# Is the baby ALL that really matters?



## amydidit (Jan 21, 2005)

Okay, hear me out...

I frequent several pregnancy related boards and constantly hear things like:

My birth didn't happen like I wanted, but all that mattered was I got my baby

I had to have a section, but I don't care, I have a baby now

Etc etc etc

I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I don't feel like getting my baby in the end is the only important thing about giving birth. Yes, she's important, but if I say I don't care about HOW she gets here then I feel like I'm saying MY feelings aren't important.

I've read on this board a lot about mamas mourning the birth that should've been... to me that makes more sense.

I've been chastised on other boards for saying I would feel depressed and angry if my birth was taken away from me (interventions and such)... after all, if I say that then by their mindset apparently I don't care about the baby. Of course I care about having my baby, but I also care about HOW she gets here. Is that so wrong?

Yes, the baby is the result of birth, but seriously, should that be ALL that matters? There's a saying floating around another board "It doesn't matter how she (he) got here... she's here now and that's what matters." By that feeling I would have no right to cry if I ended up with a ceserean, or forceps, or even an epidural... the baby is here... screw how I feel about how it happened.

Sorry this is so disjointed... it's been bugging me a while though, and I had to get this out. Seriously though... am I so wrong to feel that the baby isn't the ONLY thing that matters in birth? Does that make me a bad mama?


----------



## bri276 (Mar 24, 2005)

I guess it matters the reasons why the birth didn't go as planned.

If the interventions were life-saving, then great. If they were unnecessary, I'd be somewhat upset, but not crushed.

I don't think it's wrong to care a lot about the birth.


----------



## citizenfong (Dec 24, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *amydidit*
"It doesn't matter how she (he) got here... she's here now and that's what matters."

The logical conclusion to this line of thinking is that you are not allowed to grieve or regret any tragedy short of death that befalls your child (or you!). Do these same people think that if your baby, 10 years from now, had to have his/her arm amputated you would not be allowed to be upset about it? Because you "have your baby"?

This kind of logic also assumes that every intervention is lifesaving.

Also, reverse this logic...so, if my goal is a live baby, I must be willing to undergo absolutely any random, arcane, useless, or cruel intervention that the hospital staff can dream up?

"The doctor said if I didn't name my baby Beulah she'd die! But it doesn't matter what her name is, she's here now and that's what matters."

"The nurse punched out my dh when he asked the doctor to wait until my contraction was over before checking my dilation. But it doesn't matter, my baby's here now and that's what matters."

In fairness, all those women have been told at some point that the very interventions that you protest ARE lifesaving, regardless of whether or not that is the truth.

Anyway, they don't even mean it. If something really extreme happened they'd all be yelling, "Sue! Sue!" What they mean is, "You think you know better than the doctor and nurses and what is necessary for a safe birth. Who do you think you ARE, Miss Smartypants?" :LOL

Oh, and of course I think you should be allowed to be disappointed even if the interventions WERE necessary. Are my biases showing?


----------



## Devaskyla (Oct 5, 2003)

http://www.plus-size-pregnancy.org/C...begrateful.htm

I'd post that whenever I see anyone saying something like that, because it's just not true. Of course people are happy/grateful to have a healthy baby (assuming that they do), but that doesn't mean you can't be unhappy about everything else.

"You nearly died, but at least you have a healthy baby." blech.


----------



## theelfqueen (Dec 4, 2002)

A healthy baby is NOT the only desired outcome of a birth - a healthy mother is important too -- including mother's mental health. If a mother feels her birth was not handled properly -- in the way that respected her as a part of the birth, not just as a vessel for babies -- it is not going to acheive that goal, IMO.


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Sadly, women expect very little for themselves when it comes to thier bodies.

We have been trained to believe that our bodies don't work, and that OB's are god's- that with out them, women would be unable to give birth, and most of our babies would be dead.
Our bodies have been made to be mysterious to even ourselves. Only THEY know what's in there, and what to do with it.
Our bodies cannot be trusted to grow a baby of a proper size to come out safely. Our bodies cannot be trusted to feed our babies with out help from scientists who can make a better product than what we have.

I feel sad for women who say "at least I have my baby," but at the same time, I will not tell them the sad truth until they come seeking it.


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Quote:

am I so wrong to feel that the baby isn't the ONLY thing that matters in birth? Does that make me a bad mama?
No, no, no, no, no no noooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I COMPLETELY agree with you!! I had a recent post about this when I thought our baby might be breech and our midwife was talking automatic c-section!!! Well, she isn't breech thank God--and needless to say I have switched midwives (at 38 weeks!!)

Anywhoooooo....

Yeah I agree, the baby's health (and yours!) are VERY important, but it isn't an either/or thing ya know??? You completely deserve the birth you want, and while no one would compromise the life of themselves or their baby on principle---you have EVERY right to do everything you can to ensure the birth you want, and you have EVERY right to be upset/mourn/be angry (whatever you feel) if you don't get the birth you wanted or planned!!

It doesn't mean you love your baby less or that you would have compromised their health!! It just means that you are mourning the birth you didn't get ya know?

you are completely justified in that... I would have been completely devestated if I had to have a c-section (or if God forbid still had to for some emergency)...completely devestated...I know people might say that "devestation" is a dead baby, or whatever...and that is true...but AS IT RELATES TO THE BIRTH EXPERIENCE....a c-section would devestate me...me being thrilled and thankful of a healthy baby is a different issue and of course I would be...

Anyway, I am longwinded (as always) but the birth experience is a completely different thing than being happy your baby is healthy and alive-- of course you are happy and thankful for that!!!! Why are people allowed to feel mourning or sadness or anger from other things but not about a bad birth experience??

In other words if I were in a horrible car wreck that like, damaged me emotionally for life....but came out okay....of course people would be like "well thank God you are alive!!" ---but at the same time, they would be totally sympathetic if I told them I had nightmares about cars, or couldn't ride on a highway, or had to get therapy because of the trauma---but with birth, somehow, people seem to be like "your baby is healthy, get over it".... and that just sucks!!!


----------



## USAmma (Nov 29, 2001)

After ttcing for 12 mos and having 1 m/c before I had Abi, the fact that she was here was more important than the birth itself. Same with Nitara, after threatened losses from 23 weeks onward, I was relieved that it was finally over and she was born safe and full term.

But that doesn't mean that women don't have the right to have the birth they want. I think it's just a way for some women who did have a less than ideal birth to heal from that, a way they can talk to themselves and let go of the anger and sadness and at least feel blessed that they have a healthy baby. KWIM?


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Quote:

I think it's just a way for some women *who did have a less than ideal birth* to heal from that, a way they can talk to themselves and let go of the anger and sadness and at least feel blessed that they have a healthy baby
(emphasis mine)

I completely agree...and well, I can only speak for myself---that is fine if it is the woman in question speaking of her own birth in those terms...of course!!

I just have a problem (not to speak for the OP but I think this is her point too, if I may be so bold) ...when like, family members/friends/people who didn't go through your experience say just nonchalontly..."well, at least your baby is healthy"...as if the birth or the circumstances around it meant really nothing ...ya know?

I would rather at least have someone just even acknowledge my feelings ya know? As in, maybe "well, thank God you and the baby were healthy, but I can imagine that was really scary/hard/upsetting for you plan a homebirth and wind up with a c-section
(or whatever) ---instead of the general attitude of "how DARE she be upset and SO ungrateful...her baby is healthy, why is she bitching????" People won't say that to your face, well, some will, but it does seem to be the general attitude---

I haven't even given birth yet, and that was the attitude I totally got, even with the POTENTIAL of a possible c-section...


----------



## pfamilygal (Feb 28, 2005)

I can kind of see it both ways. I had to have a c/s this time due to transverse lie after SROM. I was upset. Dh and I had finally taken childbirth prep class and I felt excited about him actually being involved in the birth. With our first two I felt a lot of anger because I felt like he put other things first, instead of me and the baby. (A whole other story - I realize now that birth has the ability to bring up a lot of emotions for rape survivors, and I was probably dealing with a lot of past baggage too). I was upset about the c/s and felt somewhat "robbed." But, after 4 days in the NICU, our little Abby came home, perfect and beautiful. A dear friend of mine had a c/s last year, her first baby at 48, and came home with empty arms. Her precious Samuel was born still. I feel conflicted because I know I should be grateful, but I still wanted the chance for a better delivery. I had a lot of problems bf with Abby, some of which were due to the c/s (which led to the NICU). I ep'd for 3 months and my milk dried up. I'm so disappointed that we're not nursing now. She is 9 months now and this was my favorite nursing time with the other 2. We still plan on more kids, and I've found docs who will VBAC, so at least I know there will be chances to try again.


----------



## LoveChild421 (Sep 10, 2004)

Quote:

Sadly, women expect very little for themselves when it comes to thier bodies.
I totally agree with this- in many ways in this culture moms are expected to be martyrs for their children- it isn't acceptable to express our own needs and wants

Is the most important thing about a birth a healthy baby? yes
but isn't the mothers physical and mental/spiritual health important as well?


