• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Natural Childbirth

I

Isabella

Member
Hey all,

I have been watching a show about a maternity ward and they all seem so hostile when women do not want epidurals or drugs. Does anyone have any experience of home birth or natural birth? Hospitals seem so interventionist. Did anyone have difficulty trying to have a natural birth in hospital?

Bels
 
Here's our experience in a nutshell:

First birth - hospital. Useless midwife who wouldn't have births anywhere else. Disastrous. Baby in wrong position, midwife never corrected, ended up with induction, spinal block and forceps birth (as in "We'll just have a quick pull with the forceps then give you a c-section" and baby surprised everyone when he came out!). Kicked out of hospital first thing the following morning, very disruptive.

Second birth - home. Brilliant, experienced midwife who was happy with births anywhere. Found baby was in wrong position (same issue again, we have it every time), and showed my wife how to fix it (different positions during contractions etc.). No pain relief or anything (wife didn't find that much fun, but it meant she recovered much faster afterwards and would have it no other way!). Straight into her own bed with baby afterwards and no need to move anywhere. Wonderful.

Third birth - home waterbirth. Inexperienced midwife (her first home birth), but trained by aforemetioned experienced one, and an experinced backup. No pain relief again, went brilliantly.

We live an hour from the hospital. The worst thing is having to take a labouring wife for an hour in the car. It's not nice for anyone and she's sitting in the worst position possible to labour in, puts baby in a bad position and causes problems later. Then you get kicked out after a few hours and have to drive back again with a tiny baby in a car seat when they really should be just cuddling and bonding with Mum.

My advice: It all depends on the midwife. Find a really good one who is happy doing home births, even if you are having baby in a hospital: she'll have a good attitude and be willing to shut out the scalpel-happy hospital doctors and even lock the door on them if necessary (unless she decides you need them, which is highly unlikely if she knows what she's doing!). Women have been having babies since Adam watched Eve figure it out for herself. It's a natural part of life, and hardly ever will need any medical input at all.
 
One of the other things to remember is that intervention leads to intervention. So pain relief = intervention = more pain relief = more intervention etc. This is especially so when you start out being induced and just create issues right at the start!

I find that many (not all!) of the medical profession believe that they know everything and we should just do what they say. But when you talk to them about things that are maybe a bit different than they have studied, they simply don't believe you or are not willing to look at other options. Pregnancy and childbirth is quite often seen as a disease that must be controlled and managed in every way. It's not a disease. It's the most natural thing in the world. God designed us to have children and we're pretty good at it, even without the doctors :D
 
I have had both a hospital birth and an at-home waterbirth. I prefer the at-home water birth! Of course right after I have birth at home I told my husband I would NEVER do that again, but that is par for the course when having babies. ;)

My hospital birth wasn't bad, but I was an uninformed 22 year old that just trusted the docs to do what was best for baby and me. At 5 days "over due" they broke my water and gave me a Pitocin drip that was quickly followed by an epidural. After about 11 hours of laying in the hospital bed I gave birth to Arthur. They only let me push for about 10 minutes, after which they gave me an episiotomy. At 22 I healed pretty quickly, but I think I could have done it without any cuts or tears if I was given more time. It wasn't a bad experience, but it left me wondering what it was like to do it "for real" (as the 22 year old in me thought about it).

With Liam, my water broke on its own but real contractions didn't start up until about 15 hours later. I didn't have any pain until I hit transition. I got in the birthing tub in his nursery and it helped a lot. I gave birth to him an hour and a half after getting in the tub, but that was partly because my midwife told me not to push until I couldn't resist it anymore. I gave birth in the water without any tears and got to snuggle up in bed with my brand-new baby and sleep. Best experience EVER, despite the pain.

