Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Reproductive Justice and Gender

Orgasmic Birth: The Natural Reality Behind the Hype

By Lee Stranahan, Huffington Post. Posted January 7, 2009.


The 'normal' way that women in the United States give birth -- laying prone in a room full of strangers -- is not the natural way.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Orgasmic Birth certainly is a grabber of a title. Those aren't two words normally found close together in a sentence. In our culture, other adjectives are more common. Painful Childbirth. Traumatic Childbirth.

So it's no surprise that Debra Pascalli-Bonaro's film Orgasmic Birth has become the center of some controversy. It was featured on a segment of ABC's January 2nd episode of 20/20 about "Extreme Birth" and a few weeks ago The New York Times picked a up story on the movie, which caused a flurry of comments and sent a small shockwave through the blogosphere.

Pascalli-Bonaro says she wishes some critics who just seem to see the title would actually see the film.

"It's really about the range of choices women have for experiencing birth, some of which most women aren't even aware of. There are eleven couples featured in the movie. Some use words like 'pain' and 'fear' to describe their experience but others use 'transformative', 'blissful', and 'spiritual'. Two of them use the word 'orgasmic'. This sounds strange in our culture because we're used to seeing birth dealt with on an illness model, rather than a wellness model. Birth is part of a woman's sexual life."

Laura Shanley, author of the book Unassisted Childbirth was also featured on 20/20 and agrees with the premise of the film.

"There are benefits to the mother beyond helping them rid themselves of shame, fear and guilt. An orgasm is 22 times more powerful than a tranquilizer and during sexual arousal a woman's vagina can widen as much as two inches. When women find their power during the birth experience and learn to ride the contractions, it can be an incredible, even healing experience."

The 'normal' way that women in the United States give birth -- laying prone in a room full of strangers -- is not the natural way. It might even be the cause of some birth problems. Shanley cites a study that showed that when a stranger enters a room where a pregnant monkey is housed, :both the heart rate and the blood pressure of her fetus goes down. Of course, in the delivery room a drop in the heart rate of the baby often triggers a Cesarean section."

Shanley says that stress and 'fight or flight' reactions cause huge changes in a woman's body. "There's a reason that animals seek seclusion in birth. Everyone understands that being in a brightly lit room with a group of people watching you wouldn't make a comfortable environment for someone going to the bathroom or having sex. But for an equally intimate, personal activity like birth, people don't make the connection. Woman don't need to choose between drugs, epidurals, and Cesarean sections on one hand and fear of a natural but painful childbirth on the other. There really is a third way and it's more natural."

Pascali-Bonaro says that many changes to make birth a more pleasurable, healthy experience for women are simple and inexpensive. "Americans spend more money than any other country on medical care but that doesn't mean we're getting the best care. Simple things like dimming lights, allowing the mother creative space to move around and having music, natural sounds or even just silence can make a huge difference."

Ultimately, Pascali-Bonaro says that she's an advocate of mothers making informed birth choices. Since making the film, she's learned orgasmic birth is more common than she thought. "We've screened the movie in 28 countries and women always come up to me and 'You know, I never thought about it before...but I think I had one, too!'"

 


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: birth, natural childbirth, orgasmic birth

Lee Stranahan is a freelance writer, an award winning photographer, independent digital filmmaker, graphic artist and he's taught thousands of people around the world how to make money making art through his personal consultation, seminars and articles.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Yes, this is a bit nit-picky
Posted by: Lady_L on Jan 7, 2009 2:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but I've never heard of a woman giving birth while lying (not "laying") "prone" because she would be lying on her stomach. "Supine" would mean she was lying on her back.

I just think that accuracy is important when writing. Call it my bugbear.

