not have said anything or maybe just engaged the mom in conversation about her experience.


----------



## caned & able (Dec 8, 2005)

-


----------



## craft_media_hero (May 15, 2009)

Well, I had my baby in a hospital, and she was induced (because I didn't know any better) via cervical stripping. No pain meds. I was totally the victorious, squatting, roaring goddess of hospital birth, and I would be really hurt/upset/ticked off if someone else sat in judgment of my first birth experience and claimed it wasn't "natural" just because their birth experience was more crunchy than mine. I think that it was about as natural as it could get under the circumstances and with my level of birth education at that time---had any other mamas been in the room watching while I was pushing her out, they would've proudly said, what a great natural birth, well done, mama!

I think that getting stuck on semantics is just asking for someone's feelings to get hurt. In fact, this thread actually really bothers me because this is supposed to be a place of support, not judgment. I never even would've thought someone would question that I had a natural birth--until hearing people here split hairs that induced birth in a hospital can never be natural. BOO! It's not a contest!

Even traditional midwives in indigenous cultures have a trick or two up their sleeve to get the birth going or ease the mother's pain (even in Ina May Gaskins books, they mention Castor Oil)---would anyone ever question that their clients had natural births? I mean, if the mom in question had chosen acupuncture or hypnotherapy for pain treatment instead, would that have been crunchy enough for your crowd to qualify her into the natural birth club?

Obviously, the mom did the best she could with the resources (internal and external) that were available to her at the time, and she is very proud of her vaginal birth. Please don't do or say anything to dampen her happiness or take away from her wonderful memory of that experience.


----------



## Juvysen (Apr 25, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *craft_media_hero* 
Well, I had my baby in a hospital, and she was induced (because I didn't know any better) via cervical stripping. No pain meds. I was totally the victorious, squatting, roaring goddess of hospital birth, and I would be really hurt/upset/ticked off if someone else sat in judgment of my first birth experience and claimed it wasn't "natural" just because their birth experience was more crunchy than mine. I think that it was about as natural as it could get under the circumstances and with my level of birth education at that time---had any other mamas been in the room watching while I was pushing her out, they would've proudly said, what a great natural birth, well done, mama!

I think that getting stuck on semantics is just asking for someone's feelings to get hurt. In fact, this thread actually really bothers me because this is supposed to be a place of support, not judgment. I never even would've thought someone would question that I had a natural birth--until hearing people here split hairs that induced birth in a hospital can never be natural. BOO! It's not a contest!

Even traditional midwives in indigenous cultures have a trick or two up their sleeve to get the birth going or ease the mother's pain (even in Ina May Gaskins books, they mention Castor Oil)---would anyone ever question that their clients had natural births? I mean, if the mom in question had chosen acupuncture or hypnotherapy for pain treatment instead, would that have been crunchy enough for your crowd to qualify her into the natural birth club?

Obviously, the mom did the best she could with the resources (internal and external) that were available to her at the time, and she is very proud of her vaginal birth. Please don't do or say anything to dampen her happiness or take away from her wonderful memory of that experience.

I honestly think this is exactly why "natural" is not descriptive enough. Everyone has their own view of what "natural" should (or should not) entail, so it's sort of a useless descriptor. I mean, I used evening primrose oil and pineapple and RRL tea to help get things going last time... and at 7 cm begged my homebirth midwife to break my bag of waters. Is this natural? I dunno if I'd say it *is* since it's not like how an animal gives birth, but it's more natural than, you know, the epidural route? It's a spectrum, you know?

I guess for everyone's sake it's more useful to actually say what you MEAN instead of using a term that's so subjective, although this can be true across many discussions of parenting! Is it co-sleeping if your kids only come into your bed for part of the night? Sure, since they're sleeping WITH you, but some people could argue otherwise since it assumes the child has his/her own bed. But I guess if you're going to worry about how other people are defining subjective terms, then you just need to be careful about how you discuss your own situations, too, you know?

But then, for the sake of discussion, and not trying to "out crunchy" each other, perhaps we should just be happy with thinking that if it *felt* like a "natural" childbirth to the mother - enough for her to describe it as such - then it is, in essence, close enough...


