board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Men should stay out of the birthing room

Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 53 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Author Message
Estel
Post subject: Men should stay out of the birthing room
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 3:00 pm
Pure Kitsch Flavor
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5159
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:47 pm
Location: London
 
An interesting article I came across. I'm not going to give my opinion on it just yet, as I want to see what you all - especially you men - think of it.
Quote:
This week, the Mail reported a new survey which said fathers should be allowed to stay overnight in hospital on the day their baby is born. But how much should a man be involved in his child's birth? Leading obstetrician Michel Odent has been instrumental in influencing childbirth practices for decades.

Here, with a view that will outrage many - but will strike a chord with thousands of others - he describes why he believes that when a woman goes into labour, her partner should stay well away.


For many years, I have not been able to speak openly about my views that the presence of a father in a delivery room is not only unnecessary, but also hinders labour. To utter such a thing over the past two decades would have been regarded as heresy, and flies in the face of popular convention. But having been involved in childbirth for 50 years, and having been in charge of 15,000 births, I have reached the stage where I feel it is time to state what I - and many midwives and fellow obstetricians - privately consider the obvious.

That there is little good to come for either sex from having a man at the birth of a child. For her, his presence is a hindrance, and a significant factor in why labours are longer, more painful and more likely to result in intervention than ever.

As for the effect on a man - well, was I surprised to hear a friend of mine state that watching his wife giving birth had started a chain of events that led to the couple's divorce? Or another lady describing how the day after her husband had watched her deliver their child, he had fled to his hometown of Rome, and never returned again?

For many men, the emotional fallout of watching their partner have their baby can never be overcome. When I was first involved in obstetrics in the Fifties, it was unheard of for a man to be present as their child was born. Childbirth was predominately a woman's business - usually carried out at home - and while a man may be in the vicinity at the time of labour, he would usually be found in the kitchen, boiling copious amounts of water, and therefore would miss the actual event.

However, by 1970, a handful of women started to ask for their husbands to be present at the birth, a shift that began to occur in many Western countries at about the same time. There are a variety of reasons for this, including the fact that birth was being increasingly concentrated in hospitals rather than at home, and the rise of the smaller nuclear family meant women increasingly turned to their husbands for support in all areas of their life, rather than relying on their mothers or aunts.

What we didn't anticipate at the time was that this occasional demand from a handful of women would, in a matter of years, become doctrine.
By the late Seventies, all pregnant women were saying they could not imagine giving birth without their husband at their side. And not only was the husband now nearly always present at birth, but with his wife clasping his hand during labour and screaming out for reassurance, he became an active participant.

At the time, it was widely believed there were many benefits to be had from the father's presence. It was said sharing such an experience would strengthen ties between the couple and help the father bond with his baby. It was said his reassurance would make birth easier, and that the rate of intervention in pregnancy would decrease as a result. This shift to having the father in the delivery room was one which was shrouded by optimism. However, little scientific study was conducted to find out if there was any truth to these claims.

And even at the time, I had my reservations. I didn't want to judge, but I knew from experience that the presence of a man is not always a positive thing. Fast-forward to today, and there is still a lack of scientific study on this subject. But having been in charge of thousands of births, at homes, in hospitals, in the UK, in France, with the father present, with him absent, I have reached my own conclusions.

I am more and more convinced that the participation of the father is one of the main reasons for long and difficult labours. And there are a number of basic physiological reasons for this.

First, a labouring woman needs to be protected against any stimulation of the thinking part of her brain - the neocortex - for labour to proceed with any degree of ease. This part of the brain needs to take a back seat and allow the primal "unthinking" part of the brain connected to basic vital functions to take over. A woman in labour needs to be in a private world where she doesn't have to think or talk. Yet, motivated by a desire to "share the experience", the man asks questions and offers words of reassurance and advice. In doing so, he denies his partner the quiet mind that she needs.

The second reason is that the father's release of the stress hormone adrenaline as he watches his partner labour causes her anxiety, and prevents her from relaxing. No matter how much he tries to smile and appear relaxed, he cannot help but feel anxious. And the release of adrenaline is contagious. It has been proven that it is physically impossible to be in a complete state of relaxation if there is an individual standing next to you who is tense and full of adrenaline.

The effect of this is that, with a man present, a woman cannot be as relaxed as she needs to be during labour, and hence the process becomes longer and more difficult. We must keep in mind that mammals cannot release oxytocin - the key hormone in childbirth - when they are also being influenced by the stressful effects of hormones of the adrenaline family.