(Yes, I'm getting certified to teach English, why do you ask?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» it matters to me Posted by: kittybrat
» RE: it matters to me Posted by: Lady_L
» RE: Yes, this is a bit nit-picky Posted by: Dr. P. Mooney
Doctors have not be amiable
Posted by: kittybrat on Jan 7, 2009 5:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to allowing women to get comfortable. When in labor, I wanted to stand up and lean forward on the table.. it was much more comfortable and made more sense. However, that was not to be, and for my first two children I was forced to lie on my back in the highly lit room. The other two births were C sections, so on my back made more sense of course!
I am intrigued about the orgasmic birth, and shall get this book.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Doctors have not be amiable Posted by: Dr. P. Mooney
As George Carlin would say,
Posted by: bizeeb on Jan 7, 2009 5:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"there's nothing natural about 'Natural Child Birth.'" Throughout human history, perhaps nothing has killed women at a greater rate than giving birth to a child. The death rate for women giving birth plummeted in the 20th century.

The historical level of maternal deaths is probably around 1 in 100 births. Mortality rates reached horrible proportions in maternity institutions in the 1800s, sometimes climbing to 40 percent of birthgiving women. At the beginning of the 1900s, maternal death rates were around 1 in 100 for live births. The number today in the United States is 11 in 100,000, a decline by orders of magnitude.

This article states: "The 'normal' way that women in the United States give birth -- laying prone in a room full of strangers -- is not the natural way." Two big problems with that statement:
1) A room full of strangers? Maybe in a 1950's movie, where the father is only granted a glance at his newborn through a maternity ward window; the modern day norm of "birthing suites", i.e. very private rooms where Dad can stay the whole time, the couple deciding themselves who comes and goes, with the only "stranger" in attendance is the Dr. and a nurse or two, is much closer to modern day reality, and
2) The implication that "natural" equals "good". This confusion pops up constantly, whether the topic is food, medicine, behavior, family structures, religion, and on and on. For instance, is it "natural" for men to dominate and control women? (The mere question probably sends many into a rage.) I couldn't care less if it is "natural", it's wrong. One could argue that it's "natural" in the sense that a) it's common throughout nature, and b) it's common throughout human history and human cultures. Doesn't matter, it's still wrong.

So "Natural" is not a term that deserves it's reverence, and I would respectfully disagree with the above article. If I were to deliver a baby, or a gallstone, I'd want all the drugs/anaesthesia the doc will give me. And frankly, it seems natural to me to try and escape pain at almost any cost.

This article is actually just another "Western Medicine is Unnatural And Bad For You" piece, a sentiment that is common amongst many progressives, especially those into "Alternative Medicine", but THAT is an argument that I haven't got the energy for and is un-winnable anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: As George Carlin would say, Posted by: girlnumbertwenty
» RE: As George Carlin would say, Posted by: wolfgangmo
» Thank you for your courtesy Posted by: bizeeb
» RE: As George Carlin would say, Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: As George Carlin would say, Posted by: AnnetteGallagher
Excessive "medical" control
Posted by: Karina on Jan 7, 2009 6:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately you have to have plenty of money to control your own birth, at least in the US. My insurance would cover nothing for a doula, midwife or homebirth, none of which are inexpensive. Despite a very healthy pregnancy, the doctors pushed to induce labor, pushed pain medication, used medical procedures that were unnecessary, no doubt for their own convenience.
It was surprising how vehemently both the doctor and nurse pushed me to take drugs, and after insisting that they put a heart monitor on because of minor flucuations in heart rate, I was forced to lay on my back in bed.
It's time doctors and insurance companies stopped treating childbirth as an illness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: excessive "medical" control Posted by: ProstheticConscience
» RE: excessive "medical" control Posted by: ProstheticConscience
Also, the why-not-be-painless viewpoint
Posted by: Karina on Jan 7, 2009 7:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is fine if that's what is important to you however use of the epidural can have lasting side effects, including incontinence or bladder dysfunction, loss of perineal sensation and sexual function, abnormal FHR (can lead to emergency cesarean), and dural tears for mom; for baby fetal distress, difficulty with breastfeeding, jaundice, drug toxicity and many, many more.
Fully understanding those possibilities would make a day of ungodly pain a bit more tolerable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obstetrics is very profitable
Posted by: zooeyhall on Jan 7, 2009 7:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So do you think these doctors and the phalanx of supporting specialists are gonna let their money cow get away? Don't even think of it!