----------



## tinyshoes (Mar 6, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *craft_media_hero* 
Even traditional midwives in indigenous cultures have a trick or two up their sleeve to get the birth going or ease the mother's pain (even in Ina May Gaskins books, they mention Castor Oil)---would anyone ever question that their clients had natural births? I mean, if the mom in question had chosen acupuncture or hypnotherapy for pain treatment instead, would that have been crunchy enough for your crowd to qualify her into the natural birth club?

good point!!!!!


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

When DS was born & people asked if I got to have a 'natural birth' I'd say no & then they'd say, "Oh so you had to have a c-sec" and I'd be like no... they gave me meds & an epi & broke my water & gave me pitocin & used the vacuum etc. to which everyone would just look confused because to them it's still a "natural birth" because it was a vaginal delivery. So now I don't say anything about NCB or not... I just say I had a really difficult/traumatic birth experience.

It's really frustrating that there's inconsistent terminology.


----------



## scottishmommy (Nov 30, 2009)

I prefer unmedicated, to natural childbirth. But, really, who cares if this mama had something in her IV? I chose to go without drugs for MYSELF, not to get nods from other mothers. Besides, my birth was so fast that I can't really take credit for not using drugs, because they weren't offered! But seriously I hate the "holier than thou" attitude of the NCB community. Labor hurts! I don't blame women for wanting drugs. I think it's a little odd to _plan_ on getting an epidural, but once you're in labor I totally understand.


----------



## Mulvah (Aug 12, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Chamomile Girl* 
I dunno, I think in so many ways this sounds like a spitting contest YKWIM? Its like women need to compete to see who has the "best" birth...with "best" having many definitions depending on the crowd. The OP sounds very judgy to me ("stunned looks" and then producing her credentials). Why do we all feel such a need for one-upmanship? So many crunchy mommies are tramatized because their births do not go as they wished, and then they/we are made to somehow feel impure because of it.

So now that I have probably offended everyone...sorry.


----------



## Comtessa (Sep 16, 2008)

I wouldn't have said anything either. I think that "natural" is a subjective term for a lot of people (though I have a clear idea of what it means for me), and I wouldn't quibble with someone's pride over her "natural" birth even if I wouldn't describe it that way.

HOWEVER, when someone is describing MY birth, I feel free to correct them. I get REALLY annoyed when my DH describes DD's birth to other people as a "natural birth," because it most assuredly was NOT.

One of our big arguments when I was pregnant went like this:
ME: I'm not giving birth in the hospital, because I want a natural childbirth.
DH: You can have a natural childbirth in the hospital! Didn't you hear the nice L&D nurse, she said you can turn the lights down and have music and everything!
ME: But giving birth in the hospital just isn't natural to me. And besides, they always try to intervene SOMEHOW.
DH: Well, they won't intervene in OUR birth.
ME: I'm NOT GOING TO THE HOSPITAL to have this baby.

Well, we both ended up eating our words. My HB ended in a (non-emergency) transfer (for exhaustion) after three days of labor... and it was really good, as transfers go, but I ended up getting an epidural to help me rest. And with the epidural came everything else: catheter, IV, electronic fetal monitor, blood pressure cuff, lithotomy position for pushing, etc. Thank heaven I managed to have a vaginal birth, but it was IN NO WAY NATURAL. I have to correct DH on this point constantly. Now it goes something like this:

ME: I am not going to the hospital to have our next baby because I really want a natural childbirth sometime in my life.
DH: But you HAD a natural childbirth in the hospital! You can certainly do it again!


----------



## mamatolevi (Apr 10, 2009)

it means no pain meds to me. though for some it means no interventions at all - not even inductions. However, there are folks who just don't like the word "vaginal" and subsitute "natural" in its stead. I've seen that in newspaper articles a few times.

As long as we get the births we want or are comfortable with our decisions (not the dr deciding for us) and are treated respectfully and like competent adults it doesn't matter to me how someone gives birth. (Though I'll admit I don't have much patience or tolerance for the folks who abdicate responsibilty just blithely and blindly hand over everything to their dr.)


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Comtessa* 
Now it goes something like this:

ME: I am not going to the hospital to have our next baby because I really want a natural childbirth sometime in my life.
DH: But you HAD a natural childbirth in the hospital! You can certainly do it again!









