Reasons for medication-free childbirth

[Anonymous]

A reasoned, well-argued case for natural birth:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christiane-northrup/c-section-or-natural-birt_b_323422.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm actually one of those people who is "really excited for [my] epidural from the word 'go' with [my] first baby." I just think I have a really low pain tolerance and, to be honest, and sorry if this is TMI, but I sometimes find sex painful if there is not PLENTY of lube and foreplay so I am thinking a baby pushing its way out would be INCREDIBLY painful! Oh, and I've stayed home from work because of menstrual cramps before! So, yes, I am a big wimp, but to me the knowledge that I can get an epidural is about the only thing that made me comfortable getting pregnant in the first place! I totally respect people who want to and do go natural but I know I'm not cut out for that.

Hey PP -- I just noticed this little bit and wanted to tell you what my midwife told me. Do you get really bad, painful menstrual cramps? I did, and she told me that women who have experience with very painful menstrual cramps often handle labor better than anyone. That's because we are just used to really bad cramps -- and the contractions felt a whole lot to me like bad mentrual cramps, but no worse than that until about transition.

And they went away after about a minute, and no one expected me to be able to hold down a job or talk on the phone while experiencing them -- unlike when you get bad menstrual cramps, and you have to just suck it up and keep working.

In fact I first called the midwife when I was about 9 cm along, just because I was waiting for the cramps to get worse than menstrual cramps! Up until then, yeah, it hurt -- but just like cramps hurt. Not unbearable, just not pleasant. So -- not trying to convince you of anything, but just wanted to share that thought -- you might feel like a wimp, but you might be cut out for more than you think, just because of your experience.

[Anonymous]

I had no epidural for #s 1-4, and I was induced with pitocin with #4. I didn't really have a choice to have an epidural with them (for a number of reasons). I had an epidural (and pitocin) for #5.

I personally much preferred the epidural for the simple reason it relieved the vast majority of the pain. The pain was certainly significant, but for me it was not unbearable, and I got through it fine. The pain didn't make me feel like superwoman or any particular sense of achievement--I must have missed that part! It just plain hurt.

It's such a personal decision whether or not to have an epidural, I can't imagine why anyone would want to tell someone else what to do about it. Whatever decision you make will be the right decision for you.

[Anonymous]

I had no epidural for #s 1-4, and I was induced with pitocin with #4. I didn't really have a choice to have an epidural with them (for a number of reasons). I had an epidural (and pitocin) for #5.

I personally much preferred the epidural for the simple reason it relieved the vast majority of the pain. The pain was certainly significant, but for me it was not unbearable, and I got through it fine. The pain didn't make me feel like superwoman or any particular sense of achievement--I must have missed that part! It just plain hurt.

It's such a personal decision whether or not to have an epidural, I can't imagine why anyone would want to tell someone else what to do about it. Whatever decision you make will be the right decision for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

I'm sorry for your experience, but am pretty surprised you are blaming it on pain medication when clearly - after 30 hours - natural labor was not going any better for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My best friend greatly regrets her natural birth.

She was so invested in it that she feels she endangered her baby. Things got so bad that they had to cut her to get the baby out (cord was wrapped) and she has not fully healed from that. Her baby spent the first week in the NICU. Happy ending though, her baby is fine now.

I am not against natural births by any means. But there are risks to EVERY birth, medicated or non.

I'm confused. Would having an epidural have prevented any of the cord problems?

Getting to the hospital sooner might have. Her doula talked her out of it. The baby was completely unmonitored, they called an ambulance, she got to the hospital and had to be ripped open immediately. She will likely need a c-section if she goes for #2.

It wasn't the lack of an epidural, it was that she was going to such great lengths to avoid medication (getting to the hospital where they medicate you).

This is kind of a strange story. I wonder why they called an ambulance. And, I wonder if by "ripped open" you mean that she had an emergency cesarean? Many women experiencing full-on medicated, hospital births, wind up having scary emergency cesareans.