Maternity is a BIG money maker for hospitals.

I have heard that it costs at least $5000 today for a non-complicated birth in a hospital.

When I was born back in 1955, mom had me at home. The local GP came out to help. Dad sold a couple of hogs to pay the bill (I believe it was $250).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Can't agree with you there. Posted by: wolfgangmo
Natural is not backwards
Posted by: misstexaskitty on Jan 7, 2009 7:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
bizbee...What you do not know about giving birth is a book in itself.
First the people in the room with the woman, the probability is that other than her husband, friend, coach they will be strangers, more often then not even the doctor may be a stranger, the "tail-enders" often cover for one another with callous attitude toward the patient. Second, the others are nurses or assistants and some times they monopolize the time before the husband can enter. Third, all women are given the scare stories to ensure that she will have some sort of sedation, certainly easier for the medical staff - but what of the woman and child? The United States currently ranks 49th in the developed countries for infant mortality, we still have a terrible loss of mother's lives. So-in this time of medical achievements - See some area that has been ignored? Women sure do. We over use medicine, over use the fetal monitors, and over all - over use cesarean sections. Yet, sadly still disregard the importance and expense of prenatal care. My children were born without the use of drugs, and with a minimum of interference, my first had a Midwife, the second in birthing room, which few hospitals bother with. Women need and deserve a healthy and proper education about prenatal care, use of Mid-Wives and a emphasis on learning the normal and natural actions of their own bodies.
*Insurance companies are suppose to now pay for all Mid-Wives in the assist of childbirth.*

Tail-enders = those doctors who show-up at the last possible moment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Natural is not backwards Posted by: maestra
» You are in Washington state. Posted by: wolfgangmo
» RE: Natural is not backwards Posted by: drmflorida
Treating Pregnancy as a medical condition is insane!
Posted by: Cathyc on Jan 7, 2009 7:46 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But then, there's method in madness!

Just about all aspects of life in America are commodified i.e., "How much money can WE (the racketeers) make out of this?"

So, it comes as no surprise that pregnancy and childbirth itself are routinely treated as something that needs to be fixed, and therefore, profited from - in Money-Mad- America!

Lying on the flat of one's back is the most ABNORMAL way for a woman to give birth. Yet, this is the routine practice for your average American woman (as it is in other americanized western societies) - which begs the question: WHY?

What is it about these societies that routinely treat women in such an abusive and violent manner?

More importantly, how is it that so many women (the majority, it seems to me) have passively accepted this abnormal practice for so many generations?

No doubt, it all begins in childhood; with the way one is conditioned to "obey authority" -- and America has (hitherto) been the most covert dictatorship in the West....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

alternative medicine or alternative reality?
Posted by: bizeeb on Jan 7, 2009 9:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"...the chances of a woman in America today being provided with a safe and secure - dare I say it, a genuinely LOVING environment - during the delivery of her child, is practically zero!" -CathyC

"However, that does not mean that the vast majority of births require the same level of interference by the medical community." -LindaB

"Interference" by the medical community? Then don't go to the doctor! Yet, if complications arise, I'm pretty sure I know who you'll be calling, and the number starts with a 9.

The reason why infant mortality rates in the U.S. are so deplorably high, and they truly are, is because so many women in poverty do not have access to pre-natal care - FROM A DOCTOR!

So many of the posts here attempt to make the exact same (absurd) point: Western medicine is nothing but a ruthless business, hell bent on nothing but making money; doctors are all uncaring automatons that only really care about the health of men, and their own bottom lines. What a load of bullshit.

Western doctors are the ones flying all around the world trying to save/innoculate/vaccinate/educate as many impoverished people as possible (Doctors Without Borders et al). Planned Parenthood is another good example of Western medicine, and I quote one of it's founders: "When a woman in rural Bolivia dies during pregnancy or in childbirth because she lacks access to quality medical attention, her rights to life and to health have been violated."