LOL this is the exact opposite of me & my DH. He has been saying "next time let's just do a home birth" (which I would love but am way to chicken to do) however I don't think it has much to do with being 'natural' for him... he's got other reasons. I get the impression that men don't care as much about childbirth being natural? Or maybe it's just MY man. Though he does understand that I want to experience a 100% NCB.

I have to say that although I will never consider my DS's birth to be natural I do feel a little relieved reading this thread. I have had a hard time coming to terms with DS's birth but seeing that so many others have had to have similar interventions makes me realize I did the best I could when you take into account my past, my situation, and the knowledge I had at the time. I had gotten so caught up in my ideal of a NCB that I was devastated when things went so drastically different than I'd hoped. But part of the reason I wanted a NCB was, in fact, to (subconsciously) live up to some ideal/standard I had set for myself which was reinforced by other crunchy mommas, crunchy articles, etc. I never stopped to consider that maybe in SOME cases a little intervention is necessary. Yes, I had more interventions than I would have liked, and more than I probably really needed, but I don't think it would have been possible in my case to truly have a birth that was med-free, intervention-free, etc. Just realizing that right now (11 months after the fact!) is really giving me a little peace. I wish we weren't all so hard on ourselves... I think many (most) of us probably agree that NCB (however you define it) is ideal, but that doesn't mean interventions are evil. Overused, yes, but not bad in & of themselves. Not ALWAYS unnecessary.


----------



## Youngfrankenstein (Jun 3, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *scottishmommy* 
But seriously I hate the "holier than thou" attitude of the NCB community. Labor hurts! I don't blame women for wanting drugs. I think it's a little odd to _plan_ on getting an epidural, but once you're in labor I totally understand.

No kidding! I just had my first hb and it was horribly painful. I remember seriously considering going to the hospital for and epi! After months of planning my hb! Mostly I was worried about how far along I was and didn't know how long I could last.

I remember saying to my sil, right after the birth, "I don't know how anyone doesn't get an epidual in the hospital." And I really mean that.

I had a beautiful, fast, and furious homebirth. It was freakin' natural! My last birth was "natural" in the hospital until I got an epidural. They never 'touched' me otherwise....


----------



## caned & able (Dec 8, 2005)

Years ago a person on these forums noted a newsreel reporting a woman having a planned repeat c/sec that was declared a natural birth because she had no chemical or regional anesthesia, only acupuncture needles for pain relief. I hope I remember it correctly. Anyway, begging the question, "Is that a natural birth?"

NCB is something that is defined by one's experiences in life and expectations of childbirth.


----------



## Juvysen (Apr 25, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *caned & able* 
Years ago a person on these forums noted a newsreel reporting a woman having a planned repeat c/sec that was declared a natural birth because she had no chemical or regional anesthesia, only acupuncture needles for pain relief. I hope I remember it correctly. Anyway, begging the question, "Is that a natural birth?"

NCB is something that is defined by one's experiences in life and expectations of childbirth.









wow. well, not natural by my standards, but certainly impressive.


----------



## noobmom (Jan 19, 2008)

OP here. I appreciate everyone's replies. I'm saddened that I come across as "judgy" to several people, but I'm glad that has been pointed out to me. As I said before, my surprise was based on *my* misunderstanding of what that particular mom meant by the term NCB--not the actual details of the birth itself. But based on the responses to this thread, I've been thinking about my reaction and trying to let go of any judgment--conscious or subconscious--I may have. I would never want to give someone the impression that I was judging them for their choices, so this thread has been an eye-opener for me.

Along the same lines, I was rereading the guidelines for this forum and the guidelines themselves use the term natural childbirth. Which makes me wonder if MDC has an "official" or minimum definition. Certainly the term is out there and in use. As for myself, I will continue, as I have, to pretty much avoid it completely.


----------



## Youngfrankenstein (Jun 3, 2009)

I don't think anyone is giving you a hard time...







I believe one of the biggest benefits of MDC is getting us to see how we "sound" or challenge what we think. I would never have guessed that someone may thing that giving birth in a hospital would consider it not NCB...oh well, live and learn.

I completely understand why you asked your question and I think it's sparked a great conversation. I think it can really teach us how to support each other even when we have different viewpoints.


----------