----------



## kunama (Oct 19, 2004)

I had someone pretty much tell me it was my own fault for getting PTSD after DSs birth cause I thought it through and dared to be upset went it about as far from what I wanted as was possible.

Cause, you know, all that matters is a healthy baby, never mind the crippling flashbacks i'm still having a year later, never mind the fact im still having troble walking from the SPD, never mind the feelings of humiliation and degredation, never mind the big mark on DSs head from the forceps, never mind that i'm too scared to have sex with DH incase I get pregnant again, I got a healthy baby out of it all so it's all ok









Sorry, went a wee bit ranty there!


----------



## jerawo (Jan 28, 2003)

Ugh, I hate that statement! I've found that most of the women who say it are women who ended up with c-sections, and I think they think if they say it enough they will feel better about their births. The truth is I'm going to be disapointed if I end up in the hospital or with a c-section and that's okay. I should feel disapointed if my homebirth doesn't happen, and I have a right to mourn and feel sad (even though I will still end up with a baby). That statement only belittles women's postpartum emotions, and that is one of the major problems with the pp period in this country.


----------



## Full Heart (Apr 27, 2004)

A very good friend of mine lost her dd at 6 weeks old. Now 6 years later as she remembers her dd she can fall back on her pg, those 6 weeks and her birth. A brith that sucked and was taken from her by a dr who was late for dinner. Yes, in the end she had her baby and those precious 6 weeks, but do you know how horrible it is for her to relive that birth as a memory of her daughter? To think back and see that her first moments outside were being pulled out by forceps, taken from momma to a warmer. Hands that touched her first and they weren't her hands. Now had it been an emergency (a true emergency) perhaps she would look on her birth differently, I don't know. But its a little ironic because I was just talking to her about this yesterday. Shes still very upset over what happened during that birth.

In cases of true emergencies there will be mourning, its silly to think that there wouldn't be. Even those not baby related. If a child/spouse looses his sight you mourn the dreams and aspirations that you had. I also see alot of ptsd in women. My own mother can't even go to an ob/gyn w/o having a panic attack and her last birth was 9 years ago. It still affects her.

I really bothers me when people say that the baby is all that really matters because very rarely would those same people ever advocate natural birth or bfing or cding or ec or homeschooling or anything nfl. Everything I do is for my kids. I don't get an epidural because I think its better for my baby. Not because I enjoy pain and am being selfish. I bfed because its better for my baby not because I enjoy exposing myself. I have hbs because I do think its safer for my baby than at a hospital not becasue I am controling and want everything my way. So I guess you can turn it around and say, Yes the baby does matter, that why we do what we do.

I think everything people say is to justify their own decisions and to take guilt away from what they decided to do. Or maybe because they just don't agree with our decisions. Or maybe they just can't think of anything else too say. Its like saying to a mother who m/c - "Oh well you can have another."







: Its just something someone says because they have no idea what else to say. Its not the right thing to say in the least but hey at least they said something









MIchelle


----------



## Bethla (May 29, 2004)

It's even harder when something IS wrong with your baby, because your needs completely fly out of the window. You can't speak up about anything because the health of your baby is the bigger issue.

When my third son was born we found out within a few hours he had a complicated heart defect. He was immediately transported to a hospital two hours away from us. I was not allowed to ride in the ambulance and was immediately discharged from the hospital without being examined. I had to focus all my energy on getting to him. I was soooo tired, I hurt and had to spend so much of my time walking and traveling. I just wanted to be with him. I couldn't hold him, I couldn't nurse him. My body ached to be with him, I had to wait many weeks after his open heart surgery before I could hold him in my arms.

I hurt so much, both inside and out--for myself and for him. No one was there to take care of me and for a long time I mourned that. Maybe I still do...

When you have your baby it is so easy to focus on what didn't go well and interventions that were unwanted. But having a baby born with a health problem is a far worse experience, because as the mother you are truly stressed to the max.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

I had a well thought out, educated birthplan the first time around. A planned Bradley, Natural Childbirth. It was something I had looked forward too well before I even married, much less children.

Things didn't go as planned. I had an emergency cesarean section and it was a horrific experience. The thing is, what landed me there as partly my fault. I had a weirdly transverse breech baby and I attempted an ECV three times with the hope and belief that I could have my natural vaginal birth. I didn't trust my body or my baby. I paid for it in many ways and luckily came out of it a better person, but I suffered greatly along the way. Looking back, I often feel that even through infertility, and the desire to have a baby, to be a mother, I had invested more into my birth than the person I was going to give birth too. If you read my more current posts, you will see I have another pregnancy with a daughter challenging me in a similar way.









Is how you give birth important? Absolutely. However I think any birth can be empowering and teach you life lessons, whether good, bad, intended or unintended. Its hard for the homebirther or the UCer to believe that I had a practically pain free cesarean with my last birth, that it was a wonderful, and spiritual experience -- I changed the way I thought about birth, I looked deep inside of me for what was important, and that my womanhood was not dependent on what passed out of my vagina. I think its bad for women to set their expectations so high, that it leaves them unprepared to deal with the unexpected or the variantions that birthing our babies often throw us.

And I think women should understand that some do not care how they have their babies. Often when you have dealt with infertility or other problems that might have hindered you from having a child, the only goal is having a healthy baby in the end, and how they get here is not nearly as important as how they came out. As my friend tells me, that is why some people like chocolate and some people like vanilla, and then there is neopolatin for those that don't care.

What's important to me, is listening to my body, listening to my babies, and trusting my instincts as a woman and a mother. Whenever I have done these things I have always felt good about my choices and the outcome, when I haven't, I've been left with disappointment and pain.


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
What's important to me, is listening to my body, listening to my babies, and trusting my instincts as a woman and a mother. Whenever I have done these things I have always felt good about my choices and the outcome, when I haven't, I've been left with disappointment and pain.

Yes, I totally agree. This is exactly why I believe that there must be safe, healthy, personally fulfilling choices for the entire spectrum of birthing women. Choices, information, education, respect for the inherent dignity of birth and empowerment for mothers to make their own decisions not based on fear.......









My view of birth is holistic. What's good for the mother is good for the baby and vice versa. You cannot separate the two as they are interconnected and both matter deeply. Just b/c it might be typical to hear the "healthy baby is all that matters" line doesn't make it true or helpful.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

To the OP, since I have only read that post, my complaint with modern obstetrics is that their goal is to simply have a live mother at the end of labor and a healthy baby.

Yeah, you are alive, but in no condition to care for your baby, the most important job and the hardest job there is in all human kind...the responsibility is unrelenting and so important. The nurses, doctors, technicians, and machines in the hospital cannot make up for you what you need to do for your baby.

A healthy baby needs its mama to be there for him/her.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

Quote:

Sadly, women expect very little for themselves when it comes to thier bodies.
SADLY, ITA with this statement.







:


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *applejuice*
SADLY, ITA with this statement.







:

I think it may depend on the woman, I believe there are many many women with the belief and the hope they will have their babies at least vaginally. I had always had the belief that I would birth vaginally and naturally. I always knew I would breastfeed my babies. I always had a sense of how I would parent my children. Early on. Not in my early 20s but as a pre-teen and teenager. I believed that like every woman before me in my maternal and paternal families, that I would have babies the natural way, the "right" way. I know there are women who do not have this inherent belief -- and that is sad, but I had it, it was like a part of who I was. My grandmothers had given birth with long labors, had vaginal breech deliveries, and one even had a baby with a birth defect prematurely that ended up to be my father, that now they would not let women give birth vaginally too. (he was born with his intestines on the outside of the body) My mother had given birth in 42nd week of pregnancy to me, and I weighed nearly 10lbs -- so for me I never had any doubt that my body was capable of doing what thousands of women before me had done.

I read posts here and elsewhere from women seeking the perfect birth, the experience they believe their bodies will perform, that through their pain they will triumph through natural childbirth and I often think "I was one of those women". It just wasnt in the cards for me due to my uterine anomaly. And there are a lots of women who try, and for whatever reason, sometimes legitimate reasons, do not have their ideal birth. Many seem to make peace with that much sooner than others -- I am not so sure it is because they were misinformed or distrusted their bodies abilities.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

WEll, ONTHEFENCE, I also had a very good idea of how I would parent and raise my children.

In some ways I have been successful, and not so in others, and that is part of being a human being. I am lucky that my four homebirths turned out well, and I can take from that the credit due to me and chalk it up to alittle bit of luck also.

I recognize the fact that technology is necessary sometimes and thank G-d for it in those circumstances, but it is over used and unnecessary in many cases.

Thank you for your thoughtful post.


----------



## Black Orchid (Mar 28, 2005)

A few thoughts about this IME...

It took me a long time to get over my DD's birth. It wasn't as bad as it could have been, but it was far from my ideal. Initially, I tried to tell myself that it didn't matter, the fact that I had DD and she was (relatively) unharmed by the interventions, I should be glad.

What I found was that made me feel worse, angrier and like I never wanted to give birth again. It was another way for me to make my feelings unimportant or secondary. And it didn't allow me the chance to go through the process of recovering from a diappointment.

When I eventually began to discuss this experience with others and (gasp!) talk about future births, I found myself looking at what I would do differently and clearly expressing unhappiness about the experience. Because more time had past, I guess I felt more free to talk about my disappointment at my experience. Anyway, it was very healing for me to finally face those feelings.

At this point I am finally able to say, "My DD's birth did not go as I would have liked, but she was fine and I am fine and so that is the most important thing." And mean it. And the next sentance is, "In future births, we are doing x, y and z to make sure it doesn't happen again."

So I gues what I'm saying, IME, yes the baby (outcome) is the most important thing. However, I had to allow myself to grieve my dream birth and be angry about the interventions (aknowledging my feelings) to get to that point.


----------



## cottonwood (Nov 20, 2001)

Um, doesn't the mother's emotional and mental health affect how well she cares for the baby? Then the birth experience *does* matter. Marsden Wagner, who is a physician and a consultant for the World Health Organization, has written,

Quote:

Humanizing birth means understanding that the woman giving birth is a human being, not a machine and not just a container for making babies. Showing women---half of all people---that they are inferior and inadequate by taking away their power to give birth is a tragedy for all society. On the other hand, respecting the woman as an important and valuable human being and making certain that the woman's experience while giving birth is fulfilling and empowering is not just a nice extra, it is absolutely essential as it makes the woman strong and therefore makes society strong.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

ITA, fourlittlebirds; a friend of mine wanted to do her master's thesis at Harvard in the late 1960s on this very subject in psychology, but the professors, all men, did not think it was very important.









Go figure.


----------



## alaska (Jun 12, 2004)

Quote:

My birth didn't happen like I wanted, but all that mattered was I got my baby
I do feel like this and it is demeaning and demoralizing for me to read comments such as I must think this way because I'm trying to rationalize away my guilt (?what guilt?), I'm just being a martyr, or I "expect little" from or do not trust my own body. Comments such as those are just as judgmental - regardless of the fact that they come from a self-reportedly more "AP" or "NFP" perspective.

Feeling disappointed over not having the birth one envisions, and feeling that in the end, all that matters is having a healthy baby, are not mutually exclusive, by the way.

To the OP - if you're reading comments like that on other boards, perhaps you should be giving these women the benefit of the doubt. It is possible for someone to be educated about the birth process AND trust her body, and yet still make a decision that does not comport with what you apparently believe to be the more ideal birthing situation.

I would not presume to tell anyone here what to think about HER OWN birth experience and I think it very ungenerous that some of you felt it acceptable to pass judgment on others for not believing the same way you do. You may not understand why someone would believe that "in the end, all that matters is the baby," but you haven't walked in that person's shoes either.

(And just to clarify something - I think there is a BIG difference between a woman making a comment such as the OP repeated for HERSELF and her own situation, vs. a situation like captain crunchy described where "family members/friends/people who didn't go through your experience say just nonchalontly..."well, at least your baby is healthy"...as if the birth or the circumstances around it meant really nothing ...ya know?" There is no difference between the latter and someone telling me I must feel the way I do because I'm just trying to make myself feel better.)

My life experiences have shaped my perspectives, just as yours have shaped yours. Do not be so quick to dismiss the validity of mine.


----------



## amydidit (Jan 21, 2005)

Thanks you everyone for your responses ~smiles~

These comments I've been reading are coming from women who, usually, have just put themselves in their OBs care and let them do whatever they wanted. And the few times a mama has expressed any depression or anger over her birth NOT going the way she wanted she was immediately jumped on by the others saying "You should just be happy your baby is healthy... it doesn't matter HOW she got here"... so it's not just other women saying these things for themselves.

I've already decided that IF anything happens during my upcoming birth that makes me feel unhappy or angry or ANYTHING other than just overjoyed, I'm going to hav to be very careful where I share those feelings. It's sad to me though that women can't express their feelings about their births without being attacked by SOMEONE because they aren't dismissing everything other than the baby. ~sighs~


----------



## Laziza (Jan 19, 2005)

Obviously, I feel this nowhere as deeply as the mamas on here do, but I did want to say that I think I understand a little bit about what the OP is saying. I feel the saem way about my wedding. Nothing went the way I wanted it to -- seriously, nothing -- but everyone just says, "Well, you got married in the end!" Yes, I did, and that's wonderful, but I had really hoped for more from the day itself. Anyway, like I said, NOWHERE on the scale of giving birth, but, still, it was an important thing for me.


----------



## sarajane (Oct 20, 2004)

I don't believe the baby is all that matters. My husband definately does not either. He said he couldn't truly enjoy our little one until he knew I was okay. He got to hold her right away and I was still asleep in the or with the doctors working on me, they didn't tell him anything. The baby isn't all that matters to my parents, or my husband, or my brother, or my neices and nephews, or my sister-in-law, or any of my family, that is for sure. How can it be all that matters?

It mattered a great deal after she was born that I didn't get the birth I planned. It made it harder for me to take care of her with having to recover not only physically but emotionally. It was harder on my husband. It was harder on my parents. It was harder on everyone because of what happened. I am still dealing with many emotions involving the birth. Many sad emotions. Don't know when I will be completly through with them.

I can tell you I was very hurt by a comment I recieved from someone about what happened. She asked how it went and what happened, I told her and her only comment was "All that matters is the baby is okay." I was very hurt that this person cared nothing for my well-being whatsoever.

There is more than one human life involved in childbirth.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *amydidit*

I've read on this board a lot about mamas mourning the birth that should've There's a saying floating around another board "It doesn't matter how she (he) got here... she's here now and that's what matters." By that feeling I would have no right to cry if I ended up with a ceserean, or forceps, or even an epidural... the baby is here... screw how I feel about how it happened.

This implies though that these things DON'T matter to the BABY! But perhaps they do. Perhaps it is better for the baby to undergo a normal vaginal birth. Perhaphs it is better for the baby if she comes in her own time, rather than being drawn through forceps. Perhaps it is better for the BABY if she isn't drugged through epidural medications.

And of course, your feelings are important, too. I think those other mothers do feel a sense of loss and that's why they say those things. But they don't have anyone to talk to about it either. And they may not even know WHY they feel a sense of loss because we don't have permission to link those feelings to the birth method.

Does that help some?


----------



## laprettygurl (Dec 22, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *amydidit*

I've already decided that IF anything happens during my upcoming birth that makes me feel unhappy or angry or ANYTHING other than just overjoyed, I'm going to hav to be very careful where I share those feelings.

I'll stick up for you Amy!







(let's see how many boards I can get banned from over there! )


----------



## amydidit (Jan 21, 2005)

~laughs~ I've already decided I won't join that after baby one... it'd only be a matter of time before I would be banned... might as well pre-ban myself ~laughs~


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Well, for me at least, there's a difference between "your baby's okay, and that's the most important thing", and "your baby's okay, and _that's all that matters_". I see the first as an acknowledgement that I didn't get the birth I wanted, whereas I see the second as a total dismissal of that fact. If I had to choose between a "perfect" birth experience, and my baby not being okay in the end, or a horrible birth experience, and my baby being okay - I'd obviously choose the latter. (The big problem is that there's no way to know.)

I've had two c/s I didn't want. I hate them more than I can say, and this pregnancy has been...grotesque, because of the fear of another one. But, I still want this baby, and I still want it to be healthy and happy. I got pregnant knowing that my doctor wants me to be cut open again...because having the baby counts more than not wanting to go through the surgery.

_But_, when someone says that the baby is _all_ that matters, I see it quite differently. To me, that's like saying that I'm not allowed to be upset at being cut open...I'm not allowed to wish I weren't in so much pain the first few weeks with my little ones...I'm not allowed to be angry that women who totally neglect themselves while pregnant have relatively easy deliveries (I've known way too many of this type)...I'm not allowed to regret that I have no idea what it feels like to give birth. To me, that's incredibly petty minded.


----------



## NoraB (Dec 10, 2002)

On one level, having a healthy baby IS of paramount importance. However, that still does not negate the impact of the mother's birth experience. IMO, one can separate the _birth of the child_ from the _mother's birth experience_. They are not 9at least, not always) one and the same.

I had my DD via c/s. While I was immensely grateful to have her and that she was healthy, I was traumatized by the surgery itself. I was joyful for my DD and even the memory of her first cry was joyful, the aftermath of the surgery itself and its impact on my emotions left me w/ a lot of fear, anger, and sadness.

It seems patronizing to me to even say that "it's okay to grieve if you don't get the birth experience you wanted." My own grief and anger wasn't about being deprived of some ideal birth experience. While I do regret (and have mourned) the _loss_ of a natural, vaginal childbirth, my grief over the birth experience I did have was much more profound. If my feeling had been only due to the loss of the dreamed about birth, I think I could have healed much sooner than I did b/c I can accept that birth is not something we can control. However, my feelings stemmed from the trauma of the birth experience I did have. I think that for me (and maybe for many women), what _did_ happen had much more impact than what _did not_ happen. KWIM?