As to the efficacy of modern medicine vs. "alternative" medicine, I'll leave that argument to the late, great, Carl Sagan:

"There is a persistent myth that hundreds or even thousands of years ago, long before anyone
knew that blood circulates throughout the body, or that germs cause disease, our
ancestors possessed miraculous remedies that modern science cannot understand. Much
of what is termed 'alternative medicine' is part of that myth. Ancient folk wisdom, rediscovered or repackaged, is unlikely to match the output of modern scientific laboratories."

"Alternative medicine" is not a scientific concept. It is a political, ideological ploy intended to raise public respect for a mishmash of untested, unproven, and even disproven treatments that are rejected by the scientific community. We used to call those treatments quackery, folk remedies, untested, belief-based. A rose by any other name...

I highly recommend anyone interested in "alternative medicine" to read the (hilarious) satire on Alternative Aviation, at this link:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=34

Enough said. If you want the medical "science" of 1500 B.C., does that mean you want the life expectancy (about 30 years) of that era as well? Why not go have your child out in the woods while your at it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

jwitts
Posted by: juliet on Jan 7, 2009 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I never got past your first sentence. It's lying, not laying.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I would have liked to give birth while swimming with dolphins, actually ...
Posted by: stellabloo on Jan 7, 2009 12:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... but the size of my firstborn's head was imcompatible with the size of the pelvic opening. Period. A hundred years ago we would have probably both died.

And if I had somehow survived, milk fever would have killed me for sure. My temperature was 107 when we went to the emergency ward and modern antibiotics saved my life.

Now, normally we don't go to the doctor except for checkups - even though we have universal healthcare and extended benefits. I prefer to look after my own health.

The #1 thing you can do to ensure a healthy pregnancy and a healthy baby (because THAT is what it's all about, really!) is to be in the best shape you can be BEFORE becoming pregnant. Getting in shape after you discover you're pregnant is like cleaning house after the guest arrives. All those third world mothers with successful natural deliveries have spent their short lives doing hard manual work. Commuting to the office is no way to train for labour.

However, being healthy is no guarantee that you will have that fantasy delivery - I personally know 2 moms who lost their babies because the doctor DIDN'T intervene and the cord was wrapped around the baby's neck.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Had pre-eclampsia Posted by: Chaimirija
From the Torture Chamber to the Birthing Room - a reminiscence
Posted by: mollyfurie on Jan 7, 2009 12:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is heartening to read of the experiences of parents giving birth these days in 'birthing rooms' with soft lights and music. And they are naturally grateful for the experience provided for them by modern medicine.

Those innovations are all quite recent & grew out of the rejection of the earlier style of medical intervention.

My experiences in the early 60s in a big city general hospital were vastly different. I was caged in a ward full of screaming women from the time that I arrived until I was moved to delivery, where I was screamed at by a number of men I didn't recognize - & because I was drugged with Demerol beyond sensibility - was terrified of.

I was put on a table that was tilted so that my head was considerably lower than my feet - contrary to all the laws of gravity, & caused me to struggle, panic-stricken, when I became nauseous - a common occurrence during labor.

I was put in restraints, from which I was able to free my hands in my desperation to fight off my strange 'attackers.' I am pleased to say that I managed to kick at least one of them quite solidly. It is one of the few things I remember clearly.

No friend or husband could visit me during those long hours, which, like air travel were extremely boring, but punctuated with terror & pain. I was alone most of the time. When medical staff addressed me, they spoke to me as if I were brain-damaged.

There was no rule written on the wall reading 'thou shalt not breastfeed' but the hospital staff obviously found it an incomprehensible bother, & little encouragement was given.

Visiting hours were limited to times when working people mostly couldn't make it.

My second birth - at the same hospital - was somewhat better. I had studied the subject & through self-control, aided by earnest pleading, I convinced them not to drug me or tie me down.

However, when they discovered that I was about to commit the unforgiveable sin of giving birth in the labor room rather than the delivery room, I was raced down the hall with my legs crossed & a large intern sitting on them.

Once in delivery, my contractions were countered by someone pushing my baby's head back, so that they could finish the episiotomy.

The hospital had become more breastfeeding-friendly, but nursing was now tyrannically overseen by a disapproving nurse who apparently knew nothing about it. And, while holding my swaddled baby to feed her, I was admonished not to touch her!

During the 70s a number of books were published outlining these and other horrors imposed on women in labor. The feminist movement took up the cause of a friendlier way of birth. And women began to learn to deliver babies.

All of the wonderful, enlightened innovations in childbirth were reactions to a grave threat to the medical profession - women were opting for midwives and home births! Couples were arrested for having babies at home. Midwives went to jail. And no one wanted to deliver a baby in those damned torture chambers!

So the hospitals and the doctors modified their birth-as-medical-crisis approach - or was it mother as wild animal? - and changed the scenario.

Well, better late than never.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Tis true Posted by: Chaimirija
all mixed up and nowhere to go
Posted by: DaBear on Jan 7, 2009 4:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LOL! I read the article up to the "prone" error then went to the comments, got shanghai'd for a while picking on the kool-aiders who think "natural childbirth" t'ain't natural unless its a C-section. Then I went back and read the rest of the article, then read the author's bio.... Lee teaches people "how to make money making art".... now that was funny! I now understand the bad vocabulary and syntax errors. Hee-hee!

Sounds like a neato book or film... geezis, I forgot already which Lee was writing about. The comments were much more enlightening.

I'm glad we're not having any more offspring, we've done our damage increasing the population by 0.8 kids above break-even. The all-too familiar worn out scripts recited by women who got sectioned are increasing but it's just a ramp-up in volume of the same ole thing: more craptastic interventions that weren't needed, more guilt, more shame, more kool-aiders vocally howling about how we're the best in the world while ignoring the evidence... geezis, we 'Merkaaners really are idiots.

I trashed docs pretty roundly above. I should confess that I have great respect for a good, well trained, horse-sense oriented, experienced M.D. I give the few who are hell for it, but I respect 'em, almost as much as a well-trained, experienced midwife. But both of those are far too few in a system so flush with cash in a nation so full-up with stoopid posing as wisdom. It's a damned Greek tragedy that's all too damned real.

And it's not limited to childbirth either. Just blow a disc and watch six different M.D.s dance around for a week trying to figure out why a patient is writhing in pain... then one doc comes in and actually looks at the MRI and says, hey, why haven't you treated this ruptured disc? Hello. We're the best in the world, flying our doctors all over the planet... horsehockey.

I shudder for women who are giving birth today... and I won't shut up until they have an even better shot at safe sound healthy natural births than we did. It's too damned important. Pregnant women aren't sick, they're having babies, dammit. Stop the nonsense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Women have more fun
Posted by: standingwave on Jan 7, 2009 8:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow. Not only can women have multiple orgasms, but now we learn that you may orgasm while giving birth.
Speaking as a teacher, I'd like to have more young people like that in my classes, ones who entered the world on the waves of orgasm.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Women have more fun Posted by: itchyvet
For a little balance . . . . . .
Posted by: mollyfurie on Jan 8, 2009 5:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After having accurately described my experiences in the torture chamber/labor rooms of a major US hospital in the 60s - and I only outlined it for reasons of brevity - I guess I should say a few words in defense of the medical profession, because on another occasion, they saved my life at that very same hospital, when I had an ectopic pregnancy - which would have killed me for sure in earlier times.

On that occasion, they were sometimes unkind, bordering on incompetence (mostly due to the bureaucracy inevitable in such a large urban hospital which treats the poor almost exclusively), and insensitive - but without modern medicine and the public health system, I'd have died - at just 17.

Of course, not ALL the personnel at LA General were mean or stupid - enough were to convince me that the patient must question everything. For instance, read your own name tag - don't take it for granted that the one they put on you has YOUR name on it and not someone else's. And NEVER take pills before asking what they are for. I was once given enough codeine to knock me out almost completely and wheeled to surgery for an operation I did not need - it was a case of mistaken identity. I was able to keep myself awake just enough to protest feebly, and finally, a doctor looked at my name tag and sent me back to my ward! My experiences there made me a more careful person, and a bit of a medical skeptic.

