or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Trust birth? - Page 6

post #101 of 123

Thank you, Elizabeth, MittensKittens & Sunshinemoma...it was a really bad move on my part. I made a few that night...

post #102 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

Thank you, Elizabeth, MittensKittens & Sunshinemoma...it was a really bad move on my part. I made a few that night...



Thank you for sharing your story so openly and being so honest. I am sure that reading your story helps others avoid the same mistakes. Having said that, I can understand how you would make the decisions you did. It is totally human.

post #103 of 123
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

Thank you, Elizabeth, MittensKittens & Sunshinemoma...it was a really bad move on my part. I made a few that night...


Oh man, Lisa.  It just breaks my heart that you feel this way about that horrible night.  I wish I could take that pain and regret from you.  Big hugs, mama.

post #104 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

Thank you, Elizabeth, MittensKittens & Sunshinemoma...it was a really bad move on my part. I made a few that night...

 

It's was generous of you to share such a sensitive story.  Please be kind to yourself.  I'm guessing you did the best you could, given what you knew at the time.  I still regret going with my "logic" instead of trusting my intuition in the past..  Hindsight is 20/20.  Thanks for giving us the insight.

 

 And again hug2.gif  so sorry for your loss

post #105 of 123

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lakeeffectsnow View Post

Gently, because I did chose home births, but did not UC my four children.  I think this is the misleading and sadly ignorant.May I suggest volunteering as nurse or midwife in a developing nation (Mexico, Ecuador or Haiti) and seeing how basic health care vastly improves the surivival rate of newborns and mothers.  When I was in Haiti, some of my patients had lost two or three babies at birth.

The choice to UC is a First world choice.  In many places it is not a choice, but a fact of life and the survival rate for both mothers and babies is grim.

If you chose to UC do so reliable information, intuition doesn't replace knowwledge.

 

 

"I think this is a very tired argument.  Unless, do you have direct experience as a nurse, midwife, labor assistant, whatever in a developing nation?  If so, please share."
 

 

I can never figure out how to quote within of a quote.  I work as an L & D nurse in the US.  I've volunteered overseas in Haiti, Mexico, and the Phillipines.

  In theory, I'm an L&D nurse there as well, but most of the time especially in the Phillipines, I'm the only person with medical training.  Some of my patients are

high risk because of youth, undiagnosed medical conditions, malnutrition or complications.   However, medical emergencies occur even with full term pergnancy in healthy moms who "feel fine".  

 

I found MDC when I was thinking about UC my youngest.  Ultimately, I decided it was not the right choice for me.  I'm not opposed to UCing.  I support a woman's right to have the kind of birth she wants.  If a woman feels she can handle the risks as well of the joys of and wants to UC, that is wonderful.  I just don't

think "intuition" is a subsistute for knowledge.   

 

Denying the reality of the complications that can occur with UC (or a hospital birth) is a tired arguement too.

 

I'm going to bow out now because this part MDC is not for me.

post #106 of 123

I don't that you have to choose *any* particular way to birth based on one set of reasons alone.
We are all individual humans with different needs, concerns, and wishes.
I am happy for any woman that is informed of her options (both negative and positive for both mom and baby) and then chooses.
Basically, I'm an advocate for a woman's right to informed birthing choices.
This usually makes me the odd ball in every group because it means that as long as the woman is informed I support them in anything from UC to an elective C/S.
I may not agree with any one particular person's choice, but as long as they are informed I support their freedom to make that choice.

Just because they don't choose it for one particular reason does not make their choice invalid.
 

post #107 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post




I think that if the standard we're using is that birth is meant to be enjoyed, then it's a fair comparison.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I'm hearing you say here is that if women in 3rd world countries do not enjoy having unattended births that that is an indication that UC is statistically bad?

 

My arguments against that, in no particular order:

 

Even in 1st world nations there is some indication that preconception and prenatal nutrition will affect birth outcomes. Better nourished people (all the vitamins, minerals, etc) have a better chance at easier births. (For instance, calcium affects relaxin production.)

 

The same high death rate that is caused by 3rd world conditions will introduce an element of fear that simply isn't present in 1st world voluntary UCs. When a 3rd world woman who had no choice about being unattended feels like she might die, it's because people in her area DO die in exactly the same situation she's in.

