Reasons for medication-free childbirth

[Anonymous]

My motivation for a medication-free birth was to ensure the safest, healthiest start to my baby's life. I didn't want to risk any unknown side effects of medications or an epidural to either me or my baby. Also, all of the women in my family have had relatively easy, non-eventful births -- why would I want to mess with this type of track record? Plus the medal on my mantle is SO shiny!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My motivation for a medication-free birth was to ensure the safest, healthiest start to my baby's life. I didn't want to risk any unknown side effects of medications or an epidural to either me or my baby. Also, all of the women in my family have had relatively easy, non-eventful births -- why would I want to mess with this type of track record? Plus the medal on my mantle is SO shiny!

Can you point me to unbiased research that shows that a medication-free birth is the "safest, healthiest" start to a baby's life?

These are the types of statements that sound really obnoxious - like choosing a natural delivery has been proven to be the best start for baby - that is just false information. It is your opinion, sure, based on whatever reading you have done, but epidurals have been around for decades and have proven to be safe and healthy for baby.

[Anonymous]

To me, some of the "I wanted to fully experience labor/delivery" posts sound a little self-righteous b/c - you know what - I fully experienced labor and delivery as well. I felt the contractions and I pushed my baby out and I labored and delivered just like all of you natural delivery people. To think otherwise (i.e., that those with epidurals didn't experience labor/delivery as fully is like saying that a pregnant woman didn't fully experience pregnancy b/c she didn't have morning sickness).

I think the full pain is part of the labor experience and you do not think so. Fair enough. I don't see what is self-righteous about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My motivation for a medication-free birth was to ensure the safest, healthiest start to my baby's life. I didn't want to risk any unknown side effects of medications or an epidural to either me or my baby. Also, all of the women in my family have had relatively easy, non-eventful births -- why would I want to mess with this type of track record? Plus the medal on my mantle is SO shiny!

Can you point me to unbiased research that shows that a medication-free birth is the "safest, healthiest" start to a baby's life?

These are the types of statements that sound really obnoxious - like choosing a natural delivery has been proven to be the best start for baby - that is just false information. It is your opinion, sure, based on whatever reading you have done, but epidurals have been around for decades and have proven to be safe and healthy for baby.

I'm not the PP but you know there are risks to epidurals. They may be small, slight, very rare, but they are there. I don't think that people who have epidurals need to defend their choice. Plenty of doctors have epidurals when they deliver. But pretending there is no risk destroys your credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wanted to experience all of labor. This time I am hoping to experience it again, but without pitocin!

I wanted to have the best chance at avoiding a c-section, knowing full well that you can't control it when you need it.

I wanted to increase the chances that the baby would be up for nursing right away.

OP, the pain is different for everyone and some labors are much harder than others. I have no doubt, though, that every labor is easier (not easy, and may still call for an epidural) if you have done the mental training in advance.

I had an emergency c-section, so of course epidural, and my baby nursed as soon as I was stitched up. He was also very alert and looked back and forth at me and dad when we would talk.

This is the PP. I wrote "increase the chances" of fast nursing, which is accurate. Increasing the chances doesn't mean it ensures I could get fast nursing or that it is the only way to have it. I don't want to be the one to bring rudeness to what has been a pretty relaxed thread but this kind of response drives me batty. If someone is talking about chances, percentages, etc., any one experience to the contrary is just not relevant.

If my own experience is not relevant, then neither are any of yours.

All I was trying to say is that if you end up with an epidural, or a c/s (I labored for 24 hours, including 2 hours of pushing and then an infection that came on super fast) you're not doomed to a limp baby. I thought I was trying to put some at ease.

[Anonymous]

I think the high % of epidurals, interventions (and consequently c-sections) are very much something of the US.

I am from a Western European country where you don't even get an epidural unless there is a very urgent medical reason (like an emergency c-section), 50% of the people delivers at home with a midwife (and no epidurals around there) and with much lower infant mortality rates than the US.

So to me - an epidural-free birth is the most normal thing on earth.