Unfortunately, LA's General Hospital system has gotten much worse since then. And meaner. All those arriving to get care are now under suspicion of 'drug-seeking behavior' to such an extent that patients die in the waiting room, denied treatment by a staff trained to regard patients as probable criminals.

Still, for millions in America, the public health system is all there is. It certainly needs improvement, although for a number of years it has been neglected and underfunded. The public health system is necessary - and I fear that some future epidemic will prove that, too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maternal Instinct is Right!
Posted by: Daer Mi on Jan 8, 2009 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've had some *really* bad expriences with doctors and medications, so I'm naturally very distrustful, but when I think about having a child in the future, it just goes to a whole different level. Something earth-moving inside me just says "NO." Not happening. Not a chance. Giving birth in a hospital? Of all the dirty places to have a baby, filled with super-bugs and staph infections! Doctors pushing medication on you (and in my experience often trying to give it to you without telling you what it is), not to mention the terrifying, medieval-sounding interventions and instruments. When I think about it, something primal in me rears its head and sharpens its claws. No way am I letting any of that near my baby.

The more I read about natural births, the more I'm relieved and confident in my body. Childbirth is not so scary or even painful as I was raised to believe. It doesn't even happen the way way I was taught! It's very interesting that there's a direct correlation between the mother's fear and the amount of pain she experiences. Seriously, check out the bornfree website in the article. There's tons of information, and probably a hundred stories of women who give birth without even a midwife, and without pain! When you look at how other animals give birth, it makes sense that we would seek to deliver in a place that's familiar and safe and secluded from strangers.

I love finding articles like this. Living in a culture where I'm taught I can't trust my body, it's a wonderful feeling when I find that my instinct is right after all. It's wonderful to find my maternal instinct is already telling me what I need to know, even before I'm a mother.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have seen both ways
Posted by: mollyfurie on Jan 8, 2009 6:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would certainly never condemn anyone who needed a C-section! Of course I am glad I didn't, because I've had abdominal surgery, and it was a darn sight harder to recover from. But 1bout 15 years after my experiences in the Los Angeles torture chamber/labor and delivery rooms, I attended the home birth of a friend, who had a midwife come to her home. At any point, the midwife told us, if things looked bad, she would see to it that the mother was hospitalized. After all, we are in the 20th century and a real emergency can be recognized and responded to appropriately. It wasn't necessary.

In fact, so VERY MUCH wasn't necessary! Shaving, enema, episiotomy - all completely unnecessary. Whatever horrible things are supposed to happen if these uncomfortable procedures are skipped, didn't happen. Pain killers, epidurals, and restraints all turned out to be unnecessary. I guess screaming is unnecessary because my friend never screamed at all. Massage was a necessity, as was a friendly relaxed environment. When it was over, the mother was alert and happy, not drugged and inert.

What a difference!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

International comparison
Posted by: taralazet on Jan 8, 2009 7:33 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Where I'm from, the Netherlands, almost all women have home births. Not because the Netherlands is some third-world country but because that is what most women feel comfortable with. Of course, women with medical conditions are under supervision of OBGYNs during their pregnancy and delivery but generally speaking women have home births. I found it very interesting reading the different stories here and of course the advances made in medicine keeping women and babies alive during pregnancy and delivery are great but pregnancy shouldn't be treated as some illness that always needs aggressive action. Some women might prefer giving birth in a hospital and that is their perogative of course but I think it is vital that women have a choice in the matter AND that they are aware of what their choices mean (e.g. if you have a home birth your midwife can't give you and epidural). And finally, even though pregnancy is not an illness women should get the chance to take some rest after they delivered and get help around the house. I work with African and Middle-Eastern women and they have told me that after they give birth their friends and family pamper them, cook for them etc etc, not for a few days but for a few weeks (sounds kinda nice to me :D ) Recently, the French Secretary of Justice gave birth by c-section and was back on the job in 5 days. In whatever circumstance, I don't think that is a very nice experience, for mother or child (please note I am not condemning her personal choice)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement