Do you consider it a UC if... - Page 2

[zoebird]

i wouldn't say so, alicia.

well, i didn't say so. having the training but not utilizing it (unless it's an emergency), that is, not expecting to use it, not trying to use it, not relying on it as the reason for feelign 'safe" to bith that way, etc, means that it's still unassisted.

i remember someone saying "yeah, i would feel safe if DH was a paramedic" and i'm like--yeah, that's an assisted birth, no different than having a midwife there or another paramedic. but, if DH is there because he is just being DH, and not relying on his training, and you're not going "well, as a nurse, my training tells me. . ." then, yeah, it's a UC.

does that make any sense? LOL

[Happiestever]

Originally Posted by zoebird

well, i didn't say so. having the training but not utilizing it (unless it's an emergency), that is, not expecting to use it, not trying to use it, not relying on it as the reason for feelign 'safe" to bith that way, etc, means that it's still unassisted.

I was trying to figure a way to say this. Thank you!

[claddaghmom]

This has always confused me a bit, too. And additionally, UC sounds so...well you know it's like intact vs. uncircumcised. I know some people try to use freebirth to overcome the connotations, but I don't like freebirth either.

I try to say husband/wife HB. And if someone asks what that is, I refer them to Moran's book.

So much about birthing is psychological and I think that is where the real differences lie in choosing an UC. I do think there is a big difference between having a MW in the room over "just in case" versus birthing alone or only with family. The beginning point in thinking is very different. I hope no one see this as a put down for choosing to have someone in the rafters. I am just trying to point out the differences. Is it really UC if you have someone ready to assist? How does that influence a woman and her partner mentally and emotionally?

That being said, on the specific question of having a doula...if your intention is simply to have support during labor and not to have the doula assist in birthing then I think you could call that an UC.

[amberskyfire]

Originally Posted by claddaghmom

This has always confused me a bit, too. And additionally, UC sounds so...well you know it's like intact vs. uncircumcised. I know some people try to use freebirth to overcome the connotations, but I don't like freebirth either.

I try to say husband/wife HB. And if someone asks what that is, I refer them to Moran's book.

So much about birthing is psychological and I think that is where the real differences lie in choosing an UC. I do think there is a big difference between having a MW in the room over "just in case" versus birthing alone or only with family. The beginning point in thinking is very different. I hope no one see this as a put down for choosing to have someone in the rafters. I am just trying to point out the differences. Is it really UC if you have someone ready to assist? How does that influence a woman and her partner mentally and emotionally?

That being said, on the specific question of having a doula...if your intention is simply to have support during labor and not to have the doula assist in birthing then I think you could call that an UC.

Well, the reason I brought up having a midwife "just in case" is because some families want to have a UC, but live an hour or more from a hospital and so they choose to have a midwife on standby. That always made me wonder. If you have a midwife in the living room "just in case," is it anything at all like making sure you are within 30 minutes of a hospital "just in case?"

That's mostly the reason I was asking. I think birth is totally safe, but I don't think I would want to have a UC if I was an hour or more from a hospital unless I had to. But then, that's just me. Plenty of moms have UCs without any hospital nearby.

[moonfirefaery]

A birth that occurs without the help of a medically trained professional is a UC.

Doulas are not trained to handle any kind of medical situation; they are trained to be supportive to the mother and to mother her, to take care of her like a sister. They are not medical professionals.

The only difference between a UC with a midwife in the living room and a UC with no midwife at all is the mindset of the birthing woman. The woman with the midwife in the living room knows that she has help right there if she needs it in case of emergency; she has immediate back-up, and this gives her peace of mind. The woman with no midwife at all knows that if something goes wrong, she and her birthing partner(s) must handle it alone and wait for help to come if it's needed. She is completely responsible; there is no immediate back-up, no on-site consultant to help her. Some would say that this woman would be more vigilant about preparing because she IS the back-up plan. The woman with the midwife may have a relationship with her from planning the UC; the woman without will be seeing attendants she has never met in case of emergency.

Which is better? NEITHER. Both are unassisted births, so long as there is no medically trained professional participating in the labor or birth. The difference in how far away medical help is does not change whether the birth is a UC. And the mother who births with no midwife at all is not better or braver or anything than the woman who has a midwife in her living room. The difference is the comfort level of the two women and what each woman has found is best for safety and to achieve the experience they each desire. That is the only difference. So chose for yourself. Either you want that immediate back-up midwife that you have hand-picked for extra peace of mind, or you want to be completely in control, completely responsible, and accept that in case of emergency you may have to wait for help and be treated by strangers.

I don't want it to sound like I'm more in favor of either choice; I am just trying to present the pros and cons of each. There are drawbacks to both options just as there are good things about each option. Women should decide and should not be told that having a midwife on call makes it less of a UC, nor should they be told that not having a midwife means they care any less about safety. It's just a difference in the kind of precautions a woman wants to take.

[moonfirefaery]

Originally Posted by amberskyfire

I feel the same way, but what about a doula? By definition, a doula *is* assisting in the birth, though not in a medical way. I suppose it would be the same way many fathers/mothers assist their partners while in labor and that makes me wonder what most UCers consider "unassisted." Does moral assistance count? If the father/other mother is helping the mother to give birth, is it still unassisted?

Does "unassisted" ONLY mean "medical assistance?"

Unassisted is referring to medical assistance. If we decide that having any assistance at all makes it an assisted birth, then 90% of unassisted births weren't actually UCs at all. But they were. You don't have to give birth completely alone for it to be a UC. The entire spirit of UC is about taking control of birth and excluding birth professionals from it unless necessary. That spirit is not compromised by the presence of friends and family members who are acting in the same loving, supportive capacity that they have at births since time began.

[moonfirefaery]

Originally Posted by zoebird

not that it matters, but i consider having a medical-type person in the home there to assist in the birth in a medical-type way to be an attended birth.

having anyone there, whether medical-type trained or not, to be emotional or other support (not to be there to medically assist the birth), is an unassisted birth.

to me, a MW or doctor as back up, only going to them or calling them if necessary is a UC with back up. having a MW in the next room just in case is, IMO and IMO only, having a MW assisted HB. the reason for this is how i see the mind. having someone "on call" is having the intention and holding the idea that they are there for an emergency. having someone in the next room is wanting their attendance, no matter how hands off (even completely) they are. they are there as medical person to give medical help, and you have them there for that reason.

it doesnt' make it a "lesser" birth, and if someone else wants to consider that a UC, then that's fine. i just don't.

If the midwife is watching Gilmore Girls and ignoring the goings-on of the labor room, if she does not assist in the birth at all.... then how is that an assisted birth? If she is not present when the child is born... then how is that an attended birth? And... if the birthing woman wanted the midwife's attendance, the midwife would be in the labor room not the living room. If the midwife is there to give medical help only when it becomes necessary, and that help never becomes necessary so that the midwife remains on the couch the entire time, then there was no medical assistance. It's like saying a UC that occurs 5 minutes from the hospital is assisted, IMO.

Also, paramedics have COMPLETELY different training than OBGYNS and midwives. Their training is obsolete compared to the training birth professionals get. A paramedic is not a birth professional, just like an LPN is not a birth professional. They can offer some assistance with resuscitating the infant and delivering the birth, but there is a stark difference between a husband who is a trained paramedic and having an ob/gyn or midwife there to assist.

[mommy2abigail]

I consider my dd2's birth to be unassisted. We had a midwife there, but she never touched me, checked me, or directed me in any way at all. She basically crocheted a baby hat during labor, and cleaned up afterwards. Baby was born in the water, I pulled her up to my chest, waited till the cord stopped pulsing and dh cut. When I got out to take a shower, dh held dd, and when I went to take a nap, midwife and attendants cleaned up and left.

[zoebird]

moon,

as i wrote, it's really how i see things. If you see it differently, then i don't argue with that.

it's a matter of the way my mind works. i had to define the term for myself to understand what i was undertaking and preparing for emotionally. so, for me, the definition extended to meaning the exclusion of having a medically trained person in the home.

for me, it's not about the midwife's mind (that she's in the other room "ignoring" the birth), but in my mind for having her there to be immediate medical help if we wanted it. because by having her there, i feel that i am saying that i want that attendance, even if it's entirely and completely hands off.

to me, this is different than having to call her if i want help (she is elsewhere) or transfer to a hospital if i want help (the hospital is elsewhere) because i am stepping out and saying "i am doing this alone, and help is a last resort, a call away, and would have to be necessary for me to do it" as opposed to having that moment of transition where i questioned whether i needed help, and being able to go into the living room and get help prematurely.

again, if someone else considers a midwife in the next room to be a UC, that's none of my business. they are free to do so. i have no problem with that definition.

but for myself and my own definitions (how I see things for Myself), it would not be a UC for *me* to have a midwife in the next room ignoring me.

and to be honest, it would have hindered me as well (i know in hind sight). as it was, at one point of my sounding, i was concerned about our neighbors! it was, afterall, after midnight when the baby was born, and i'd been screaming at the top of my lungs for two hours. LOL so, to an extent, knowing the neighbors were there was a bit of an inhibition (i at least thought about it!).

also, my house is small, and i didn't stay in one place. i labored in my Living room, couldn't have any music or sound in the house (DH said that was "annoying" becuase he wanted to do things such as watch a movie or listen to music, but i seemed to want total silence, even when i was upstairs), and then i would go between upstairs and downstairs throughout the labor.

thus, had anyone been in any room, i think she would have impacted my mind, and *I* would have relied on her (with her medical training) to attend or reassure.

because she wasn't there at all--based on what i know of myself and how i was defining a UC--i was able to have what i consider to be a UC experience.

*again--and please read this clearly--this is only for my own purposes and not to define what UC is or is not for other women and families. i have no problem with a woman saying that she went to the hospital at the last minute to avoid attendance but still have medical care if needed a UC. if that's how she sees it, then fine by me.

[Jlcampbellkidz]

I didn't realize so many people actually thought about all this. Im somewhat in this boat. And have thus far called it unhindered or free birth. I do have a homebirth midwife. We do not plan to call her unless nessasary, and I don't think that will happen. However, I do want her to come afterwards to check out the baby. In my book even having the backup or her coming after the birth doesn't change that it will be UC, unhindered, or free birth.

Birth is what you view it as. I have even heard a mother call her c-section a natural birth. To her it was. I certainly have a different opinion. but she was blissfully happy and unfortunetly, being blissfully happy at birth is Rare in America, I don't see the point of arguing or making a point of my own opinion. It is what it is, and if having a MW in the other room that manages to keep herself from intervening in some way is what works best for you then go for it.

[zoebird]

i don't know if people think about it all that much--among UCers that is. every once in a while, the question crops up, and so we answer it. i suppose it makes it seem like we are sitting around pondering how we label different births or define different types of birth.

i remember being first asked this question either right before i was pregnant or while i was pregnant. i can't remember exactly. i did think about it a bit then, but in answering i really decided tht i needed to define the term because that would--in part--define my preparations. so, i took a bit of time (mostly what it took to engage in the discussion around the question), and i definted the term.

now that i've done that and i'm happy with that definition and use, when the quesiton is asked again, i answer it the same way, but i don't have to think about it, you know?