But I had my kids in the US - and the first one was a typical interventionest experience as I had not educated myself very well: induction, epidural, stalled progress and then a c-section. You hear this all the time.
The second one was an epidural-free, natural delivery with a midwife. I avoided the epidural since I knew it would increase my chances of a c-section. That was my main reason for not wanting this type of pain medication as it numbs the lower part of the body and it makes it impossible for a laboring woman to move around or change positions. The moving around made baby no. 2 descend into the birth canal and saved me from a c-section.

But again - if I tell my friends back home I had a medication-free birth with no.2 they do not blink an eye. To them it's completely normal.

[Anonymous]

If my own experience is not relevant, then neither are any of yours.

All I was trying to say is that if you end up with an epidural, or a c/s (I labored for 24 hours, including 2 hours of pushing and then an infection that came on super fast) you're not doomed to a limp baby. I thought I was trying to put some at ease.

OP asked why those who went natural did so. Part of my reasoning was based on the percentage chance of an outcome I wanted. You tried to counter that with a single experience. That's what doesn't make sense.

Of course all of our experiences matter to the large telling of the labor story. But you were trying to refute my reasoning, not just add to the experiences of labor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If my own experience is not relevant, then neither are any of yours.

All I was trying to say is that if you end up with an epidural, or a c/s (I labored for 24 hours, including 2 hours of pushing and then an infection that came on super fast) you're not doomed to a limp baby. I thought I was trying to put some at ease.

OP asked why those who went natural did so. Part of my reasoning was based on the percentage chance of an outcome I wanted. You tried to counter that with a single experience. That's what doesn't make sense.

Of course all of our experiences matter to the large telling of the labor story. But you were trying to refute my reasoning, not just add to the experiences of labor.

I promise it wasn't a personal attack. I was just relating my experience. FWIW, I also had to fight with the pediatrician to let me nurse again even though they were going to let me see the baby again (bc of my infection the baby had to be put on antibiotics too even though his fever was gone within 5 minutes of birth). But she was just weird.

[Anonymous]

When my second son was born, he had "infant depression" meaning that he was not reacting to the outside world. He did not cry, or react as a normal baby should at birth.

Among other things, he would not latch and nurse, because his neurology was messed up. I persisted, and eventually he did latch and nurse after six weeks - but during that time it was a hellish nightmare for both of us.

At the time it happened, no one at the hospital (the then-failing Columbia Hospital for Women) would talk about the whys, but I later learned this condition was directly related to the Nubain I had been given for pain relief. (The anesthesiologist was tied up and they couldn't get him there in a reasonable timeframe for an epidural.)

http://www.americanpregnancy.org/labornbirth/narcotics.html

Had I been properly informed I would never have agreed to this drug.

[Anonymous]

I promise it wasn't a personal attack. I was just relating my experience. FWIW, I also had to fight with the pediatrician to let me nurse again even though they were going to let me see the baby again (bc of my infection the baby had to be put on antibiotics too even though his fever was gone within 5 minutes of birth). But she was just weird.

I appreciate this, thank you. I'm glad you got to do so much early nursing and sad you had to fight for it.

[Anonymous]

I haven't had a med-free birth yet, but am planning it for #2. With #1 I managed labor fine until transition, and then had that overwhelmed feeling and asked for the epidural. Which was fine - it worked, I couldn't feel the pain, etc. However when my baby was born I didn't feel that instant rush of bonding emotion, and I also went on to have some serious engorgement problems (leading to weeks of breastfeeding problems) that I believe were exacerbated by the IV fluids you have to get in order to have an epidural. So for #2 I am hoping for an umedicated birth to see if either of those situations are better with this child. I realize it may very well NOT make a dramatic impact on the post-birth outcome, but I'm hopeful that if I go med-free that at least I won't mentally beat myself up with 'what ifs' if things are difficult for me again.

And while many of the reasons mentioned earlier do factor in - slight risks to epidural, reduced chance of tearing if I can actually work with my body during pushing, sense of accomplishment, etc. - they are definitely all secondary.