At any rate, this story really is a promotion of planned homebirth. In a planned homebirth, the midwife allows early enough in your labor, and monitors you and your baby continuously, stays by your side, and notices if something is going wrong well before it turns into an emergency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are also risks associated with "natural" birth (all births are natural events to me). You also need not have the full on, vaginal, unmedicated experience to fully experience having a baby. That is incredibly offensive to those who either could not or for other circumstances had any other experience.

That is why it is self-righteous. "I've experienced something in a better way than you." It's nauseating.

I accept this argument for women who have done it both ways. My personal experience has been that overwhelmingly, people are saying "I had all kinds of medical interventions with #1 and with #2 I decided to avoid those things and my birth experience with #2 was much better."

I have yet to hear the argument the other way. I have heard women say that they did not have a bad experience with interventions and later chose to have non-interventioned births. I have never heard a woman say "I had a natural birth with #1 and it was so awful that I wanted all the interventions I could get with #2."

Really? I had no interventions with # 1. Found pain positively horrendous. Coping techniques barely scratched the surface. Got an epidural for #2 and will do the same for #3. I actually know several women in this same situation. And at least one who had that plan all along. Wanted to try it but had no intention of going natural more than once.

Congrats on breaking my cherry there

I completely respect your decision because it is YOUR decision, not mine. But I applaud it because you did the natural birth thing with the first one and for you, it was unbearable. And on the basis of that, you made your choice. I am personally boggled by the people who are really excited for their epidurals from the word "go" with their first baby. Since they don't have a basis for comparison. But that's just me

How is it any different from a woman how chooses natural childbirth from the word "go"? Why do you need a "basis for comparison" to choose that you want an epidural? Many of us view having an epidural as a very low risk procedure that will help us enjoy the birthing process more and let us rest/relax so that when baby is actually here, we have the energy to focus on baby. I never wanted to potentially labor for 24+ hours without pain medication and then be exhausted for what - to me - is the important part of the whole process - bonding and being with my newborn. I had epidurals for both my labors and count myself very lucky. I always felt enough to push out the baby very effectively (15 minutes of pushing for #1 and 30 minutes for #2 and only b/c cord was wrapped around his neck). I feel that I fully experienced all of the birthing process, but without the intense pain. And I have labored enough without pain medication to tell you that - for me - it really was MUCH more pleasurable and I was much more relaxed with an epidural because I wasn't in that kind of pain for hours and hours. To each their own, but I can't believe it "boggles" you that some of us don't want to (and don't need to) go through that pain to experience labor/delivery.

[Anonymous]

This helped me understand why some women do choose epidurals. But I think it's a false (but very common) assumption that women who don't get epidurals are going to be too tired to bond or be with their newborn. I was told this by an OB in my first pregnancy -- that women who have natural births are often too tired to bond with their newborn. It sounded fishy to me then (and she admitted after I probed her that she rarely saw a natural birth), and now after having two natural births (and switching away from that OB to midwifery care), I can confirm that I never felt exhausted or unable to bond with my baby after my natural labors. I felt high as a kite with all those endorphins running through my system, and really blissful, peaceful, alert, and very connected to my baby. Most other women I know who have had natural births felt the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are also risks associated with "natural" birth (all births are natural events to me). You also need not have the full on, vaginal, unmedicated experience to fully experience having a baby. That is incredibly offensive to those who either could not or for other circumstances had any other experience.

That is why it is self-righteous. "I've experienced something in a better way than you." It's nauseating.

I accept this argument for women who have done it both ways. My personal experience has been that overwhelmingly, people are saying "I had all kinds of medical interventions with #1 and with #2 I decided to avoid those things and my birth experience with #2 was much better."

I have yet to hear the argument the other way. I have heard women say that they did not have a bad experience with interventions and later chose to have non-interventioned births. I have never heard a woman say "I had a natural birth with #1 and it was so awful that I wanted all the interventions I could get with #2."

Really? I had no interventions with # 1. Found pain positively horrendous. Coping techniques barely scratched the surface. Got an epidural for #2 and will do the same for #3. I actually know several women in this same situation. And at least one who had that plan all along. Wanted to try it but had no intention of going natural more than once.

Congrats on breaking my cherry there

I completely respect your decision because it is YOUR decision, not mine. But I applaud it because you did the natural birth thing with the first one and for you, it was unbearable. And on the basis of that, you made your choice. I am personally boggled by the people who are really excited for their epidurals from the word "go" with their first baby. Since they don't have a basis for comparison. But that's just me

How is it any different from a woman how chooses natural childbirth from the word "go"? Why do you need a "basis for comparison" to choose that you want an epidural? Many of us view having an epidural as a very low risk procedure that will help us enjoy the birthing process more and let us rest/relax so that when baby is actually here, we have the energy to focus on baby. I never wanted to potentially labor for 24+ hours without pain medication and then be exhausted for what - to me - is the important part of the whole process - bonding and being with my newborn. I had epidurals for both my labors and count myself very lucky. I always felt enough to push out the baby very effectively (15 minutes of pushing for #1 and 30 minutes for #2 and only b/c cord was wrapped around his neck). I feel that I fully experienced all of the birthing process, but without the intense pain. And I have labored enough without pain medication to tell you that - for me - it really was MUCH more pleasurable and I was much more relaxed with an epidural because I wasn't in that kind of pain for hours and hours. To each their own, but I can't believe it "boggles" you that some of us don't want to (and don't need to) go through that pain to experience labor/delivery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My best friend greatly regrets her natural birth.

She was so invested in it that she feels she endangered her baby. Things got so bad that they had to cut her to get the baby out (cord was wrapped) and she has not fully healed from that. Her baby spent the first week in the NICU. Happy ending though, her baby is fine now.

I am not against natural births by any means. But there are risks to EVERY birth, medicated or non.

I'm confused. Would having an epidural have prevented any of the cord problems?

Getting to the hospital sooner might have. Her doula talked her out of it. The baby was completely unmonitored, they called an ambulance, she got to the hospital and had to be ripped open immediately. She will likely need a c-section if she goes for #2.

It wasn't the lack of an epidural, it was that she was going to such great lengths to avoid medication (getting to the hospital where they medicate you).

This is kind of a strange story. I wonder why they called an ambulance. And, I wonder if by "ripped open" you mean that she had an emergency cesarean? Many women experiencing full-on medicated, hospital births, wind up having scary emergency cesareans.

At any rate, this story really is a promotion of planned homebirth. In a planned homebirth, the midwife allows early enough in your labor, and monitors you and your baby continuously, stays by your side, and notices if something is going wrong well before it turns into an emergency.

No, it's really not a strange story, just hard to communicate over the internet. My friend did not feel comfortable with a home birth. She did however, want to do anything in her power to avoid a medicated birth. She hired a doula, took private classes, did prenatal yoga, and got induced by acupuncture when she was two weeks late and they wanted to medically induce her. She didn't want a home birth though, she thought she could achieve a medicine free birth in a hospital, she knew it would be tough, thus the intense preparations.

The ambulance was called because they were trying to avoid going to the hospital for as long as possible. When she felt the need to push, her doula called the ambulance. They rushed her in, and that is when they found the cord was wrapped. Ripped her open was not a c-section. She had an epidural free birth, they had to cut her because the baby was not coming out (head caught maybe and they needed it out right then). Episiotmy it is called? Something like that.

She got her medication free birth but the baby was rushed to NICU and spent a week there. She did initiate breast feeding/pumping but her whole point of having a medication free birth was to avoid exposing the baby to drugs and to initiate BFing easier. Needless to say in the NICU they do antibiotics, etc. and she was not able to do skin-to-skin.

She says if she did it again she would have gone to the hospital earlier and risked the epidural.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This helped me understand why some women do choose epidurals. But I think it's a false (but very common) assumption that women who don't get epidurals are going to be too tired to bond or be with their newborn. I was told this by an OB in my first pregnancy -- that women who have natural births are often too tired to bond with their newborn. It sounded fishy to me then (and she admitted after I probed her that she rarely saw a natural birth), and now after having two natural births (and switching away from that OB to midwifery care), I can confirm that I never felt exhausted or unable to bond with my baby after my natural labors. I felt high as a kite with all those endorphins running through my system, and really blissful, peaceful, alert, and very connected to my baby. Most other women I know who have had natural births felt the same.

natural birther here -- and i agree. when i made that final push and she came out, the high was indescribable. not only did all the pain just suddenly and completely stop, but i felt so empowered, so over the f'ing moon that i'd done it. i had absolutely no problem bonding with my little girl. i don't even remember at any point feeling exhausted after she was out. she was in my arms the moment she was out. and she stayed there for a while. in fact, she never left our room. that was one of the benefits of a birth center birth. all i remember thinking was --oh my god, she's here and it all happened exactly the way i had hoped. and i was home within 7 hours (birth center rather than hospital), so so much for the theory of exhaustion. it's the medicalized births that require overnight stays, and it's these moms who have the baby sleep in the nursery so that they can get some sleep and recover from the epidurals.

i don't know any women who were committed to natural birth who had any problem bonding at all. in fact, the vast majority of them felt the same as me, i think.

in short, it was absolutely amazing. and you bet i'm incredibly proud of what i did, how i did it. so, to the OP -- after a long-winded answer, the reason i chose natural birth and would do so again in the future is because ... well, it was an unreal feeling and it's what was right for me. i don't enjoy pain, but didn't view my contractions as the standard pain. they peaked, they ebbed, they flowed. it was manageable and i knew it was going to end. if i'd freaked out and obsessed about OMG this hurts so much, i would have worked against my own body. i would have tensed up and it would have made it more painful for me. instead, i just went with it, tried to remain relaxed as much as possible, let the contraction come, peak, and go without screaming or tensing... and it wasn't suffering. i'd never choose a needle in my spine and paralysis over that. i dont' ever want to feel that disconnected from my own body. i don't want some doctors and a machine to tell me when to push. i'd rather work with my own body and minimize the chances of tearing, the need for an assisted delivery and a c-section. relieving some temporary, manageable pain was not worth it to me. and for me, in the end, i couldn't have been more right.

[Anonymous]

One reason I wanted to skip the epidural was that I wanted all the chemicals that flood your brain from an unmedicated birth, if that worked out for me. Unfortunately some of those chemicals are linked to the pain because they are part of the body's response to pain. I loved my baby before birth but I was also worried that I might not be that maternal right off the bat. The brain flood of chemicals from labor makes that transition happen faster. This was for me, in a sense, not for the baby because I was going to love her and hold her and meet her needs regardless but I thought all the sleeplessness and breastfeeding would be easier on me if I was "in love." I certainly did fall in love after the birth. I know all mothers do eventually, I just wanted to get those chemicals as soon as I could.

And yes, I know that breastfeeding itself releases a lot of these hormones and I know that women who have c-sections and don't nurse love their children just as much. I still wanted the chemical high from the start.

[Anonymous]

I agree with a lot of the reasons that PP (who have had med-free births) have posted. In all honestly, I wanted to see how my body would react to labor and handle the pain. I was lucky that it was not too awful for me the first time.

Another reason I really wanted a med-free birth was serious fear of the epidural needle/back pain and C-sections.

[Anonymous]

I was more afraid of the epidural and the potential complications than the pain. I found the pain wasn't so bad as long as I focused on being relaxed and the other coping techniques that I learned.

[Anonymous]

I imagine that the pain from a natural birth were your intention is to get an epidural is much greater than if you planned a natural birth. I spent a lot of time mentally preparing for birth and managed the pain well. I think that if I had not prepared myself I would have just been blind-sided by the intensity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am shit scared of needles and there is no way I want some huge needle IN MY SPINE.
I hated the idea of not being able to move or feel legs, contractions, when to push, etc.
Didn't want any drugs passing through to baby
Knew I could do it w/o drugs; trusted my body

I've had 2 natural births. I'll admit that I'm curious what a pain-free/epidural birth would be like (sleeping while in labor? reading magazines?) but I'm way too scared of the needle and potential side effects or other interventions to every go for an epi if I have #3. Plus, I feel like I can do anything. Having 2 kids naturally made me feel like super woman. I'm not afraid of anything any more.

I had the same experience but I'm still afraid of needles.