Reasons for medication-free childbirth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think for some of us, we just don't get what is so special about the "pain" of childbirth. I mean, it is one aspect of what goes on. Having pain medication doesn't negate the childbirth process or the experience. We do the same things. We just are not writing in pain during the whole thing. But for some reason, natural birth moms think that the pain itself defines the experience and we just disagree.

Have you read any of the posts? I don't know who else you're listening to, but it's not about the pain (I didn't have much acutal pain, for instance, and I went naturally) so much as it is about the lack of artificial drugs. OP asked for reasons for a med-free childbirth. I and others gave them. Frankly, I think it's almost always healthier. I personally truly believe it was better for me and baby. And you DON'T do the same things if you labor under anaesthesia. So what you are saying is just not factually accurate. Natural childbirth allows mom and baby to experience endorphins and hormone release that are blocked when mom has medication. Have an epidural and you'll almost alwyas labor in a less favorable position, greatly increasing your risk for tearing or an episiotomy. You can't change positions so if baby stops progressing in one position, your next alternative is the c-section, not a position change, which can often help. While some of you may be able to feel to push, others won't. There's no guarantee that you'll be able to feel enough to push well under an epidural.

And there are other benefits that are less medical and really, more personal. I was walking around with my baby and gave him his first bath an hour after he was born and felt great doing it. Because I didn't have pain medication I never had to let my baby leave my side. I could stand up and hold his hand for any tests and procedures. That's not important to everybody and that's okay. But you can't do all of those things if you're on your back from an epidural. So they really, it isn't at all the same.

I also believe many women who had an epidural closed themselves off to something they might have enjoyed or benefitted from. Yeah, when I hear about someone who had a dreadful experience with an epidural, I definitely wonder if her outcome might have been better had she labored more naturally. But to reduce reasons for natural childbirth

down to pride of going through the pain is really nonsensical. Drug-free childbirth does not mean "no-pain no-gain." That totally misses the point for many of us.


Each of us has the responsibility to evaluate the facts and decide on an approach that is best for us. I went natural because I think it was the best way to give birth. I don't care if that offends someone who chose an epidural. My belief about what's best for birth doesn't have to be yours, but you don't get to choose how I feel about it so you're not offended!!!

[Anonymous]

well said, 13:37. loved and agreed with every word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sooo..women who choose an epidural and think that it is obnoxious when natural laborers say that is it best FOR BABY and MOMMY (not, mind you, best for their own babies and their own bodies, but make blanket statements about what is best for baby) are just jealous and insecure? And you don't think making a blanket about what is absolutely best for mommy and baby is obnoxious? It isn't jealousy or insecurity, honey. It is aggravation that natural laborers feel the need to put down other women's choices (and yes, that is what you are doing when you state that we aren't doing what is best for mom and baby).

Not to put my head in the lion's mouth or anything, but when we natural birth moms post research that backs up our position, we get accused also of manipulating facts.

When it comes down to it, if someone asks "Why did you choose this?" and you say "Because based on what I've read, it's what's best for everyone involved" on this board, you're going to get slammed in 6 different directions by women who are justifiably proud of the birth of their child and the way that they chose to make that happen.

Would you rather that we lie?

You do realize that nowadays, you can find research backing just about any opinion. And none of the research that has been posted states that natural birth is best...period. It mentions some advantages, but don't confuse pointing out the advantages of natural childbirth with what is best in all cases. You all are stretching to make it sound like it is always best and that there aren't any advantages of an epidural, for example. It has been pointed out before that natural laborers are cherry-picking the stats that make it seem like the absolute best, while ignoring research that points to the benefits of other options (like pain medication). If you want to read with blinders on, fine...but don't expect us to not call you out on it.

My point was that the reverse is also true. There are pros and cons to both ways of doing things, and that list changes depending on the specific situations in question. What I was getting at was that people ask "Why did you do it drug free?" or "Why do you think it's better to do it drug free?", those of us who feel strongly about it give the opinions that we ask for. When we don't cite specific studies, we get accused of wildly making up stories to scare other expectant moms away from hospitals and when we do cite specific studies, we get told that "you can find research backing just about any opinion" and that we are "cherry-picking the stats."

I'm not reading with blinders on at all, thanks. I did a lot of research on both sides of the issue and frankly, based on the things I read, the educated conclusion I've come to is that non-medicated vaginal birth IS what's best for most moms and babies. Call me out on it or not, but don't dismiss my opinion, which was asked for, just because you disagree with it.

[Anonymous]

AnonymousI also believe many women who had an epidural closed themselves off to something they might have enjoyed or benefitted from. [/quote wrote:

whatevah!

[Anonymous]

13:37: you are such a pompous person. Classic example of the judgmental and boorish "natural" mom.

[Anonymous]

Here's a question: those of you who went natural. How long were you in labor, start to finish?

[Anonymous]

12 hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:12 hours.

Hey, mine too. Someone upthread (about a million pages ago) wrote about being in the zone and losing track of time. I felt this too, so it felt much much shorter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's a question: those of you who went natural. How long were you in labor, start to finish?

53 hours. Guarantee I would have had any number of interventions such as drugs, episiotomy, forceps, surgery, separation of my baby after delivery....any number of things which could have physically harmed me or my baby.

Instead, I had an amazing, peaceful birth at home - not even a tear - and my perfectly healthy baby never left my perfectly-healthy side. For me the big deal was that when baby #2 and 3 came along, I didn't have to fight for or worry about a VBAC, and thankfully those labors were much, much shorter.

[Anonymous]

Mine was 21 hours but I accepted pitocin after 17 hours of labor with minimal dilation. My water broke at the beginning so I was on the clock. I guess I wasn't fully natural, but I did go without pain meds. I probably would have been in labor for two days without the pit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's a question: those of you who went natural. How long were you in labor, start to finish?

Also 12 hours.

[Anonymous]

OK, I haven't read this whole thread, because, well, my kid is now 8 and who cares.

Seriously, we choose what we choose with the best of intentions. Many of us are proud of our birth stories. There's nothing wrong with that, no matter how they happened.

[Anonymous]

Mom of 8 y.o. again. I've learned when someone asks in a way to tease out a judgement to say, "I'm not going there. Stop stirring up shit."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's a question: those of you who went natural. How long were you in labor, start to finish?

28 hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's a question: those of you who went natural. How long were you in labor, start to finish?

14 hours, first labor. Full active labor was pretty short.