To be honest, the only reason I did a home birth with Liam was to avoid getting a C-section. I found out the section rate at the hospital I was going to was 1 in 3 and I figured with my "advanced" maternal age, they might target me for one. I certainly ran into a lot of "don't question us about how to have a baby" at the hospital, so I decided I wanted a midwife at my own home. But I have heard from other ladies that the hospital here is very supportive of women having natural childbirth. (Probably because it is so very "granola" here on the Kitsap Peninsula.) ;) I am pretty sure they would have induced me at the hospital since I wasn't contracting until 15 hours later and my water had already broken. Hospitals have a policy to have the baby within 24 hours of the water breaking. I did have him before 24 hours had passed, but they would have never waited for me to start labor on my own, nor would they have had any faith in my body to do it in that timeframe by itself.

In order to get Steven onboard with a home birth we watched "The Business of Being Born" (which you can stream via Netflix) and we talked to a midwife here that has been doing home births for 20 years. Let me tell you, she is an amazing woman! I am part of a board that supports and discusses natural childbirth, so if you want more info, I can always pass that along.
 
I tried valiantly to have a "natural" birth in a military hospital, but as it turns out, I did have some difficult complications: 1) pre-eclampsia, and 2) my son was a shoulder presentation, so I could not dilate. I was in extreme pain, and exhausted, so they finally convinced me to go with an epidural, so my body could relax and get some rest. It worked. However, we still had to wait for the baby to turn, so I could dilate. I was one hour away from a c-section when he finally moved into position and I could dilate, then start pushing. Oh joy! Because our labor was so difficult, however, they kept him in NICU for three days of sepsis screening, and extra recovery for me.

The next baby? Oh yeah. Epidural at 4 cm! :lol: A MUCH easier birth, lol. Of course, since I had gestational diabetes with that one, I still could not have the home water birth I coveted. If you have to go in hospital, go for the epidural. :D
 
Hi all,
I don't post much, (since I have no poly experience at all) but this topic is one I have a bit of experience with.

We just had a new baby girl on Jan 28th. This was our 8th home birth, and everything went smooth. I had less then a day of labor that was fairly gentle (contractions about 5 minutes apart till right before she came) and only maybe ten minutes of pushing her out. Some of my labors were faster 4 1/2 hours...a couple were about 8 hours. Some a bit over 20 hours and the longest (our first) was 3 1/2 days. In every case the lord has blessed us with uncomplicated deliveries, and healthy babies. Yes labor is work, and not the comfortable sort at that, but I would much rather be home with my husband and not have to fight with anyone about anything. That epidural sounds nice....but not nice enough for me to go to the hospital.
I do know a lovely midwife, who has attended about 700 births, but we have yet to have a midwife here for ours. Hubby thinks it could be nice to have a midwife, but I see no point in paying someone to tell me I'm doing good, or when to push. If she could have the baby for me, we would be hiring her! But since I still have to do that part, hubby is a great labor coach, and all the help I need.
My Mom did come out for the first one, and we called a midwife during the labor since it was a long and slow. We found out there had been quite a few of those about that time, and since the water didn't break till a few hours before he was born, the midwife said to just walk around, take a hot shower, or try to relax.

I think the most important thing, after seeing quite a few friends and family members try for the home birth and give up, or get scared and end up at the hospital, is for the couple to agree completely on whatever birth plan they decide on.
Just my 2 cents worth.

Jolene
 
I would recommend taking the Bradley Method class. My wife and I took the class together and decided to go the hospital route... my wife had very high blood pressure on 2 or 3 of 4 pregnancies and I think pre-eclampsia on the first. After a very unpleasant c-section experience with our first child she successfully pushed out 3 more babies one of which was 9lb 14 oz... almost 2 pounds heavier than our first child. Almost had c-section on the last child because they couldn't find a heart beat during pushing... literally had her in the OR room prepping for surgery and the doc gave her a couple of more pushes... he was face down and we found out later that it likely due to the umbilical cord being caught in between his head or shoulder and the pressure cut off the blood supply... scary.. Thank God everything turned out okay. We wanted to try water birth but our hospitals wouldn't go for it doing vbac.
Some keys for us were:
- find a dr office with dr's and midwives who are supportive of natural childbirth
- do create a birthing plan but be willing to have some flexibility... things change... often rapidly. (know your options ahead of time)
- find a hospital that tends to be more supportive of natural births and the nurses listen. We are fortunate to live in the Atlanta metro and have several hospitals to choose from. Our Bradley class instructor was able to refer us to hospitals and doctors that were more friendly to natural birthing methods.

I personally would have loved to try a home birth and think it would have been more relaxing at home but wife wasn't quite comfortable with it. I do have a brother who lost a child doing a home birth, cord was wrapped around neck and it was too late by the time the baby was delivered. They've successfully had other babies at home though. so who's to say. I agree that it's a personal decision by the couple which needs to account for their own personal circumstances.
ch
 
Well I have substantial experience in this area. I have worked as a midwifery assistant and doula at home,birth centers and hospital transfers and am expecting a baby in late May early June. I am also certified although not practicing currently as a lactation consultant. I have 2 older children both born with midwives. One a hospital induction with a CNM and one a free standing birth center birth with an LM(licensed midwife) in Florida which is one of the few states that has excellent and stringent requirements for out of hospital practicioners. So much so that home birth safety is very good in most parts of Florida. Midwives that work out of hospital in Florida, wether they be CNM (Certified Nurse Midwife) or non nurse LM, generally have very good collaborative aggrements with Doctors and are well known at the local hospitals they use for transfer. This makes it easier for them to seamlesly consult and transfer as soon as possible without feeling that they or the parents(or baby) will have a hard time recieving treatment or specialist medical advice when needed. I think Texas has a similar deal.

Anyhow, unfortunately not all states have so much accountability and good relations between home birth practicioners and medical personel in hospitals. Also the regulations in place in some states may be inadequate. It is as if people who are in charge of the regulations are not familiar with birth. I would not want to get into a discussion of freedom issues in regards to this. There is a patchwork of laws throughout the US about midwifery and out of hospital birth regulations. It is similar to the situation where if u are in one area of the country you are more likely to get a coronary catheterization, bypass, tonsolectomy, etc in others less so wether you needed it truly or not. Same with C-section rates. Same goes for out of hopsital birth/midwifery care. For example in Oregon CPM licensure is optional and rules that licensed CPMs follow are lax at best as far as what clients to transfer and reefer and when. Perhaps as a result Oregon has a higher death/disability/injury rate at home birth-some of which is not counted as such because late transfers who meet demise/disability after birth in hospital are counted as "hospital deaths" in the stats. Colorado CPMs at home have similarly dismal death rates, such that they no longer publish them in the annual report of the state board that regulates midwifery. The state where I live(MO) has a death rate at home birth (after accounting for "accidental"at home births) that is something like 20 times higher than comparable hospital births.
in the area: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21380991.

Almost all studies show time after time that home birth in the first world has a lower rate of c-section,lower intervention rates, lower infection rates for moms and babies while at the same having a 2-10+ likehood of death in the perinatal/neonatal period as well as a higher newborn seizure rate. These risks are very tiny and very unlikely to happen but more likely to happen for homebirth families than for comparable hospital birth families.
http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d7400

Bottom line: Shop around, do your homework, tour hospitals, birth centers, ask about credentials, experience etc. About licensure: would you want an unlicensed contractor to build your house? An unlicensed, inexperienced engineer to build the bridge you will drive over? You get the idea. It's up to you to figure out accountability of practicioners be they doctors, midwives, nurses etc. who are going to take care of your precious family. In case of a death/disability do your practicioners have malpractice insurance? If not who wil pay funeral expenses and lifelong disability expenses? The government?

I know that hospitals can be a pain in the butt to work around but in some cases when you need one fast (uncontrolled postpartum hemmorage, baby not responding to resusitation efforts at home, baby's heartbeat stopped being detectable by doppler etc) 5 minutes away is too far by the time you get everyone in the car/ambulance. I am not saying don't homebirth. I'm saying know exactly what are as many possible scenarios in your case as possible beforehand.
http://hurtbyhomebirth.blogspot.com/
 
That is a very well researched and valuable post itainteasy. We are fortunate to live in a country where independent midwives are highly qualified and generally know their stuff, but clearly others do not. I don't pay too much attention to sites like "hurt by homebirth", as there's probably an equally horrifying sounding blog somewhere named "hurt by hospital birth" - there are tragedies in every single birthing setting, if you make a selective list of them you can prompt any emotional response you like, and making decisions based on emotion is generally not wise.

That research paper is extremely good, and very reliable given the massive sample size, particularly as it looks at where the birth was planned rather than where it ended up happening. To summarise the outcomes:
- Home births had far less intervention than hospital births ("normal births" with no induction, forceps, c-section etc. occured only 58% of the time at hospital, and 88% at home).
- Despite lower intervention, there was no overall difference in risk between hospital and home.
However, within the overall statistics:
- First births had a slightly higher risk of death or serious disability at home, but no difference between a birthing centre and hospital (all below 1%).
- Second and subsequent births had no difference in risk between birthing setting.

This paper strongly supports home-birth for most mothers, as it avoids intervention (ie increasing women's recovery times and reducing the risk of complications for mothers), without increasing the risk to the baby. However first-time mothers (or those with a known problem) might want to consider a birthing centre or hospital just in case - which is what most first-time mothers do anyway because you're always more paranoid about the first. :D

I would highly recommend people actually read that research paper. It's very reassuring, once you get past the medical language. Glossary: "nulliparous" means this is their first birth, "multiparous" means this is their second or subsequent birth, "the primary outcome" means death or serious injury to the baby, and "adverse perinatal outcomes" means something bad happened to baby (anything from minor problems to death).

Summary from the paper:
What is already known on this topic:
Healthy women who plan to give birth at home or in a midwifery unit are more likely to have a vaginal birth with less intervention compared with women who plan to give birth in an obstetric unit
There is a lack of good quality evidence comparing the risk of rare but serious adverse perinatal outcomes in these settings

What this study adds:
For healthy women with low risk pregnancies, the incidence of adverse perinatal outcomes is low in all birth settings
For healthy multiparous women with a low risk pregnancy, there are no differences in adverse perinatal outcomes between planned births at home or in a midwifery unit compared with planned births in an obstetric unit
For healthy nulliparous women with a low risk pregnancy, the risk of an adverse perinatal outcome seems to be higher for planned births at home, and the intrapartum transfer rate is high in all settings other than an obstetric unit
Click to expand...
http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d7400

Note however that the research was done in the UK, if your local midwives aren't as good as the UK ones then clearly results may vary - you still need to make sure you can actually get a good midwife. You can do as much internet research as you like, but there is no substitute to actually talking to a woman who's had your midwife before and seeing if she's any good.
 
Very good points added, thanks.

Also the difference between the collaborative system between independent midwives in the UK and US is VERY different depending upon which state/region you are in, like I said. In the UK, I beleive, Ambulances/choppers are aware of home births as they happen and doctors are on standby to support home birth midwives bringing in mothers and babies as needed so there is no delay in transfer of care like can happen in a haphazard ER transfer over here in some cases. Many times a great midwife will bring a laboring mother in when there is no emergency-preemptively because signs show that a difficulty MAY possibly occur in the near future. I saw this happen sometimes and felt that the midwives were jumping the gun a bit (they do it more with first time moms) but actually this is good midwifery care. Be sure your midwife is on very good terms with her back up physician and maybe even meet him. At one birth center where I doulad (verb?) in Florida, all clients were required to have at least one consultation visit with one of several back up physicians that the center used. Some U.S. states have similar results as this Birthplace study but many do not.

We do know that when the majority of births moved in to the hospitals (after 1930's or so) that maternal and newborn mortality went way down. Many of the life saving advances for moms and babies have happened as a result of modern medical technology and research. Many babies and mothers survive birth unmaimed but many would not without good knowledgable assistance and the technology we have today (OR's, bloodbanks, emergency drugs and techniques, etc.). Home birth, midwives, natural living can be very good practices for maintaining health but when you have a preemie, baby who cannot breathe, eclampsia, uncontrolled bleeding, stuck baby, placenta previa etc. then there is NOTHING on planet earth like a good medical team at an adequate hospital. Better diets and hygiene and public health efforts (like understanding the cause and prevention of rickets for example) contributed to the deaths/disability numbers around birth and pregnancy going down but I don't beleive anyone thinks that it is "just as safe" if you run into a "we needed help 5 minutes ago" emergency at home where there are no crash carts/ORs/Blood etc., etc. Many "low risk" moms and babies are just that until the second that they are not anymore! The many women and babies who died in the old days (and watched mothers, sisters, daughters, etc, die could tell you about it if they could).
 
itainteasy, I am finding you and me a fascinating comparison between male and female thinking on an issue, no offence meant! :D
itainteasy said:
I don't beleive anyone thinks that it is "just as safe" if you run into a "we needed help 5 minutes ago" emergency at home where there are no crash carts/ORs/Blood etc., etc. Many "low risk" moms and babies are just that until the second that they are not anymore! The many women and babies who died in the old days (and watched mothers, sisters, daughters, etc, die could tell you about it if they could).
Click to expand...
That's emotional thinking. Everything you say there is 100% true - however statistically it is clearly balanced by the fact that hospitals create their own set of problems (as shown by the higher levels of intervention in hospital for instance), since in the scientific paper above there was no actual overall difference in risk between home and hospital births.

Then you get women who emotionally argue that hospitals are the cause of every evil known to pregnant women and your baby is far more likely to die if you go there - that too is contradicted by the above paper, which says hospitals are no worse than home birthing.

As I said, it all comes back to your individual situation, and the healthcare available where you live. Either will work, pick what you are most comfortable with. If it's your fifth child, you've never had a problem, and you've got a great midwife, have it at home. If it's your first and you've got pre-eclampsia and a breech position and all the local midwives are stoned hippies with no training, go to hospital! :D There's a line between those extremes somewhere, and you can decide where it lies for yourself, there's no right or wrong answer.
 
FollowingHim said:
That's emotional thinking. Everything you say there is 100% true - however statistically it is clearly balanced by the fact that hospitals create their own set of problems (as shown by the higher levels of intervention in hospital for instance),
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this if that show *I mention in the OP* is anything to go by.
 
I want to say that i agree with hospitals having a higher level of interventions which at times seem unneccesary and sometimes really actually may be. There is a trade off that families need to think about when choosing care. I think some of it is a preponderance of caution. Here is an article that may explain some of it:
http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2010/03 ... -high.html
http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2011/11 ... re-to.html
and here is another of her articles describing what the march of Dimes themselves know can happen when you have less intervention and don't take things on a case by case basis:
http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2011/10 ... ivery.html
http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2012/02 ... asing.html

So yes when you walk into a hospital to have your baby you better bet you are at higher risk for all kinds of interventions and all that entails. So the choice of which risk to take is up to you. many women on this board are VERY fortunate not to have to walk hours and days or take donkeys to hospitals while in labor like women in Africa/Afganistan etc. you know what I mean. The fact that we are even debating this shows how very blessed we are in the places we live! Homebirthing moms in developed nations have the relatively quick access to all the hospital stuff they are shunning and that is what many times makes homebirth safer to attempt here and in UK etc. I had a baby out of hospital and it was great so not knocking it personally beleive me, just looking at the cold hard reality.
 
itainteasy said:
The fact that we are even debating this shows how very blessed we are in the places we live! Homebirthing moms in developed nations have the relatively quick access to all the hospital stuff they are shunning and that is what many times makes homebirth safer to attempt here and in UK etc.
Click to expand...
Oh I just have to chuckle at this...Home birth for us is out of the question because we are 4 hours from the nearest hospital. Before we moved here I had one hospital birth then 3 homebirths. Since moving here we have had one birth center birth and one attempted birthcenter birth that ended in a c-section. (She was a footling doing the splits.) I would love to have another homebirth but here in Alaska the state law will not allow it unless its unassisted...which considering our location is out of the question. I prefer home births though because after the baby is born there is no traveling. Unfortunately for us though we not only get to leave the hospital or birth center to go home but we also get the thrill of a 4 hour car trip too. Thankfully its in a car though :lol:
Blessings,
Polarfamily :D
 
Polarfamily said:
I would love to have another homebirth but here in Alaska the state law will not allow it unless its unassisted...
Click to expand...
Don't you love stupid laws, you can see where they come from but the result is ridiculous. You might as well say "If you have a drivers licence you can drive only what vehicles are specified on your licence - but if you've had no training or tests you can drive anything". I love governments, they're more amusing than most comedians (not that that's saying much!). :D
 
Yes, FollowingHim stupid laws ruin a country. Here in Alaska we can't have twins or breech births either. If she had been breech I could have handled it but a footling no way. If you have gestational diabetes you get kicked out of home births too. I might add this all applies to any out of the hospital births with a midwife. You can do a hospital birth with an approved midwife but according to the hospital's rules the midwife has to sign a contract saying she won't do home or clinic births, only hospital births...talk about cornering the market. Silly I know.
 
It just goes to illustrate how America's whole "land of the free" nonsense is purely government propaganda. It might have been true back in the day, but these days your laws are some of the most restrictive in the world in many areas - yet most Americans seem to still think they are free. It must really be hammered into gullible kids at school, and most never travel abroad so don't see what's on the other side of the smokescreen.
 
Too true...we are still free but the government has made stupid laws to protect us from ourselves....We would move but where to we as Americans would stick out like sore thumbs....I sure wish it was 100 years ago so we could live in peace without the control. Unfortunately our country has gone sue happy and is controlled by the insurance companies just as much as the government...As if that was not bad enough but our food is controlled by GMO's and RHBT milk all thanks to monsanto and their lobbyists...yeah we are a messed up nation :( Ah what I would give for the purity of life 100 years ago.
Blessings and can we move there???? lol :)
 
Actually there is no law against doing birth any kind of way you want. You can be diabetic/breech whatever and do home birth or have your baby wherever you want. Many countries in Europe are much more restrictive and police state-like than the US. The laws in some states are against who can assist you with the birth. Each hospital/caregiver has their own rules about who they are qualified and willing to take on. If they take on super risky cases then get sued they won't be able to practice at all.

It makes sense that in a place like Alaska where distances to emergency care are long that caregivers would be wary of taking on high risk cases so far away from emergency care. It is up to you if you want to risk it but sometimes having a midwife assist could give you a false sense of security in such a situation. That is why the states make laws about what practicioners can practice what and what licenses they need. I agree with the breach in freedom in these cases being restrictive-but I also know that precendent gives them impetus to make these laws. Like I said before the midwifery licensing laws and parameters(the rules that tell her when she needs to transfer care, etc.) in Florida make practicing midwifery in Florida very safe and midwives more easily accesable to many.

For example in Oregon non-nurse midwifery licensure is optional so basically the midwife license is a joke because no one will ever prosecute/penalize an unlicensed midwife for malpractice especially since almost no midwife-licensed or not-carries malpractice insurance, so no lawyer would take a case against one anyway.
 
itainteasy said:
Actually there is no law against doing birth any kind of way you want. You can be diabetic/breech whatever and do home birth or have your baby wherever you want.
Click to expand...
This is only true if your state chooses not to prosecute you for reckless endangerment or manslaughter should something go wrong. In theory, we are a free country; in practice, liberty as the U.S. Constitution intends vanished along with the competence of our Supreme Judiciary.

I know, a tangent. Sorry, my libertarian psyche just couldn't resist ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top