[Anonymous]

Childbirth Connection is a great resource for evidence-based childbirth information. This is their web page about labor pain relief:
http://www.childbirthconnection.org/article.asp?ck=10183

I think what is "safest" and "healthiest" for any particular baby and mother depends on the circumstances. For me, I was low risk, and I felt that a medication free birth was safest and healthiest because none of the pain relief methods I planned to use had any possible risks or side effects, whereas medicinal pain relief did have possible risks or side effects. So for me, sitting in a tub of water for pain relief seemed safer than an epidural, because it would relieve my pain but without any risk to me or my baby. It wasn't that I thought epidurals were always unsafe or unhealthy, just that they had more potential to be, and I didn't want to take any chances.

For someone else, what is safest and healthiest might be very different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My motivation for a medication-free birth was to ensure the safest, healthiest start to my baby's life. I didn't want to risk any unknown side effects of medications or an epidural to either me or my baby. Also, all of the women in my family have had relatively easy, non-eventful births -- why would I want to mess with this type of track record? Plus the medal on my mantle is SO shiny!

Can you point me to unbiased research that shows that a medication-free birth is the "safest, healthiest" start to a baby's life?

These are the types of statements that sound really obnoxious - like choosing a natural delivery has been proven to be the best start for baby - that is just false information. It is your opinion, sure, based on whatever reading you have done, but epidurals have been around for decades and have proven to be safe and healthy for baby.

[Anonymous]

I am hoping for a natural, non-medicated child birth for several reasons... My number one reason is that I hate to be confined when it isn't necessary. I also was with a friend who was induced and then given an epidural, in the end after 48hrs in the hospital she wasn't able to push effectively so they took out the epidural. It was like dropping her off a cliff, she had no preparation, no built up endorphines to help her cope and no childbirth classes under her belt that might have helped her deal with the pain. She also had a very hard time with breastfeeding because the baby was very lethargic after so many hours under the epidural.

I recently read a great blog post by a doula who said that no matter what you think about an epidural you should prepare for a natural birth because over the 1000+ births that she has attended many of the women who wanted an epidural couldn't get one for one reason or another, or it didn't work completely, or the dose had to be lowered significantly during the final stage of labor. Personally, there isn't any harm in learning the pain management techniques of a Bradley, or Lamaze class, just in case things don't go as planned. Just like I will be making sure I am well educated on epidurals, pitocin, ect. just in case natural birth isn't what is in the cards for me. There is never any harm in making sure you are well educated about all of the possibilities.

[Anonymous]

OP, for me some of this just comes down to my general views about birth, which is that for a healthy mom and baby birth need not be a medical procedure. I see it more as a natural process that the body is designed for. It is truly amazing all the hormones your body produces during labor to help you cope and then quickly forget the pain to start bonding with your baby!

That's also why I have trouble getting my head around the comparison to having a tooth extracted without pain medicine. A tooth extraction is more comparable to a c-section, which nobody would advocate doing without meds. Perhaps, if we're sticking with the tooth theme, labor is more similar to having a baby tooth fall out, though of course more intense and painful.

Either way, if a mom is happy with her birth and has a healthy baby, that's what really counts.

[Anonymous]

I planned a non-medicated birth in a birth center because I am needle phobic. To me, the thought of a mandatory IV alone was worse than the pain I expected from labor. The possibility of a c-section was absolutely terrifying for me. I coped very well with labor and natural pain management for 30 hours before I choose to transfer to the hospital because my body couldn't hold down food or water and I was completely exhausted yet only 5cm dialated. The cascade of interventions proved very true in my case and I ended up with an IV, narcotics, pitocin, an epidural, and an assisted delivery. In addition, I had nerve damage from the epidural and stirrups that only resolved after 6 month and a course of physical therapy. Fortunately, my baby was healty, alert, and breastfeed well right away. Although I made all of my choices from an informed place I still feel cheated that I couldn't have the birth I wanted.