 

And, connected to that, unlike a 1st world voluntary UCer, that same woman has no possibility of emergency help. If she starts bleeding too much, if there's any problem with the baby, if she labors for days and days with no progress (don't think too hard about the implications of that, they aren't pleasant), there is no help.  The only 1st world UCers who want to do away with hospitals entirely are imaginary. (Possibly there is someone out there who does want to get rid of hospitals and had a UC as a result, that hypothetical person is anti-hospital first, UCer by chance.)

 

Having no choice but UC is exactly the same lack of choice as being forced to go to a hospital. If being forced to go to a hospital makes UC-minded mamas feel violated why on earth would anyone expect a woman who has no choice but UC  (including, I suspect, some women who could've gone to hospitals if their families allowed it) to be happy about it?

 

3rd world countries are NOT poor versions of 1st world countries.

 

 

Finally, the argument about including 3rd world countries in statistics about satisfaction with various birth outcomes basically amounts to "there are women in 3rd world countries who would be GRATEFUL to have a nice clean hospital like that one you're pushing around on your plate. Eat up, there are women starving in Africa."

post #108 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by ursusarctos View Post



 


Yes, what is intuition anyway? I tend to think that in birth types of situations it might be unconscious interpretations of subtle physical cues. The same way we interpret the physical cues of others without conceptualizing it - why wouldn't our brains interpret our own physical cues without conceptualizing them? Sort of like when you're craving something and later you find out it was exactly what you needed at the time. Is that intuition, or was it your brain associating the needed nutrient with a particular food and therefore creating the desire for it? Or are they the same thing?
 

 

Quote:


 

By feeling for it. As far as I understand that is what midwives do too.
 

 

By reaching up inside there and feeling around? Um... ouch? Or is that only something they do if it seems like the baby's caught on something? And if so, how... Sorry, way off topic there, nevermind.
 

 

post #109 of 123

In regards to medical training/equipment verses intuition:

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_18840_5-common-medical-procedures-that-secretly-arent-worth-it.html

 

Look at #4.

 

 

Quote:
what if the tests come back negative? Isn't the peace of mind worth it? Again, not so much. Apparently, this lulls people into a false sense of security, and they walk away feeling totally healthy. As we've pointed out, tons of terrible diseases can't be detected until they become symptomatic. But when symptoms of an actual disease do show up, people who get physicals are less likely to get these symptoms checked out, thinking that a "clean bill of health" is synonymous with "Wolverine-like powers of bodily fortitude."

 

post #110 of 123

Sorry I kinda posted and disappeared.  I don't come around every day and when I do, I generally click "new posts" and if it doesn't show up on the first two pages, I might miss it.  Like this thread. LOL

 

When I was talking about statistics regarding birth and safety, I was referring to statistics comparing the safety of hospital births vs. home births that were done years ago (when I studied this stuff...now I have no use for statistics) in the UK and Canada, I believe.  (Definitely the UK.)  Those types of studies have been published in old Mothering mags, I believe.  Definitely in old Compleat Mother mags.  (How I do love and appreciate The Compleat Mother.)  Those types of studies roundly concluded that, all things being equal, it was actually safer for women to birth at home than in a hospital. 

 

As far as 1st World vs 3rd or Developing or whatever other disrespectful term we'd like to use for places with actual people who matter living in them...the first mistake is usually that we want to treat the non-1st World nations like we can simply transplant our models over there and it will improve whatever situation the transplanted model is due to address.  But it takes years of work to create a 1st World nation with its 1st World problems.  The years of work that go into creating 1st World problems so that they can be addressed by 1st World solutions is a tedious process and many times 1st World corporate mongers and savior complexers go to other countries thinking that 1 + 1 =2, when, in fact, it doesn't.  Because math is real and the 1st World is not. 

 

(That may only make sense to me, but if that's the case, my point is still made because the main point is that none of it makes sense.  It can be explained, though, and I really don't have the patience to do that online, anymore.  Not for debatable purposes, anyway.)

 

Anyway...enjoy life. 

 

That generally means getting off the computer and, you know, enjoying it for real. ;)

post #111 of 123
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lakeeffectsnow View Post

 

"I think this is a very tired argument.  Unless, do you have direct experience as a nurse, midwife, labor assistant, whatever in a developing nation?  If so, please share."
 

 

I can never figure out how to quote within of a quote.  I work as an L & D nurse in the US.  I've volunteered overseas in Haiti, Mexico, and the Phillipines.

  In theory, I'm an L&D nurse there as well, but most of the time especially in the Phillipines, I'm the only person with medical training.  Some of my patients are

high risk because of youth, undiagnosed medical conditions, malnutrition or complications.   However, medical emergencies occur even with full term pergnancy in healthy moms who "feel fine".  

 

I found MDC when I was thinking about UC my youngest.  Ultimately, I decided it was not the right choice for me.  I'm not opposed to UCing.  I support a woman's right to have the kind of birth she wants.  If a woman feels she can handle the risks as well of the joys of and wants to UC, that is wonderful.  I just don't

think "intuition" is a subsistute for knowledge.   

 

Denying the reality of the complications that can occur with UC (or a hospital birth) is a tired arguement too.

 

I'm going to bow out now because this part MDC is not for me.


I'm sorry.  It was a genuine question.  Now knowing your background, I'm sure you'd have some very valuable experience to share.  I just don't think it's fair to apply the same over-arching rationales to such disparate conditions around the world.  I also recently have an OB talk to me about women in Africa with anal fistulas as a reason to rethink vaginal birth?  It just irritated me.  I think that's cool that you considered UC and are supportive of a woman's choice regarding birth venue and assistant (or lack thereof).

 

I don't think anyone here is denying the complications that can occur in any birth setting.  shrug.gif  But then again, I'm not really looking for it so perhaps less sensitive to any such undercurrent.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by princesstutu View Post

Sorry I kinda posted and disappeared.  I don't come around every day and when I do, I generally click "new posts" and if it doesn't show up on the first two pages, I might miss it.  Like this thread. LOL

 

When I was talking about statistics regarding birth and safety, I was referring to statistics comparing the safety of hospital births vs. home births that were done years ago (when I studied this stuff...now I have no use for statistics) in the UK and Canada, I believe.  (Definitely the UK.)  Those types of studies have been published in old Mothering mags, I believe.  Definitely in old Compleat Mother mags.  (How I do love and appreciate The Compleat Mother.)  Those types of studies roundly concluded that, all things being equal, it was actually safer for women to birth at home than in a hospital. 

 

As far as 1st World vs 3rd or Developing or whatever other disrespectful term we'd like to use for places with actual people who matter living in them...the first mistake is usually that we want to treat the non-1st World nations like we can simply transplant our models over there and it will improve whatever situation the transplanted model is due to address.  But it takes years of work to create a 1st World nation with its 1st World problems.  The years of work that go into creating 1st World problems so that they can be addressed by 1st World solutions is a tedious process and many times 1st World corporate mongers and savior complexers go to other countries thinking that 1 + 1 =2, when, in fact, it doesn't.  Because math is real and the 1st World is not. 

 

(That may only make sense to me, but if that's the case, my point is still made because the main point is that none of it makes sense.  It can be explained, though, and I really don't have the patience to do that online, anymore.  Not for debatable purposes, anyway.)

 

Anyway...enjoy life. 

 

That generally means getting off the computer and, you know, enjoying it for real. ;)

LoL, AWOL happens!  I so agree with the statement above that I bolded.  It drives me nuts how we force "Americanism" down people's throats.  I'm all about sharing knowledge and resources, but people have to be willing to accept knowledge and resources, and when they don't, the "Great Nations" need to respect that choice.

post #112 of 123

I wish people would grow up. I wish people wouldn't use logical fallacies in their arguments. I wish people would understand basic UC concepts before they come here. (I've just about filled out my UC bingo card with this thread.) It's so tiresome. I go through a thread like this and think about responding individually to each objection and then I think, what's the point? For the naysayers it all boils down to this: the only acceptable scenario is birth with a medically-trained attendant. Period. If you do not agree with that, you are wrong. There is no rational debate to be had with that. It is not even desired. They have no interest in understanding the philosophy and motivations behind UC. They really just want to flog us with their opinion until we give in. Or maybe just for the sake of it, I don't know. What I do know is that they don't like it, they don't like that we exist, and... perhaps if they bug us enough about it we will just give up and go away? Stop doing this thing they don't like! Stop being different! Stop being not them!

 

I really don't understand why people have such a need to campaign against it and "prove" it wrong. What does it matter to them what I do? Who am I to them? Why is it so important to them that life and death are, to me, what they are to them?

 

I do understand the desire to protect those who can't protect themselves. And of course we should. We shouldn't allow people to cut off others' genitals without their consent, or to mistreat them, or to force them to spend any part of their lives in an institution. That good intention goes awry, though, when we think our sphere of control should always include that of individuals' relationship to the natural world, which I regard as much a part of a person's autonomy as their right to their own body. It should be the default, until the person him/herself is able to assert otherwise, or if they would obviously suffer without intervention. Sometimes that good intention goes awry too, but it's the best I think that we can do.

 

And that default sometimes mean the ending of this particular phase of existence. I know it's not okay with a lot of people; it's okay with me. My spirituality is such that I do not have fear that the natural death of any person is wrong. When there has been no violence done, I have no objective moral basis for claiming that it isn't the right or best thing. I think there is a plan, I think no one languishes without getting to go through that which they need to, and I don't think that this life is the be-all and end-all of existence. It perplexes me that people feel so strongly averse to the choice to allow the possibility of natural death. If they are spiritual, believe in God or whatever, do they not believe that there is a plan and all will be right in the end? If they are not spiritual, then what does it matter to them if someone is fine with natural death or not? It seems absolutely irrational to me that people are so fixated on life at all costs for everyone, not just themselves. Certainly, it shouldn't be taken away from them; they get to make that choice for themselves. And I won't argue with the sense of duty they feel to further persuade others who have the same fundamental mindset. The mistake these people make though is in assuming that we all feel the same way fundamentally, so that if they could only convince us that their numbers and facts are objective and true, all would be well. People who are anti-homebirth do this; people who are anti-hospital birth do it too. Some of us though really just are outside of that need to pin it down; our concerns are elsewhere. I can't speak for everyone, of course, and I imagine there are ways of looking at this that haven't even entered my mind. But for me, there is a purpose to being here, and it isn't about trying to string it out as long as I possibly can or getting as much stuff as I can or being as pain-free as I can. It is about learning to be what I am meant to be. I've been given a particular framework within which to explore that, and it is right, and it is my right, to do that as thoroughly and authentically as I am inwardly compelled to do. That is my guide; it is the only guide that makes sense, that has meaning to me. Anything else would be just living for the sake of living, or for the sake of convention, and to me that would be a tragic waste, a throwing away of an immense gift. And that means that I sometimes go down pathways that are not guaranteed "safe" (as if anything is) and that sometimes look foolish to others (who do not share or are even aware of my purpose.)

 

Meanwhile, there are going to be people reading this for whom it has no relation to anything they personally have the ability to perceive and understand, and so they assume that it is inherently meaningless. To them it looks like blathering, the making up of things that don't exist, like claiming that pink elephants with wings are real. What can you do? To the people who don't like that I wish to live my life in accordance with the natural world and spirit, I'm sorry that I can't put your hearts at ease. I would like to, I would like everyone to feel happy. But that power hasn't been given to me. And for you to keep railing against me about statistics and dead babies and responsibility to a moral/philosophical belief system that I don't even share, isn't making you happy and it isn't making me happy either. I suggest you stop. I suggest that you examine the possibility that your chosen mode of existence isn't the only moral or meaningful one. I suggest that you accept that there are things that you don't understand. I suggest that, aside from kindly-meant suggestions as to possibilities, you let conscientious loving people find their own way, and let go of the desire to control them and be angry when you don't get your way about their lives. If you agree to all that, and still want to talk, I'll be here.

post #113 of 123


That was very powerful, cottonwood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cottonwood View Post
To the people who don't like that I wish to live my life in accordance with the natural world and spirit, I'm sorry that I can't put your hearts at ease. I would like to, I would like everyone to feel happy. But that power hasn't been given to me. And for you to keep railing against me about statistics and dead babies and responsibility to a moral/philosophical belief system that I don't even share, isn't making you happy and it isn't making me happy either. I suggest you stop. I suggest that you examine the possibility that your chosen mode of existence isn't the only moral or meaningful one. I suggest that you accept that there are things that you don't understand. I suggest that, aside from kindly-meant suggestions as to possibilities, you let conscientious loving people find their own way, and let go of the desire to control them and be angry when you don't get your way about their lives. If you agree to all that, and still want to talk, I'll be here.


Especially this. Right on!

 

post #114 of 123

If I am inspired to answer someones post,  I like to answer people from a place of inspiration, excitement and a little bit of humor!  This is way more fulfilling, and I find people can hear me better- which is what I want anyway.

 

 

I see negativity as a "jumping off" place to create understanding. Negativity gives me a burst of energy to do something positive. When I feel angry - and I am moved to answer someones post,  I make sure that I am answering from a place that does not feel like " So THERE!"  If it does I delete it and start over.

 

That ( negative) person may not ever get "it," but really I am writing for me from a place of passion. I feel like a winner every time.

 

 

 

 

post #115 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by princesstutu View Post

 

 

When I was talking about statistics regarding birth and safety, I was referring to statistics comparing the safety of hospital births vs. home births that were done years ago (when I studied this stuff...now I have no use for statistics) in the UK and Canada, I believe.  (Definitely the UK.)  Those types of studies have been published in old Mothering mags, I believe.  Definitely in old Compleat Mother mags.  (How I do love and appreciate The Compleat Mother.)  Those types of studies roundly concluded that, all things being equal, it was actually safer for women to birth at home than in a hospital. 

 

Is that right? I thought assisted homebirth was as safe as hospital birth for low risk women, not safer? Someone please school me if I'm wrong.

 

(Non UCer - ducking out now!)

 

 


 

 

post #116 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by tessie View Post



 

Is that right? I thought assisted homebirth was as safe as hospital birth for low risk women, not safer? Someone please school me if I'm wrong.

 

(Non UCer - ducking out now!)

 

 


 

 


The death rates are similar, but a low risk woman is more likely to have a c-section if she goes straight to the hospital than if she attempts UC, and c-sections are major abdominal surgery and carry their own additional risks.

 

post #117 of 123

"If they are spiritual, believe in God or whatever, do they not believe that there is a plan and all will be right in the end?" 

 

It is possible to believe in God and also believe that you have free will and that actions and choices count for something.  Reminds me of the old joke about the man caught on the roof of his house in a flood.  He starts praying for God to save him.  A log bobs by and he keeps praying.  A empty canoe passes by and he keeps praying.  Then an empty rowboat passes by.  The waters continue to rise and in desperate extremity he pleads with God "Oh God, why won't you answer my prayers?"  and God responds "I did. I sent you a log, a canoe and a rowboat."

 

"If they are not spiritual, then what does it matter to them if someone is fine with natural death or not .".:

 

You know -- if the UC advice and homebirth advice I find strewn all over the internets had the disclaimer "Please be fine with natural death before attempting.  Information presented as true may be false" I would not feel compelled to come back to discuss these issues.  However, many "safer than" arguments are made and much factually incorrect information is presented which I think is unethical to leave unquestioned if one knows otherwise.

 

 

 

 

post #118 of 123
Thread Starter 

cottonwood, I so appreciate your fervor!  I think the problem is that for many (if not all non-UCers), a live baby is the only acceptable outcome.  What happens to the mother is secondary.  What happens on anything other than the physical (or superficial physiologic) level is secondary.  I'm speaking here of things as straight-forward as maternal morbidity, mother-baby dyad, breastfeeding relationships to things less widely appreciated such as the abrupt disruption of oxytocin transfer, violent birth, emotional effects of birth experiences on women and their babies, secondary infertility due to unnecessary cesareans, etc.

 

I agree that you have to be accepting of 'natural death' before you jump into UC, especially.  However, our critics will be the first to say that deaths at home would be escaped if only the birth had been in a hospital.  Well, I hope anyone who is (pardon me) naive enough to think that unnecessary deaths don't happen in hospitals should read this absolutely sad story (woman died in birth due to excessive dose of misoprostal).  This should remind us all of what happened to Tatia Oden French.

 

No matter the outcome, it happens to YOU.  This is why I am and always will be an advocate for childbirth choices, presented in the most ethical and transparent ways.

post #119 of 123
I'm late, but I want to quit lurking and chime in anyway.....

First, I always felt that Uc was TO ME about following my personal intuition regarding pregnancy and birth, regardless of where it may lead. Whether Inliked it OR NOT. Of course, I hoped for a short, painless, complication free, joyous UC :-) Why wouldn't you? I took stock of my body, mind and health, and went for it. I wasn't all about a UC at all costs, and I don't think very many people are this way. For ME, UC is being in touch with yourself first and foremost, and acknowledging that in most cases everything will be fine, but when it's not, you are prepared to do what's needed. Being aware of death as a constant companion is important TO ME. To deny this is like denying life itself.

ALL pregnancy is risky, you accept the risks you can, and take action to mitigate ones at are too great. Every woman chooses differently, and to me, that what freedom and life are all about. Personally, I wanted to know that going into my UC, I was in the best possible shape, and didn't feel like I could tell myself. So I saw a CNM and OB team, and they were great. But this is not for everyone. Some people are not willing to take any risk, and thats fine too.

It's a totally different way of looking at things, so I try not to be upset by interlopers that just cannot see it any way but their own. What WE see as freedom and choice, they see as ignoring risk. These posts crop up on the MDC front page, and often when one of these types sees a post like this, they want to comment. Thats fine, I just wish they would share a little more about WHY they think the way they do, rather than just dropping into remind us of all the things we hear from the mainstream everyday. I mean really, no one gets to UC without thinking about it somewhat first. This may be the first place they find, but usually, even before this, they have heard ALL ABOUT OBs, hospitals and such. it's not like UCers are ignorant to the fact that those things are there! If they want a OB or MW, they can get one (in most cases), this forum is to explore UC! I don't understand "hecklers", that don't care to have a real conversation.

Cottonwood asked above, why do theses people care? IME it's because they have lost someone themselves, and cannot fathom this choice. I try to keep this in mind, so I don't get hostile with them. They often what to protect us from ourselves, in itself not uncaring, just misguided. It's a little like watching a baby walk towards a pool- you just HAVE to say/do something. You don't know if babe can swim, or if their mama is over there, but you cannot restrain yourself- it's a sense of responsibility towards others. Again, this is a good thing in and of itself, but it can come across as very rude and condescending! Especially when mamas have spent years making this decision, and are confident in their abilities. I like when people share info I didn't know, and I like being challenged, as it helps ME grow. But the tone- well, if it's nasty, Im just gonna tune it out. I also don't mind if someone disagrees or is curious, as it gives ME the chance to formulate a better way to communicate my needs to others.

OH, and the intuition question- With My last babe I had shadow care, and around week 39 I just could NOT stop thinking "this kids gonna get stuck". I wasn't worried, didn't have GD, he wasn't measuring big, I had no reason to think this, and my CNM AND OB even said "DONT worry, it's all going to be fine". But it kept popping up. Week 40 came and all was well, my water broke, and labor began. About hour 30, I said. To myself "damn, I think I was right all along" and went to the hospital. NOT what I wanted, but what I needed. Hour 37 came and he hadn't budged. I was fully dilated and effaced, no problems, he just wouldn't come down- even after 4 hours of pushing, 2 of laboring down, and a million position changes. I got a CS, and sure enough HE WAS STUCK. Wedged in there tight, he wasn't going anywhere without the CS. I was NOT at all surprised when I was told he was stuck the way he was. It confirmed my intuition!

Sorry for the rambling. This is a long thread, And I wanted to hit the major points I saw. Usually I lurk, but I do read most of the threads, and appreciate they're here. I am planning my next UC right now ;-) hoping for a babe that wants to come out the normal way, lol.
post #120 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by labortrials View Post
  Well, I hope anyone who is (pardon me) naive enough to think that unnecessary deaths don't happen in hospitals should read this absolutely sad story (woman died in birth due to excessive dose of misoprostal).  

 


The sad thing is that lady's birth may lead to them having policies on mandatory C-sections for still births to cover themselves from any liability.....

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Unassisted Childbirth