I have been with many women as they struggle to give birth with their partner at their side. Yet the moment he leaves the room, the baby arrives. Afterwards, they say it was just "bad luck" he wasn't there the moment their child was born. Luck, however, is little to do with it. The truth is that without him there, the woman is finally able to relax into labour in a way that speeds up delivery.

After birth, too, a woman needs a few moments alone with her baby, particularly between the time the child is born and she delivers the placenta. And this is not just about her need to bond with her baby.
Physically, in order to deliver the placenta with ease, her levels of oxytocin - the hormone of love - need to peak. This happens if she has a moment in which she can forget everything about the world, save for her baby, and if she has time in which she can look into the baby's eyes, make contact with its skin and take in its smell without any distractions.

Often, as soon as a baby is born, men cannot help but say something or try to touch the baby. Their interference at this key moment is more often than not the main cause for a difficult delivery of the placenta, too.

But it is not just the fact that men slow down labour that makes me cautious about their presence at the birth. There are two other important questions that I would like to see answered scientifically.

The first is, are we sure that all men can easily cope with the strong emotional reaction they have when they participate in the birth? Over the years, I have seen something akin to post-natal depression in many men who have been present at the birth. In its mild form, men often take to their bed in the week following the birth, complaining of everything from a stomach ache or migraine to a 24-hour bug.

Their wives, meanwhile, are up and about, caring for their baby and in good spirits, and tell me how unfortunate it is that their husband has been struck down by one ailment or another. But it is well known by those who study depression that rather than admit a low mood, men often offer up a symptom as a reason to why they have taken to their bed. There are also men who try to find ways to escape the reality of what they have been through. This could just be a night at the pub, or a day playing golf when their child is a day old. I've known of perfectly well-balanced men who held their wife's hand through labour then left the next day never to return again.

And in the most graphic example, one perfectly healthy man had his first experience of schizophrenia two days after watching his wife give birth. Was this his way of escaping reality?

Generally speaking, I have noticed that the more the man has participated at the birth and the worse his wife's labour has been, the higher the risks of post-natal "symptoms" are. Of course, this is not the case for all men, but it seems without doubt that some men are at risk of being unwell or depressed due to having seen their partners labour.

The final question I would like to see answered is what, if a man is present at birth, will be the effect on the sexual attraction he feels towards his wife over the long term? When men first started standing at their partner's side during labour, I remember my mother's generation saying, very matter of factly, that the couple's intimate life would be ruined as a result. And, given that the key to eroticism is a degree of mystery, I am left believing they had a point.

There are many things we do in private in order to preserve a degree of modesty and mystery. And, for the benefit of our sex lives, it may be worth adding childbirth to this list.

I have three children and wasn't present at any of their births. My first two were born before it was considered normal for a man to be at the birth of their child. But my youngest son was born in 1985, at home. As it happens, at the exact moment our son arrived in the world, the midwife was on her way down the street and I, having made my excuses realising he was about to be born, was fiddling with the thermostat on the central heating boiler downstairs. My partner did not know it, but I had given her the exceptionally rare, but ideal situation in which to give birth: she felt secure, she knew the midwife was minutes away and I was downstairs, yet she had complete privacy and no one was watching her.

If there are any doubts, we only have to look across the rest of the mammal world in order to see that no other female, save the human female, invites her sexual partner to witness her giving birth. Of course, it would not be possible for women to give birth alone. But the optimum situation for women is to give birth with an experienced midwife, or another woman - known as a doula. The key to the perfect birthing partner is finding a mother figure who can help, keep a low profile and remain silent.

It is only 35 years since men first entered the delivery room, yet we have welcomed them in without question. At the present time, when birth is more difficult and longer than ever, when more women need drugs or Caesareans, we have to dare to smash the limits of political correctness and ask whether men should really be present at birth. When we take into consideration the effects of this on male and female, it seems the answer is not. It is time to go back to basics, and turn modern convention on its head.

When it comes to the delivery suite, men would be well advised to stay away.


Sooo.... what do you think of that?


Top
Profile Quote
Alatar
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 3:11 pm
of Vinyamar
Offline
 
Posts: 8274
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact: ICQ
 
Fair play to him for raising a difficult subject. I'm not saying I agree necessarily, but he makes some good points. I don't agree with the whole eroticism and mystery of sex thing, and its hard to know whether my wife would have been more or less relaxed had I not been present.

I'm still glad I was there, simply cause she wanted me to be.

_________________

[ img ]
These are my friends, see how they glisten...


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 4:01 pm
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
We've been through this cycle, and for the most part the fathers just do what they are told by the mothers.

In the 50's the fathers paced in the hallways while the birth was occurring. Then the fathers were wanted inside. Then the fathers were told they had to be coaches. Then they had to be filmakers.

There is no way to make generalized statements about this. It has to be on a case by case basis. End of story.

And whether I wanted to or not, I was there four times. I'm glad I was there, and you know fathers should have some say.


Top
Profile Quote
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 4:06 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
If we're talking generalizations, I don't trust OB-GYNs, men in particular, about pretty much anything related to decision-making. Too many, no matter what they say publicly, pretty much believe in scheduling births around their tee times et al. If moms standing on their heads made for more convenient childbirth for the doctors, the doctors would recommend it.

_________________

Destiny is a rhythm track on which we must improvise.

In some cases, firing the drummer helps.


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 4:07 pm
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
He makes a few odd points--aren't women in labor generally drugged up to the point that they're not altogether aware of their surroundings anyway? And how many other females mammals even have anything analogous to husbands? (a few, but not a lot). That said, I don't disagree with the gist. I don't need that kind of stress, and if she doesn't want me there either, it's win/win.


Top
Profile Quote
Meril36
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 4:24 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 869
Joined: Thu 01 Sep , 2005 7:06 pm
Location: Lancaster, CA
 
I wasn't drugged, I had an epidural. If it hadn't turned into back labor, I probably wouldn't even have needed that. And the nurses were bloody incompetent, to the point where I SWEAR TO GOD I'm getting a midwife and having my next kid at home. Never go to a hospital if you can possibly avoid it.

_________________

Trying for profundity only limits depth.

With all the anger in the land, how long before the judgement day? Before we cut the fat ones down to size? Before the barricades arise?

Visit my art gallery at deviantART.


Top
Profile Quote
vison
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 5:06 pm
Best friends forever
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6546
Joined: Fri 04 Feb , 2005 4:49 am
 
That guy sounds a little bit off to me, too. He's English, and in England, Doctor is still God. However, I think he makes some good points and I tend to agree with him. For myself - not as "a general rule".

Dave L_F, women nowadays are NOT drugged up, I don't know where you got that idea!!! Almost everyone is as "with it" as possible and if there is anethesia, it is often an epidural which does not make you unconscious or dopey.

My husband was not present at the birth of either of our children. The first time it was still in the era (1965) when it was not "allowed" and the second time (1971) I had a very difficult time and the last person I wanted in there was my husband.

Nowadays it's SOP, but it should be left to the people involved. It is NOT traditional in any other culture for the father to be present, and as mentioned above, no other mammal has the male present at birth.

All that "mystery and modesty" stuff kinda turns me off, actually. If that was such a problem, would any OB-GYN ever be able to have a normal sex life, considering what they spend their days looking at? Jeez.

Home births are the norm in many countries. My English friend had all 3 of her kids at home and was sort of amazed when she got to Canada to find that women routinely have their babies in a hospital.

Anyone who wishes to have their child at home should - if you can find a good midwife or doula. There are, unfortunately, a lot of cranks out there. This is because the medical profession has fought TOOTH and NAIL to keep childbirth in the hospitals and the profession of midwifery has been marginalized in North America. That's changing. But the few and yet tragic cases of midwife lunacy and incompetence do a lot of harm. Like the utter and unbelievable notion of having your baby in tub full of water. Jesus H. What do these people smoke?

_________________

Living on Earth is expensive,
but it does include a free trip
around the sun every year.


Top
Profile Quote
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 5:19 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
vison wrote:
Dave L_F, women nowadays are NOT drugged up, I don't know where you got that idea!!! Almost everyone is as "with it" as possible and if there is anethesia, it is often an epidural which does not make you unconscious or dopey.
Though in England, it seems that epidurals are frowned upon a bit and that natural births are encouraged. At least that's the impression I got from Berhael.

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile Quote
Donernilwen
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 5:24 pm
B77's Crazy Christmas Elf
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Wed 16 Mar , 2005 2:09 pm
Location: ...Earth...?
 
I'd wondered about this before actually. The thing that I've considered the most is the effect it would have on the couple's intimancy afterwards. I agree with what's been said really. Decide on a case by case basis. I'm not going to force my husband to, but if he wanted to be in there, I wouldn't object either...I do reserve my right to change my mind when the time comes though. ;)


Top
Profile Quote
tolkienpurist
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 6:20 pm
Unlabeled
Offline
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 4:01 am
Location: San Francisco
 
I can't imagine there being a one size fits all answer here - I assume that the couple could puzzle it out as much as possible in advance and decide according to both of their comfort levels and emotional needs.

I don't even have a coherent hypothesis what I would prefer if I was to find myself in so (hopefully) unlikely a situation in terms of having a partner present. I suppose my personal preference is to myself stay out of the birthing room. :P


Top
Profile Quote
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 6:31 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
Quote:
I suppose my personal preference is to myself stay out of the birthing room.
:LMAO:

_________________

Destiny is a rhythm track on which we must improvise.

In some cases, firing the drummer helps.


Top
Profile Quote
Estel
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 6:57 pm
Pure Kitsch Flavor
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5159
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:47 pm
Location: London
 
I think the doc speaking is full of BS especially considering - and Brits, please don't take offense - the not so good mortality rate (including mothers dying) in British maternity wards compared to those of other western european countries. To be honest, from what I have heard, read, seen on TV here and the research I've done, if I ever got pregnant, I would not not not have the baby in the UK. Some hospitals only have two or three fetal heart monitors for a ward of 25 patients :Q

Anyway - that's the the issue right now - sorry for osgiliating.

As for Steve being in the room if I ever got pregnant.... I would certainly want him there in the beginning boring stages of labor. I'm a very much tactile comfort sort of person. When I'm ill, I feel the best when I can just lay my head in Steve's lap and fall asleep cuddling whilst he watches TV. I'd want the same thing then - he could watch TV and I could fall in and out of sleep.

On the other hand, when I'm in pain, everything annoys me, so for the icky painful bit, I don't know if I would want anyone there other than the person waiting at the exit. Steve does get very emotional for important things - should've seen him when we got married :P - so I get the feeling that he would want to be there. I wouldn't want him at the exit, if that were the case, nor anywhere near it. If it was a long labor, I think I would want Steve to leave the room occasionally just cause I know he'd be getting bored out of his mind and I'd be getting so worried that he was bored that I wouldn't be able to concentrate and hence the labor would go on even longer. I mean - I'm sorry, you hear about even "short" healthy labors going on for 6-7 hours. Even the mom must get somewhat bored in that situation.

To be honest, I know myself well enough that in the last bit of pushing, etc, I wouldn't want anyone to be helping me with the counting, I wouldn't want anyone holding my hand, or, god forbid, sitting behind me. I would just want to be left alone so I could get on with it. Steve could be in the room, but he'd be the absolute only one besides the medical staff, and everyone in the room would have to be in my eyeline. I know it's pure animal instinct, but the thought of anyone being behind me if I were in a vulnerable situation like giving birth - it makes the hair on the back of my head stand up.

Thinking about it for me gives me the emotional memory response of when I'm sitting in a movie theatre watching of film that has such a strong impact that I'm crying my eyes out:

- don't touch me
- don't talk to me
- be there, but don't annoy me
- don't try and draw my attention
- when I'm ready, I'll let you know


It may seem harsh and uncaring, but I know myself well enough to know that that's probably what my reaction would be. Steve knows me well enough that he knows that's probably what my reaction would be as well. To be honest, it should probably be a forseen response from anyone - I mean, the woman is in the process of pushing something huge out of her vagina - that takes a bit of concentration ;)


As for the hubby being in the room after the baby is born but before the placenta is out - yeah ok, but I kinda agree with the doc on this one. Let the mom and baby have their moment. If I've just pushed something huge out of my body, then I have just pushed something huge out of my body - leave me alone to recover for a few minutes please. I won't be in the mood for bonding at that moment except with the thing that I just pushed out. When I'm ready, I will let you know.

That may also seem harsh - the dad not getting to see the kid in the first few minutes of it's life. The way I look at it - I'll probably be going to sleep pretty soon after being cleaned up, and I'll be taking advantage of that sleep as much as possible since I know I won't be getting any for a few years - dad can have his bonding time with baby then. Heck, he can even hold the baby up to the tit for it's first feeding so I don't have to wake up to do it. :blackeye:

I would want to be in the hospital, and I would want my mom to be the one delivering the baby. She's been an Ob/Gyn nurse for almost 30 years, and has delivered almost 30 babies without a doc being present, and has delivered probably twice that number when the doc is in the room but can't get to the bed in time. She has been the one many times to pull a baby out when a C-section has been done as well. I trust her. I trust her to know what's best for me in a labor situation, I trust her to make decisions for me with Steve if I am unable to make them for myself, I trust that Steve trusts her as much as I do. To be honest, if my mom couldn't be the one delivering the baby, I would switch and switch and switch hospitals until I found one that would let her, and if I couldn't, I would have the baby at home so that she would be the one. I literally could not imagine anyone else in the world manning the exit :Wooper: Besides, I've met about 40 or 50 women who all had my mom as their nurse, and every single one of them adored her. I've met nurses who have worked with my mom, and every single one I have met has worshipped her (and lectured me on how well I should treat her and told me how lucky I am to have her for a mom). All the doctors I've met who've worked with my mom have had nothing but good to say about her - even when they didn't know I was her daughter.

She's earned that reputation, respect and adoration for good reason.

In conclusion :LMAO: It's definitely a personal decision up to the couple. I think if the guy is not comfortable with it, the girl shouldn't pressure him to be there the whole time unless there is no other family or close friends to be there with her. If the girl doesn't want the guy there - I'm sorry boys, but the one doing the pushing and going through the pain has priority opinion in this case. If both want the guy to be there, then great. Doctors who make all encompassing statements like the article shown above, however, are full of it IMHO.

Last edited by Estel on Wed 16 Apr , 2008 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile Quote
jadeval
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 7:07 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu 29 Nov , 2007 9:47 pm
Location: Ecotopia
 
What's the big deal? Why shouldn't people be allowed to do what they want? Why should we allow doctors to make the decisions for us?

Give her the info. If the mother wants the man, then fine. If not, then fine. It's the doctor's job to put up with whatever she decides.

_________________

"Every determination is a negation." -Spinoza


Top
Profile Quote
MariaHobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 8:28 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Thu 03 Feb , 2005 2:39 pm
Location: MO
 
I've had three, and my husband was there with me for all of them. They even let him cut the cord. I don't see how our sex life could have improved over what we've had the past nearly 18 years since the last one, :shrug: so I think the whole sexual mystery thing is ridiculous.

I wanted him there. It was his job to be there with me, to hold my hand, to feed me ice chips, to be an advocate for me if I needed one, and above all, to follow the baby after she/he was born and make absolutely sure that it was tagged correctly as ours!

To go through an experience like that without him there in a room full of strangers would have been unbearable. I didn't want him filming or taking pictures or any nonsense like that. He was there for me, and he did great.

Oh, and childbirth was not prolonged on any of mine. 2-3 pushes after they told me to start pushing, and they were out. I think the person who wrote that article has some hangups of his own that he's projecting into his theory.

As to drugs, I only accepted a mild narcotic on the first birth, which had the appalling effect of making me fall asleep between contractions (I'd been up all night). It was horrible. I didn't get a pain free break between contractions- all I remembered was a solid block of pain for the couple of hours that the drug was active. *shudder* I refused any kind of pain reduction on the other two and was much happier that way.

_________________


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
vison
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 8:45 pm
Best friends forever
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6546
Joined: Fri 04 Feb , 2005 4:49 am
 
The infant mortality rate is higher in the US, Estel. And maternal mortality, too.

The UK rate is quite a bit lower than in the US.

Ignore the "third world" countries, but check the US against Western Europe and Canada

While it is true that in the US, hospitals might be better equipped with fancy technology, the infant mortality rate is still significantly higher than in most Western nations.

A lot of what that doctor had to say made a lot of sense, particularly about the stress hormones. So many women have trouble nursing their babies - and that is a hormone issue.

I think it should be left up to the couple involved, certainly, but I also think that doctor is correct in saying there are no scientific studies showing there is an automatic advantage to the infant, the mother and/or the father by having him at the delivery. I think another woman - your mother or a doula, etc., is a better idea, myself. And I think that, all things considered, home births make a lot of sense.

_________________

Living on Earth is expensive,
but it does include a free trip
around the sun every year.


Top
Profile Quote
Riverthalos
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 9:16 pm
bioalchemist
Offline
 
Posts: 5205
Joined: Wed 16 Mar , 2005 2:10 am
Location: at a safe distance
 
If I were to have kids with S, I would not want him in the room. He would not be supportive. He would be terrified. He had a bad enough time when I had to get my nose repaired. I can only imagine how he'd be if something actually serious and dangerous was happening to me.

_________________

"He attacks. And here I can kill him. But I don't. That's the answer to world peace, people."
-Stickles Shihan


Top
Profile Quote
Wilma
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 10:21 pm
Takoyaki is love
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Tue 22 Feb , 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
 
I haven't read whole thread yet.