FTR, I actually chose my c/s b/c DD was breech and my amniotic fluid was too low to attempt a version. I didn't know much about natural methods of encouraging the baby to turn (other than laying at a 45 degree angle w/ head down...which gave me horrific headaches) or vaginal delivery of a breech baby (my OB impressed on me she _could_ deliver vag but the baby might get stuck and die). I didn't understand that it might be better to at least go into labor eirther. Right up until the end of the procedure itself, I was fairly comfortable w/ my decision. The psychological horror of it mostly came after.


----------



## coralsmom (Apr 1, 2005)

i just wanted to share a different perspective on this interesting question... (i'm sorry in advance because my posts tend to be so darn lengthy) i don't have much of an opportunity to discuss my birthing experience, so i have a lot of feelings about it just rolling around in my brain.
my perspective comes from the sad ending of a baby who was not 'ok'- she died before she was born. beyond this reality, i went into her birth very prepared and pretty set in my ideas of how i wanted the birth to go... a detailed birth plan based in a natural birth experience and hoping for no need for any interventions, as well as a midwife who was supportive of this and a group of nurses at the birth center in the hospital who respected our wishes. i was worried, though, that when push came to shove, they may try to intervene, and it gave me a little stress thinking i'd have to waste my focus and energy on making sure interventions didn't happen. when we found out she had died in the middle of her birth, i could almost hear my birth plans getting flushed down the toilet! there were so many emotions all entangled in the decisions that followed, and i am amazed that my first reaction to the news that there was no heartbeat, i immediately thought of a c-section, exactly what i was so afraid of having happen. i know that i was mentally trying to just 'make it all go away' by getting anesethia and waking up not pregnant. my midwife carefully and very caringly led me away from this initial reaction, and we decided to have a vaginal birth, _but_... i had an iv put in, an intrathecal, two kinds of drugs, and my midwife attempted to rupture the membrane 4 times to no avail...this is the memory that just haunts me... hopelessly and kind of helplessly watching her try to do this, extemely aware that it was just all _so_ wrong. i felt that since the baby's health was no longer in danger of being affected by drugs, it didn't matter if i had them... in fact, they really didn't have much of an affect on me...the situation was so unexpected and surreal, my mind wouldn't accept the relief the drugs were offering, maybe? in the end, her actual birth was totally amazing and i didn't care about anything except to be able to see her. when my body started to push her out, i was just blown away by this feeling... it occured to me that i didn't actually _need_ anyone to attend to me during her birth... my body was doing it so perfectly on its own. i'll always remember that... it made her birth beautiful to me, knowing that my body was able to work through all of the interventions and my own shock and sorrow to do what it was supposed to do...

so, i guess what i am trying to say is that i can separate my birth experience from the tragic end to my birth story... i am not too happy with how it went, of course. i wish my mind hadn't had such a powerful take-over affect and that i was able to deny interventions even in the face of her death. on the other hand, i know i would have done anything, any intervention, in trade for her being able to live. i think if i am lucky enough to get pregnant again and have the opportunity to experince another birth, i will still use my original birth plan, and continue to hope for the best. but i definately feel a loss of the birth i had planned for, prepared for, and wanted to have so badly.

i know that some of you are pregnant, and i _hope hope hope_ that my sad contribution hasn't given any of you any negative thoughts, etc. if it has i am so sorry. i wish that each of you can experience the birth that you dream of, and for those who have had it taken away from you, either by necessity or unfortunate intervention, i hope you can have a healing for this loss.
thanks for listening.


----------



## HeartsOpenWide (Mar 1, 2005)

I think a lot of the time when birth does not go as planned one is at risk for PPD


----------



## crunchyconmomma (Feb 6, 2003)

NO, a healthy baby is not all that matters and YES, it is, at the same time. true health is WHY i chose homebirth AND hypnobirth - b/c a healthy baby means healthy in body, MIND AND SPIRIT. a baby born in a traumatic setting cannot start out in this life in a healthy way. i am not entirely sure if he could ever be healthy in this existence in those respects. as healthy as possible, i suppose.
what of the fact that a mother's body biologically thinks that her baby died when she has a section? when it becomes medically necessary, then yes, the healthy baby is all that matters. but when it is elective, then NO, there is much more to it than the embarrassingly inaccurate markers of health that the western world chooses to subscribe to. how can a person be psychologically healthy when his mother's body thinks he is dead? how can they bond, physiologically? i know i did not bond at all to my own mother and i DO think it had to do very largely with our birth. i was a section, and she was drugged with demerol for some time prior, slowing her down so much that she "needed" the section. i do not believe this in any way constitutes "medically necessary," but rather medical neglect or medical ignorance, more accurately.
a healthy baby IS all that matters, but let us first define "healthy" and then we shall see the fallacy that is common practice obstetrics.


----------



## NoraB (Dec 10, 2002)

Coralsmom,

I am so sorry for your loss.


----------



## NoraB (Dec 10, 2002)

Kate,

Quote:

a healthy baby IS all that matters, but let us first define "healthy" and then we shall see the fallacy that is common practice obstetrics.
I agree. I think the Western definition of health leaves a lot to be desired.

Could you elaborate on the connection between c/s and a mother biologically thinking her child has died? I hadn't heard that before and I'm very interested in learning more.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *crunchyconmomma*
NO, a healthy baby is not all that matters and YES, it is, at the same time. true health is WHY i chose homebirth AND hypnobirth - b/c a healthy baby means healthy in body, MIND AND SPIRIT. a baby born in a traumatic setting cannot start out in this life in a healthy way. i am not entirely sure if he could ever be healthy in this existence in those respects. as healthy as possible, i suppose.
what of the fact that a mother's body biologically thinks that her baby died when she has a section? when it becomes medically necessary, then yes, the healthy baby is all that matters. but when it is elective, then NO, there is much more to it than the embarrassingly inaccurate markers of health that the western world chooses to subscribe to. how can a person be psychologically healthy when his mother's body thinks he is dead? how can they bond, physiologically? i know i did not bond at all to my own mother and i DO think it had to do very largely with our birth. i was a section, and she was drugged with demerol for some time prior, slowing her down so much that she "needed" the section. i do not believe this in any way constitutes "medically necessary," but rather medical neglect or medical ignorance, more accurately.
a healthy baby IS all that matters, but let us first define "healthy" and then we shall see the fallacy that is common practice obstetrics.

I will not speak to my adopted sons birth because it was not my own, but I can most certainly say that for my first two births, they were birthed in the healthiest way -- else they be dead. In my son's birth, a planned cesarean section, it was not traumatic in anyway, my body definitely wasn't of the belief my baby was dead, and the bond between us was instant. There was a great breastfeeding relationship, and even though I had an epidural for the birth my baby was wide awake, alert, and taking in the world. I think its cruel and not even based on fact to say that mother's who have cesareans or traumatic vaginal births bodies believe their babies are dead. Good lord. Many of healthy babies are born, emotionally and physically to women who do not have ideal births. I personally think its odd and a load of newagepsych0babble to blame bad mother-child relationships on one event -- birth. I say this not only as a mother who has birthed but as one who adopted a newborn, AND according to my own mother, was not born of an ideal birthing experience.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NoraB*
Kate,
I agree. I think the Western definition of health leaves a lot to be desired.

Could you elaborate on the connection between c/s and a mother biologically thinking her child has died? I hadn't heard that before and I'm very interested in learning more.

Yeah I would be interested in this too, and I hope there is some basis for it, because no where in my research have I ever come across something like that. Of course the premise to me is a bunch of hogwash just thinking about it.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

If my body believed that my babies had died (both c/s deliveries), why would I still produce milk? I successfully b/f both my kids, and I certainly don't think we ended up with any bonding/attachment issues, despite my emotional problems with the births themselves.


----------



## coralsmom (Apr 1, 2005)

i asked my midwife after the birth was over about my body knowing or not knowing whether coral had died... she told me there would have been no difference in the way her birth went. i realize that i did go into labor on my own, and after her birth, i physiologically was postpartum... milk came down, uterus firmed and dropped down, just as if my baby was alive. i really don't know much about the body thinking the baby has died after a c-section, but my body didn't have a sense that coral was gone... that's one of the difficult parts of stillbirth- many mother's go through 'normal' postpartum functions, yet no baby.
and i just wanted to add that my hypnobirthing breathing and relaxation stayed in affect throughout her entire birth- i believe that i was able to give her a calm, smooth, loving transition into her death just as i would have if she was born alive.


----------



## alaska (Jun 12, 2004)

Coralsmom.
You sound like an incredibly strong woman.


----------



## cottonwood (Nov 20, 2001)

It's pretty simple, really -- the presence of the baby is not the only factor in what the mother's body does after birth. Ideally the mother survives after there is a stillbirth, so the body by itself usually takes care of preventing hemorrhage, for example (and I assume that the same hormones that protect the mother's life are tied in with milk production.) But not always, which is why it's important to have the baby close to mother if possible, facilitating more hormone production as insurance. All bodies are not created equal. Some can function well under adverse circumstances that would disable and damage others. Not knowing who is going to be who, though, as a general rule it makes sense to give babies and mothers as much of a chance at normality as possible, and that means not interfering with the hormonal process.

So you (not speaking to anyone in particular, here,) took the technocratic route and you feel very good about it and feel that it has not adversely affecting your health or the mother-child relationship. That doesn't mean that the importance of protecting the hormonal process of recovery and becoming a mother is a myth; it means either that you were lucky and that your body is especially resilient, or, that your belief system pulled you through (mind over matter,) or, that not having experienced normal birth and bonding you really have no inner understanding of what other people mean by "normal" because you haven't experienced it.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

fourlittlebirds, I find that last paragraph so condescending.

first you are not going to convince me that I had unnatural bonding with my children, or for the millions of other women who have had non-all natural vaginal births or cesareans.

Also, let me just say that I think some of the things done in the "natural birthing community" is not "normal", and not always so natural and pure. In the big scheme of things, is it really all that different if a woman at home takes herbs to induce labor vs going a medical route at a hospital -- like the use of cervidil? Or how about women who drink alcohol in labor, is it all that different than the woman who takes demerol? No, not really. And I am not of the belief, nor will I be convinced that UC is "normal" in the realm of womanhood and birth because historically women have been supported and attended to by women in childbirth (and for good reason) I think to taunts ones way as the only normal way to give birth is a way to say "My experience is superior to your experience as a woman" and frankly I am not buying it -- I haven't bought into that with religion, and I won't be for birth either.

Another thing, some of us didn't choose the route we gave birth -- it was dealt to us. I didn't choose to have a deformed uterus -- nor did the thousands of other women who have mullerian anomalies that have had cesarean sections. The only "normal" way these women have to birth, is through cesarean.


----------



## cottonwood (Nov 20, 2001)

Why is it condescending? This is academic, not personal. Let me try to put it another way.

In this country we have a large percentage of women who have never experienced a normal hormonal process and the benefits that are specific to it, and (as the OP asserts) they have decided that because they are happy with how things worked out for them, that those "supposed" benefits (from their perspective) are really not that big a deal, if they exist at all. Which is an assumption, not a logical truth. My point was, first, that there are many reasons a mom and baby might come out of an unnatural birth "fine" --we have back-up systems that work, more or less, for many people. And second, if you haven't experienced something, how can you judge its worth to others?

I do not need or want to convince you that your bonding experience was any particular thing at all. That's not my concern. My concern is that society in general is dismissive and antagonistic toward the idea that the circumstances surrounding birth can have an affect on the health (mental, emotional, physical) of both mother and baby, so that people who make choices that are not purely mechanistic are accused of being selfish and naive, and are bullied and harassed into denying their instincts and common sense because "all that matters is getting a live baby." I can tell you from personal experience that it's _not_ all that matters; my ability to bond, mother, and care for my baby was directly affected by the circumstances surrounding my births. That isn't a judgement of you; it just simply is a fact for me and for many others.

Just so there isn't any question about it: I'm not judging anyone for having a cesarean birth. That's not what this is about, at all. In any case, I know that sometimes we don't have a choice, if we want a live baby (although why that disclaimer should be necessary I don't know; we all know it.)

I totally agree with you that not all that happens in the name of "natural birth" is natural.

And last, I don't understand what the point is of bringing a critique of UC into this. The subject of the thread is whether the mother's experience of birth matters or not, not whether UC is normal or not.


----------



## mmaramba (May 17, 2005)

fourlittlebirds,









I think I agree with everything you're saying about dismissing birth experiences in their entirety... Not good.

Doesn't meant that they can't be "overcome," maybe even "easily" for some women and babies.

But we shouldn't just dismiss them.

I had this conversation w/my SIL the other day, about her best friend, who wanted a VBAC. (First C-sec seemed to be for abrupted placenta. Although... I don't know).

SIL: Well, her doctor said he'd do VBAC, but her hospital said no. She's disappointed.
Me: Oh, that's too bad.
SIL: Well, I told her that natural birth isn't all it's cracked up to be!
Me:







: Um, didn't you have epidurals?
SIL: Yeah.
Me: So, uh... When you say "natural," you mean vaginal?
SIL: Yeah. And let me tell you, I was still sore for weeks afterward!
Me: Well... you had episiotomies with both of them, right?
SIL: They *had* to do them. The babies didn't come out fast enough!
Me:







(Thinking: Um, okay... But you've never had a C-sec, right? So you might not think she's missing much by not having a V-birth, but you can't really compare, can you? She might happily trade with you, if she could!)

But no, it's all "six of one, half a dozen of the other."









No, it's not. You might "end up fine," which is great. And I'm talking about odds, not certainties.

But let's not minimize birth experiences like _they're all the same._


----------



## huggerwocky (Jun 21, 2004)

I think that statement is offensive and reduces women to birthing machines.


----------



## NoraB (Dec 10, 2002)

Quote:

I think that statement is offensive and reduces women to birthing machines.
It seems to me that it's the modern American (and probably in some other industrialized nations too) birth practices that reduce the female body to a machine...and a defective one at that. I found Floyd's Birth as an American Right of Passage to be quite illuminating.


----------



## cottonwood (Nov 20, 2001)

A previous poster was asking about studies that look at the affect of hormones in labor and birth on the ability to mother (including the ability to breastfeed) and bond. Here is an article that looks at some of these studies:

http://www.michelodent.com/news.php?id=14


----------



## mandalamama (Sep 1, 2004)

(edited to say what i really meant to say)

{{{great big hugs for coralsmom}}} your attitude about your birth and your baby has touched my heart in so many ways. isn't it amazing how the human mind and body can both grieve and celebrate on so many different levels?

OnTheFence: i think you're doing a great job of birthing babies. it's one thing to have an unexpected cesarean that takes one by surprise, it's another to have a uterine deformity necessitating cesarean and have the courage to say "ah, so this is how it will be. bring it on."

regardless of how prepared and educated i was for childbirth, regardless of how i had 2 doulas attending me, regardless of how long i labored naturally with no interventions, regardless of how many different laboring positions i went through ... i had a cesarean. going into it - signing the papers, being wheeled down the hall, getting the spinal, all that stuff - i was already deeply, deeply in mourning. even my OB knew i was grieving the loss of "my birth" and she hugged me tight as i made the decision. looking back the day after, i knew there was no alternative (Willow had a very short cord wrapped twice around her neck, she "yo-yo'd" the whole time and never dropped past -3) and i knew i could make my peace with that, someday. but at the time it was happening, i could only zoom through my thoughts "what did i miss, what did i do wrong, what's wrong with my body?!" in pure panic and fear. i have become grateful for the labor, every second of it, i loved "dancing" with my daughter through each surge.









PTSD is a very real demon and should never be minimized or dismissed. Willow is 7 months old now, and i still have frequent nightmares about c-birth stuff ... nightmares about the operating room, of the bright light, the echoing voices, the cold air, the metallic noises ... about how the spinal went wrong and i was completely numb and paralyzed, ... about how i'm all alone in the OR and laid out in that horrible "crucifixion" pose, strapped down ... and the worst for me: nightmares where i wake up and Willow's been taken from my arms while we were both asleep, i scream her name but i can't move, but then i *really* wake up and she's right there, soundly asleep in my arms (i'm glad i don't scream my way out of bad dreams and disturb her!).

there ARE bonding issues for me, and i DO blame it on the c-birth, rightly or wrongly. sure, i'll tell you that i value my scar as my "other birth canal" and i plan to get a spiral tattoo above it someday, i'll tell you that i've grieved and mourned, i'll tell you i loved my labor, yada yada. and then my daughter cries one of those cries where i've gone through everything and i still can't figure out why she's crying, and i blame myself and my body and the surgery for my inability to know why she's crying. what if i'd birthed her vaginally and held her right away, would i be able to know the source of her every cry? i have no idea. i'll never know for sure.

when Willow was about 2 weeks old, we were skin-to-skin in bed after nursing, and on a sudden impulse i laid her head-down on my belly, let her body slide down between my legs onto the bed and then lifted her up into my arms ... just to feel even a little of what it would have felt like. i cried and cried and cried, just holding and rocking her, feeling really stupid for play-acting at a normal birth. but now i realize that was just my way of trying to recover from the grief. and it was a little bit healing, to imagine something so wonderful, to play-act it with her sleepy, soft, warm little body. agh, i haven't shared that with anyone yet, not even my husband, i don't know why i've spewed it out now. i just really, really want to make the point that of course the baby is the most important thing, but the birth is how the baby gets here, and it IS possible to feel different feelings on different levels all at the exact same time.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *fourlittlebirds*
A previous poster was asking about studies that look at the affect of hormones in labor and birth on the ability to mother (including the ability to breastfeed) and bond. Here is an article that looks at some of these studies:

http://www.michelodent.com/news.php?id=14

Oy. Forgive me but I find it a crock. Its subjection and opinion on various studies ranging from the early 60s to 2000 (most are more than 20yrs old), and mainly on rats and mice when it comes to effects of oxytocin and bonding. The author is hardly open minded or objective as well. So nope this isn't a study saying that a mother who has a cesarean views her baby has died. While I think birth does play a part in bonding, whether it be good, bad, ugly --you aren't going to convince me that the women here who have had epidural births, pit induced births, or surgical mothers lack certain abilities or hormonal function to be mothers, good mothers to their young (unlike the rats who let their young DIE). I am also not going to buy into this notion that my kids are going to being born with mental health issues, learning disabilities, or eating disorders because they were born by cesarean other than an all natural birth. Nope, nadda, not going to believe it -- because too many things factor in like genetics, prenatal care, diet, personal temperment, and enviroment -- not to mention the spiritual side to it all.

I think its sad (and disgusting) that this kind of stuff is used to make women feel guilty about their births, or make their births seem less than to elevate anothers choices or sometimes not their choice at all.


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

I think when you have a healthy baby through a birthing process with a lot of medical interventions, that's the situation for which the expression "mixed feelings" was invented. I had a vaginal birth. My plan was to have a natural birth with no drugs in the hospital, using a birthing tub, and my CNM practice supported me in that. I took hypnobirthing classes, but didn't practice.

At 5PM on my due date, I was at work and my waters broke. For the next 40 hours, I waited for labor to start. I tried spicy food. I tried shiatsu (for hours, with lots of pummeling!) I tried herbs. I was in touch with the midwives on call the whole time. Finally, I went in to the hospital and had a pitocin induction. I had contractions, but not full fledged labor, for 24 hours. After 24 hours, I agreed to pain relief medication (Nubain). Then I agreed to an epidural, essentially because I was tired and hadn't had any food for 24 hours, and had been contracting with some discomfort. It seemed like we had to double the pitocin to make birth happen, so I was given enough pain meds to sleep for three hours while the pitocin did its work. Then I had about 8 hours at the pushing stage, with a break in the middle for the anaesthesiologist to come and turn off the pain meds because I couldn't push through them. Finally my CNM did an episiotomy right before I pushed the baby out. Pretty nearly as soon as he was born, the L&D nurse took him across the room to check him out, even though I protested that i wanted to nurse him right away. They didn't have him long, but I think it did disrupt the nursing process, and I didn't like it that I labored for soooooo long and someone else was even holding the baby!

I felt grateful that my baby was healthy and alert at birth in spite of my having agreed to pain drugs. I felt relieved that I had avoided a c-section and didn't have to recover from one, because of my CNM's birth skills. I felt exhausted and panicky because my baby didn't know how to latch on and establishing breastfeeding was insanely difficult. I felt disappointed that my birth was a very medical experience. I felt ambivalent (and now feel quite angry!) that the CNM decided to cut me. I felt deficient because my body didn't go into labor by itself. I felt very lucky because my baby was so incredible, but also like I had gotten away with something. My birthing process was so unreal that I couldn't believe this was really my child. How did I even get such a great kid. I still think that sometimes. I wish I had insisted at the outset that they had to do all exams with the baby _on my body_ and that I wanted to wait to bathe him until I was recovered enough to be there.

So yes, I think you can hold gratitude and joy over the baby and disappointment and even anger about the birth in the same heart!


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Mellybean,

I want to say I can relate. I did have PTSD after I had my first child, I did mourn that I would not be able to have a natural childbirth, a homebirth, and I was literally "tortured" in the OR that day. I had nightmares for months, had PPD, etc. I did get "over it". It took five years but I did. However I don't think the birth itself ( the actual act of the cesarean) affected bonding, gave me nightmares, etc. It was much bigger than that. I am one of the few people I know that have had the problems you and I both experienced having a surgical birth. (FTR, I had no problems breastfeeding) I contribute a lot of my grief and pain to not following my instincts, to being so engrained to one idea of thinking, and the judgement I had for so long placed upon other women and how they birthed in general. There were so many things that played into that day, that I think it would be unreasonable to say "this is why" I had the problems I did (surgical birth alone), because I didn't have those problems with my second cesarean and my second biological child. I seriously doubt I will have any problems this time around either.

Thanks for sharing your private and personal moments, I think its a good thing here for all to read.


----------



## cottonwood (Nov 20, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
Oy. Forgive me but I find it a crock. Its subjection and opinion on various studies ranging from the early 60s to 2000 (most are more than 20yrs old), and mainly on rats and mice when it comes to effects of oxytocin and bonding. The author is hardly open minded or objective as well. So nope this isn't a study saying that a mother who has a cesarean views her baby has died. While I think birth does play a part in bonding, whether it be good, bad, ugly --you aren't going to convince me that the women here who have had epidural births, pit induced births, or surgical mothers lack certain abilities or hormonal function to be mothers, good mothers to their young (unlike the rats who let their young DIE).

I am wondering if you bothered to read the whole article, as this part addresses the animal/human comparison problem (bold emphasis mine):

_It is noticeable that at all stages of the history of the scientification of love there have been convincing animal experiments. This is a reason to clarify what we can learn from non human mammals and also the limits of what we can learn from them. Let us take as an example the experiment by Krehbiel and Poindron, who studied the link between the birth process and maternal behavior. They found that after giving birth with epidural anesthesia, ewes do not take care of their lambs(21). It is obvious that the effects of an epidural anesthesia during labor among humans are much more complex than among sheep. It is easy to interpret such differences. *Human beings use elaborated forms of communication and create cultures; this implies that our behaviors are less directly under the effects of the hormonal balances and more directly under the effects of the cultural milieu.* This does not mean that we have nothing to learn from the sheep. *Animal experiments indicate which question we should raise where human beings are concerned.* If ewes do not take care of their lambs after giving birth with an epidural anesthesia, this implies that where human beings are concerned the right question is: what is the future of a civilization born under epidural anesthesia?_

I have no idea about a study about cesarean mom's bodies reacting as though the baby has died -- I wonder if that was just an inference of the reader's, based on the fact when the natural birth process is cut short (or not allowed to happen at all) certain hormones do not get released, or in lesser amounts. For instance, a couple of studies that have been done recently (and on humans) show that

_Beta-endorphins levels increase during labor and induce the release of prolactin. Women who gave birth vaginally release oxytocin in a pulsatile way during breastfeeding, 2 days after birth, while women who gave birth by emergency caesarean section do not. The "pulsatility" of oxytocin release is associated with the duration of exclusive breastfeeding and with the amount of milk transferred from mother to baby(23). Women delivered by cesarean section lacked a significant rise in prolactin levels at 20-30 minutes after the onset of breastfeeding(23). In addition, colostral milk beta-endorphin concentrations of mothers who delivered vaginally are significantly higher in the fourth postpartum day than colostrum levels of mothers who underwent caesarean section(24). One of the effects of milk opiates is probably to induce a sort of addiction to mother's milk._

Quote:

I think its sad (and disgusting) that this kind of stuff is used to make women feel guilty about their births, or make their births seem less than to elevate anothers choices or sometimes not their choice at all.
What a despicable thing it would be to use these studies for those purposes.


----------



## cottonwood (Nov 20, 2001)

I meant to mention too, on a personal note, that I was a cesarean baby (_and_ I spent my first week of life in the hospital nursery!) and my mom was able to breastfeed me just fine. Although she did have trouble after her second cesarean with low milk supply and stopped at six weeks. I have to wonder if that had anything to do with the fact that she was not allowed to go into labor with the second, and so that oxytocin wasn't released... well, of course, back then too the baby was whisked away and kept in the nursery as much as possible and that can't have helped.

Also, OTF, concerning motive, one reason that the science of the hormonal process is important to me is because _I_ had a traumatic birth with serious PPD (which, fwiw, had nothing to do with guilt over not fulfilling others' expectations -- I had none) and I have sought to understand why so that I could avoid that trauma and difficult postpartum with future children. Understanding what role hormones play in birth has helped me to do that, and I am sure I am not the only one who could benefit from this understanding, so I talk about it.

Mellybean (I have a Willow too







) your words have touched me so deeply, thank you for sharing them.


----------



## RachelGS (Sep 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *applejuice*
ITA, fourlittlebirds; a friend of mine wanted to do her master's thesis at Harvard in the late 1960s on this very subject in psychology, but the professors, all men, did not think it was very important.









Go figure.

I DID write my doctoral dissertation on this topic in clinical psychology.







for my committee for supporting me in doing that! It was amazing, fascinating work. I loved it.

As for the original question, NO, I don't believe that the baby is all that matters. Certainly it matters if you get your baby here safely, but women are not treated respectfully and humanely in birth in the US. Since this can affect self-esteem, body image, confidence in breastfeeding and parenting, and can cause long-term grief and loss issues for which there is relatively little empathy or support, I think it's a huge deal. Birth is an important psychological event for a mother, not just a change of address for a baby.


----------



## Kincaid (Feb 12, 2004)

.


----------



## cottonwood (Nov 20, 2001)

I'm so sorry.









There's not a one of us that would trade a healthy baby for a "good" birth.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Kincaid, you left this preggo momma crying tonight. Your post, your story says it all.
It is sad that some of us have had to learn lessons in such a cruel and harsh way. I was lucky, my baby was lucky, even though I made some very selfish choices in an attept to get the birth I wanted.

Peace and hugs to you, I appreciate you sharing your experience and your childs.

Kim


----------



## RachelGS (Sep 29, 2002)

That was awful, awful midwife advice. Nobody here is suggesting that you should go for a dream birth at your baby's expense. We're saying that the high-intervention, low-respect births that most women have (without medical cause) are a big deal, and that simply having a healthy baby does not make it not a big deal. But what you're talking about is a medical emergency that was grossly mismanaged. I'm so sorry that happened to you.


----------



## Kincaid (Feb 12, 2004)

.


----------



## paquerette (Oct 16, 2004)

I've only skimmed this thread so I might have missed some stuff, but I wanted to share my experience. I didn't have my ideal birth (uc) but I didn't have a horrible birth, at least I keep telling myself that. So many out there have had much worse experiences, so I should consider myself lucky. I had a quick, no meds, low pain, no epis, vaginal hospital birth. Couldn't use their stupid ill designed squat bar, and I couldn't verbalize that I wanted help getting into all-fours, if they would have even agreed to that. They BS'ed that she was "in distress" when she came out and they just had to cut the cord right away and take her to the other side of the room. And it seems like such a little thing compared to everything that could have gone wrong. But I spent weeks missing "my" baby and wondering who this screaming unhappy little creature was. I still pat my belly sometimes looking for my baby that used to be in there. Her father went with them when they took her, so he's the one who didn't abandon her and let her down. She only wanted to be near me to nurse for a long time. Sometimes, still does, but now sometimes she will actually cry for me when he has her. I have moments, less now I guess, where I wanted to give her away and start again with a "real" birth and a baby that doesn't hate me. Even in good moments, sometimes I feel like I think an adoptive mother might -- I love her, I'm her mother, but I don't feel like there's any physical connection. And the weird thing is she looks just like me. If it wasn't for that I don't know what I'd think. And I'm still very resentful of my husband for falling down on the job. I hit transition and when I said I can't do this, I want to go to the hospital, he was all for it. I wish he would have told me months before that he was going to wuss out and we needed to get a midwife -- but he's too much of a cheapskate to go for that anyway. Next time I have a UC, he's not invited -- I doubt if I'm inviting him to the conception, either.







:

Sorry for getting long-winded here. 4 months later and I haven't talked about this much.


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *paquerette*
But I spent weeks missing "my" baby and wondering who this screaming unhappy little creature was. I still pat my belly sometimes looking for my baby that used to be in there. Her father went with them when they took her, so he's the one who didn't abandon her and let her down. She only wanted to be near me to nurse for a long time. Sometimes, still does, but now sometimes she will actually cry for me when he has her. I have moments, less now I guess, where I wanted to give her away and start again with a "real" birth and a baby that doesn't hate me. Even in good moments, sometimes I feel like I think an adoptive mother might -- I love her, I'm her mother, but I don't feel like there's any physical connection.

I went through something like this, as I said above. It felt like I had gotten away with something, that I was pregnant and then I got this great baby but I couldn't feel the connection. It was like a prize! Wow! I wonder if a lot of women feel this anyway, no matter what kind of birth we have. It's kind of mysterious on some level. I think nursing and carrying him around and sleeping with him helped me to feel more physically connected.

I think most babies under four months want to nurse all the time, and many scream a lot, too. It doesn't mean the baby feels abandoned or hates you. At least, I don't think it does! It means the baby is going through a gazillion little growth spurts and is hungry, and is bringing up your milk supply. The screaming is feeling disorganized, especially in the evenings. Sometimes it takes awhile to get that rhythm down.


----------



## CountryMom2e (Apr 1, 2005)

I agree - I had an emergency c with a bunch of complications after an incredibly healthy pregnancy and TTC for over a year. I was grateful to have my son, but I still was depressed over my birth experience. I am glad I did all I could do - I had a terrific doula, great midwives, tried to avoid most interventions but sometimes even the best planned birth does not happen as expected! When we decided to do the C and DH went off to get into scrubs, I wept because I needed to grieve the natural birth I had wanted for me and for DS.

I think the problem is that people don't want to acknowledge that there are "good" and "bad" births from the mother's perspective. As far as the docs are concerned, the only "bad" birth results in injury to child or mother. But why are we surprised? Our feelings rarely factor in to prenatal or postnatal care.

Over time I have come to accept my birth experience as it was. And while I hope my next birth comes a bit closer to plan, I also fear that the same will happen. Part of me doesn't why to try a VBAC because I actually think it's worse from the mom's perspective to try for a vaginal birth and "fail" than to just plan for another section. In my case, I had pushed for over 3 hrs before we had to have the section. It was like running a marathon, and in the last few miles, someone came by to pick me up in a taxi instead of letting me finish.


----------



## laralou (Nov 27, 2001)

I am answering the OP here. Coming from a less than optimal birth, I can say that "a healthy baby is all that matters" is the mantra of those of us who don't want to dwell on our birth experiences. I wanted the perfect birth, and to some extent in hindsight see how I could have accomplished it, but if I focus on what I didn't get, I will be losing sight of the most important thing now, that I had two healthy babies who latched on perfectly. I would have loved a natural birth, but I can't dwell on it, so I focus on what I do have.

So yes, a natural birth is optimal, best for the mother and the baby. Drugs, lying on your back attached to machines, and surgical birth aren't natural or best, except when the baby or mother's health is at risk. But I don't see rubbing salt in the wounds of someone who wanted better, but on the other hand, education is the only way women will learn that they need to fight for what is best for our babies.


----------



## NoraB (Dec 10, 2002)

Kincaid,

You mentioned in your first post that you were afraid you had abrupted. Perhaps your body did know, but it sounds like your MW didn't encourage you to trust your instincts in that regard. I'm not trying to lay any blame here at all, please don't think so. But I think that we do have to balance "nature" w/ technology sometimes. I hate the overuse of technology and how the medical model of childbirth has stolen birth from women, but I'm grateful that technology is there when we need it.

HUGS.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kincaid*
OB's are taught that no death and no complication is acceptable, and so they aggressively treat to that small percentage. They are not "bad guys" who are out to disrespect our bodies. They just play the odds differently. They have their eye on the small percent who goes wrong, and they act accordingly.

If "no complication is acceptable", why do they cut open women for approximately 25-30% of births on this continent? The fact that they cut me open for my son made it much more likely that they'd do so again with my daughter...and almost impossible that they _won't_ do so with this baby. I don't demonize OBs. But, any profession that feels that a mother who can barely stand up long enough to change a diaper is a "healthy" mom and that cutting open and damaging a woman's uterus isn't a "complication" seriously needs to rethink their viewpoint. I have two doctors worried sick because I want to VBA2C. They're soooo concerned about uterine rupture - but that's apparently not a complication, because they go right ahead and do the primary c-sections in the first place.


----------



## Arwyn (Sep 9, 2004)

Kincaid, you have every right to feel that you would trade your "ideal" birth for a healthy baby. And in your case, maybe it would have been better to have had a c/sec.

But the problem is that you seem to think problems _don't_ happen with medically managed births. They do. They happen more often. About the same number of mothers and babies die (and, conversely, about the same survive) in medically managed and naturally managed births. The difference is in the health of those who survive; the natural way is, statistically, healthier for the surviving mother and babe.

Yes, in your case, a c/sec would have been healthier (although I don't think a vaginal medically managed birth would have been, except that it would have been more likely to result in a c/sec birth). But what that means is that for every case like yours there are many where problems are _caused_ by medical management. There are many babies like yours who _were that sick because of_ the medical management that you avoided.

A very small percentage of births are better off being medicalized (usually with c/sec) and most homebirth midwives are extremely good at identifying those few percent; there are very, very few cases like yours where there _are no signs_ and thus don't get screened out. But going with a "everybody gets the 2% treatment" approach doesn't save more babies; it harms a lot of mothers and babies who would otherwise have been fine, and it changes around _which_ babies or mothers survive.

This, of course, isn't much consolation for those who are still harmed, and I wish I had a time machine to lend you so you could go back with the knowledge you have now and change what happened. But only hindsight, not foresight, has the potential of being 20/20. As you said, death and damage _are_ natural (but again, that doesn't mean they only happen when going the "natural" route - but neither can the natural route entirely prevent it, it just does a better job than the all-medical route). All we can do is play the numbers, trust birth, trust bodies, and trust instincts when something says "this isn't right".


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

This is an appropriate topic for me this week, as my midwife lost her nerve with all my complications and recommended c-sec at 36 weeks. The surgery was fine, and this time I managed to minimize most of what I hate about hospital birth. But this is my 3rd c. And my pregnancies and deliveries have been full of illness, pain and grief. The midwife used the "the important thing" argument when I was not happy about delivering immediately - knowing my history of multiple late losses. I told her that just because I did not have the worst outcome - a dead baby - that didn't mean some of the things that happen in delivery aren't bad to me. They are not the same things. It doesn't make those events, even as basic as an infiltrated IV, "suck less" for me.

In general all of this is really hard for me to talk about since I feel like there are two main camps - victim of medicalized birth, or feeling like a c-sec was the ideal choice for whatever reason - like medical necessity. So I feel a little isolated in viewing my c-secs as appropriate, but highly undesirable. And as deliveries, not "births" despite my intense involvement in the decision-making. I've accepted that normal birth and pregnancy will never happen for me. I can be ok with that, and still at the same time believe it was not an equivalent experience. Some people cope by focusing on the positive aspects. Perhaps for me, I can always find circumstances that would be worse to me than my own, so that makes me feel better.


----------



## Arwyn (Sep 9, 2004)

Kincaid, I'm sorry to see you deleted your post. I hope I didn't say anything to contribute to your decision. My point was only to engage you in conversation, not chase you away.


----------



## Arwyn (Sep 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Clarity*
This is an appropriate topic for me this week, as my midwife lost her nerve with all my complications and recommended c-sec at 36 weeks. The surgery was fine, and this time I managed to minimize most of what I hate about hospital birth. But this is my 3rd c. And my pregnancies and deliveries have been full of illness, pain and grief. The midwife used the "the important thing" argument when I was not happy about delivering immediately - knowing my history of multiple late losses. *I told her that just because I did not have the worst outcome - a dead baby - that didn't mean some of the things that happen in delivery aren't bad to me.* They are not the same things. *It doesn't make those events, even as basic as an infiltrated IV, "suck less" for me.*

In general all of this is really hard for me to talk about since I feel like there are two main camps - victim of medicalized birth, or feeling like a c-sec was the ideal choice for whatever reason - like medical necessity. *So I feel a little isolated in viewing my c-secs as appropriate, but highly undesirable.* And as deliveries, not "births" despite my intense involvement in the decision-making. *I've accepted that normal birth and pregnancy will never happen for me. I can be ok with that, and still at the same time believe it was not an equivalent experience.* Some people cope by focusing on the positive aspects. Perhaps for me, I can always find circumstances that would be worse to me than my own, so that makes me feel better.

These are really wise words. Thank you.

I do wish you would reconsider your rejection of the term "birth". It is a fundamental feature of my religion that only the mother gives birth to her baby. No matter who else does what, even if it is done by abdominal surgury with you under general anesthesia, your body is still the one birthing the baby. Not the doctor; they're just helping out. Your baby was not delivered by a doctor, even as a doctor pulled her (him?) out of your womb via your abdomen; your body - _you_ - birthed her.


----------



## moonstarmama (Jun 5, 2004)

i only read amydidit's thread starter, so I may be covering old territory here, but the birth experience is not just for the mom----it's for the baby, too. They need the labor experience, and the experience of being squeezed through the birth canal. Just off hand, c-sec babies are more likely to get respiratory infections, they are pulled out by their heads which can lead to spinal alingnment problems (as can forceps)...they are sometimes sliced pretty badly. When we take drugs, the babies are exposed to those drugs. And moms who have a c-sec are not going to be able to mother in exactly the same manner they would had they not just had major surgery.

So, it's not just for mom's, or at all selfish to want a certain kind of birth.

Thank goodness c-sec's are available for those who truly need them, but the truth is, in any system worth it's salt, the c-sec rate should be under 5%. Not 26% like we have here in american hospitals.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *moonstarmama*
...c-sec babies are more likely to get respiratory infections, they are pulled out by their heads which can lead to spinal alingnment problems...

DD was pulled out by her feet...the first part of her I saw was her bum, because I was looking in the mirror and her head was still stuck under my ribs or something. It was kind of...weird.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *moonstarmama*
i only read amydidit's thread starter, so I may be covering old territory here, but the birth experience is not just for the mom----it's for the baby, too. They need the labor experience, and the experience of being squeezed through the birth canal. Just off hand, c-sec babies are more likely to get respiratory infections, they are pulled out by their heads which can lead to spinal alingnment problems (as can forceps)...they are sometimes sliced pretty badly. When we take drugs, the babies are exposed to those drugs. And moms who have a c-sec are not going to be able to mother in exactly the same manner they would had they not just had major surgery.

Thank goodness c-sec's are available for those who truly need them, but the truth is, in any system worth it's salt, the c-sec rate should be under 5%. Not 26% like we have here in american hospitals.

The Csec rate even for necessary ones would not be less than 5% in this country. Even the WHO states I believe it should be about 10-15%.

Also, these scare tactics "they are pulled out by their heads" -- not sure how many csections you have had or seen, but my two csection babies were not pulled out by their heads, many times they are pushed out through the incision site head first or their bodies are lifted out, and some are delivered butt, feet first depending on their position. It seems the belief is that csection babies are yanked out, thats not true -- unless an emergency is taking place, but they are manipulated by the OBs hands and pushed out (they actually push on the upper part of your belly). Also the percentage of a baby being nicked is very low, it is rare for them to be "sliced". Good lord -- there is a difference between a slice and nick.
And yes, for my FIRST csection -- which was an emergency, I wasn't able to "mother" like I guess a mom who just birthed in her living room, but for my second csection - I definitely mothered like other mothers who had given birth vaginally. In fact most my nurses did not even know I had had a csection unless I told them.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
And yes, for my FIRST csection -- which was an emergency, I wasn't able to "mother" like I guess a mom who just birthed in her living room, but for my second csection - I definitely mothered like other mothers who had given birth vaginally. In fact most my nurses did not even know I had had a csection unless I told them.

I've seen a few women say this now, and I'm still blown away. Except for the first day, my recovery from my emergency section was about the same as my scheduled one...general anesthetic and 20 hours of labour notwithstanding. Do you have any tips on bouncing back, if I don't get my VBA2C? Because, I can barely mother my babies _at all_ post c-section.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
I've seen a few women say this now, and I'm still blown away. Except for the first day, my recovery from my emergency section was about the same as my scheduled one...general anesthetic and 20 hours of labour notwithstanding. Do you have any tips on bouncing back, if I don't get my VBA2C? Because, I can barely mother my babies _at all_ post c-section.

Get the epidural block with a PCAP. Do not get narcotics in the OR, ask for Zofran if you experience nausea vs phenegran. Talk to Shannon and read my birthplan about comforts we had in the OR and after. I was sitting up within minutes of being taken to the L&D room to recover. Evidently this is common where I am delivering because I talked to a Anest. Asst. and he said more and more patients are getting the epidural blocks for this reason. As soon as my epidural cath was pulled out, I got up and went to the bathroom. I started moving around, I took a shower, fixed my hair, put a little makeup on and took pain meds before I needed them. I choose demerol as my drug of choice because it doesn't wack me out. I left in under 48hrs from my last csection because I felt good enough to go home. Also something that helped me, I had stitches instead of staples.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

hmm...think I had morphine in with my epidural. But, does that make the pain worse? I'm terrified I'm going to have another section, because I have _no_ idea how I'm going to look after a toddler when I can't even walk properly. Dh won't be able to help me as much as he did with dd, because he's just starting a new job. (I lie - he didn't "help" - he did almost everything.)

I'll talk to my doctor about stitches. I know I had staples with dd, but I have no idea what they used with ds. Does that really make a difference later on?

And, I'll think about taking pain meds before I need them, but I'd probably OD. They had me on pain-killing suppositories for my first two days post-op, and I felt like they weren't using anything. T3's didn't touch it. I used to think I could handle pain...migraines, dental work (I get fillings without any needle), my labour with ds, etc...no problem. But, the pain from a section just cripples me.

It sounds like the only major differences are that you didn't have the morphine, and had stitches, not staples. I was going to avoid morphine, anyway, because the itching last time drove me out of my mind.


----------



## NoraB (Dec 10, 2002)

Kincaid,

I saw that you deleted your post and I hope that my post didn't offend you in any way. I am so sorry if it did, b/c that was not my intention.


----------



## Arwyn (Sep 9, 2004)

OnTheFence, although the WHO states a goal c/sec rate of 10-15%, many people (doctors, midwives, researchers, mothers) think this is very conservative, and that the rates could very safely be brought down to approximately 5% (2-3% for homebirth practices, 5-7% for high risk hospitals, and about 5% overall). I don't think it's wrong to defend your way of birthing, and I think it's great you know you can be an awesome mother giving birth by surgery, but I don't understand why you would defend unnecessary cesareans. What's wrong with making sure all c/secs are absolutely necessary (which a 5% rate would help ensure)? I think if a woman knew ahead of time that all c/secs performed were necessary, there would be a lot less fear and a lot more acceptance of giving birth that way when faced with that. Isn't that what you want? Or am I missing something?


----------