I just wanted to post that there are least 2 mammal species who have their partner there for the birth. One I think is the capucian monkey (I think) where Daddy eats the placenta afterwards and one is a type of rodent in Siberia where it is literally too harsh an environment to give birth alone. In those cases the male is there to actually assist in the birth. (I have learned this watching the discovery channel, and TVO)

_________________

Itoshiki Sensei from Sayonara Zetsubou Sensei. Avatar by: sparklessence

"There is no such thing as coincidence in this world, only hitsuzen." - Yuko Ichihara and Kimihiro Watanuki - xxxHolic

"I'm modest, I'll keep my knickers on and die!" - My sister Grace commenting on Bear Gryllis on an episode of Oprah :rofl:

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Estel
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 16 Apr , 2008 10:52 pm
Pure Kitsch Flavor
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5159
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:47 pm
Location: London
 
vison wrote:
The infant mortality rate is higher in the US, Estel. And maternal mortality, too.
Sorry - I did actually mean to say western european countries. Comparison between say, sweden and the UK (or sweden and anywhere, really) have quite shocking differences. Also, those are mortality rates in general - I'm asking about hospital births specifically. It's not just mortality rates that make want to never have a child here though. I do want to be able to choose my doctor, and have that be the doctor who is in the labor room. I want to go to a hospital where your hospital room is the room you stay in for everything (unless you have to have a C-section). I like hospitals that just keep a woman in the same room the whole time, from start of labor, till the minute she leaves the hospital. I would want to be in a hospital where there would be a fetal heart monitor on and the standard of care is one nurse per two patients, with the baby counted as one patient (like the hospital my mom works at).

I would not want to be in a hospital where there can be as few as 2 midwives, one doc on call, 6 nurses for a ward of 25 mothers, and not enough medical equipment to go around. Maybe there is a lower mortality rate here, but I would not be comfortable in that situation, and when in labor, I want to be comfortable. I would want to feel safe. Yes, it's probably different in private care as opposed to the NHS. I've just heard and read to many horror stories about giving birth with the NHS to ever feel comfortable doing it. That's why, even if it has improved, I would never ever give birth at say, Northwick Hospital where Steve went for his heart problems.

Of all the times a person wants to feel safe, protected, and not just another number - giving birth is that time.


Another thing I wonder is whether or not having the same doctor or midwife throughout the pregnancy through to labor and birth, and being able to choose that doctor or midwife makes a difference in mortality rate, as opposed to women who might have to see a variety of doctors or midwives in that time, and not be able to choose who they see. Does comfort level, trust and familiarity have an impact on the mortality of either the mother or the child?


Top
Profile Quote
vison
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 17 Apr , 2008 4:35 pm
Best friends forever
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6546
Joined: Fri 04 Feb , 2005 4:49 am
 
I think part of the modern approach to childbirth ( * insert old fashioned emoticon here* ) is that from about the first part of the 20th century childbirth became a "a disease", requiring a doctor and a hospital. My husband was born in 1941 in the best hospital in Vancouver, the best Obstetrician in Vancouver attending. As was the practice then, my mother-in-law was unconscious when he was born and she was kept in the hospital for 10 days afterwards. When I had my oldest son in 1965, I was kept in the hospital for 6 days: after a very routine pregnancy and a very easy, uncomplicated labour.

Now the SOP is different, particularly in the USA where a woman will spend maybe one night in the hospital.

Childbirth is not a disease, it mostly does not require a hospital with zillions of dollars worth of fancy equipment. Yes, there are difficult and complicated pregnancies and births, but they are not the norm. Most women carry and bear their children with relative ease.

Medical intervention in the form of C-sections has become like a plague. Doctors are so frightened of being sued "in case something goes wrong" that they want to cover all the bases and if that means whipping that baby out real fast, they're going to do it.

If you are a healthy young woman and there are no suspected complications, you don't really need to go to a hospital at all. Only, people have become convinced that it is somehow necessary.

Having a baby is a big deal, but it shouldn't be made out to be so dangerous and complicated. It mostly isn't.

_________________

Living on Earth is expensive,
but it does include a free trip
around the sun every year.


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 17 Apr , 2008 4:40 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14774
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
If I remember the story correctly, it was either with me or with my sister's delivery that my mother almost bled to death. Thankfully the doctors at the hospital were able to save her.
Just seems like better safe then sorry to me.


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 53 posts ]
Return to “The Symposium” | Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Jump to: