The UC from Hell

[theRN]

Let me start of by saying that I'm a 29 y.o. mother of one who is a labor and delivery nurse (yes, one of the so dreaded medical professionals). A close friend of mine gave birth yesterday. She had told me she wanted to do a UC during her first trimester and though I don't agree with it at all, I supported her in her choice. She gave me this website and several other 'freebirth' website too help me understand the concept of UC. Over the past several months I would come here and read birthing stories and read posts on the forums; however, I found that I quickly became annoyed with the silliness and ignorant statements. I guess being one of 'the gods in green' I get irritated with reading all the backlash against the medical community. I'm not here to go into that, but there needs to be some serious moderating done on this website. My friend went to all her pre-natal appointments, had sonograms done, and overall checked out as a healthy young lady. When we saw the first pictures of the baby at 20 weeks I was ecstatic myself. Before getting my B.S. I quit college to go get a certification in sonography; so I pointed out the various parts of the baby with ease. He was already such a cute little boy. Having come to this website throughout her pregnancy I knew the opinion was pretty negative towards induction past the due date; hers came and went (as do half of all pregnant ladies, so no surprise there). After 42 weeks (42wks 2days) I began to get concerned; after a brief conversation with her she used the tired line "I'm going to let my body do what it knows how to do". As I mentioned before I'm a certified sonographer;  I knew that when she got her ultrasound done at 20 weeks the baby was the correct gestational age and size. I had seen pictures of other sonograms she had gotten throughout the pregnancy and the baby matched up with his due date. She 'let her body do what it needed to do' and finally gave birth yesterday at 44 wks 6 days. I'm not going to say something tragic like: "Oh and the baby died" or "he wasn't breathing when he was born". She gave birth to a healthy, if not huge, baby boy. He weighed 15 lbs 4 oz and she birthed him totally natural. On her knees. With no pushing. I do not want to hear the B.S. line "our bodies can handle anything", because if they baby is crowning there is obviously no other choice to how it will come out (this is also true if one has progressed to far). My friend didn't push and gave birth in an 'optimal' position (according to natural birth websites). She still walked away with a third and fourth degree tear (which is quite uncommon naturally). She also lost so much blood she needed a transfusion. There are several reasons why doctors really don't care to let women go past 42 weeks; one of them being that there is a chance the baby will be 'too big'. I know I'm going to get a lot of hate mail for this, but I really do not care. Everyone is entitled to their own opinino, but when it comes to due dates there need not be so much eye-rolling. Stillbirth rates DO go up; not as high as it was in the past, but that percentage does increase. While the placenta does not automatically expire after 40 weeks it does not nourish the baby as effectively. If one was to compare the placenta of a women who delivered at 39 weeks compared to someone who delivered at 42 (or even my friends at 44 weeks) there is a major difference. A placenta is typically bright red and thick; the longer the baby goes past the due date the darker and 'thinner' it gets. Half of women do go past their due date, but of that half about 65-70% go into labor on their own before 41 weeks. After 41 weeks about 25% go into labor prior to their scheduled induction; that's normally done at  41 wks 5 days. Only 5 to 10% of women ever have to be induced and that's more so for the good of the baby, not the mom. I'm not blaming this website for my friends UC complications, nor am I trying to scare anyone, but people need to realize their are very few medical professionals (midwives included) on this website. Many posts are from women who have 'been there, done that', but every birth is different. Listening to the few women that are 'poisoning the well' about due dates is NOT good for you. It might sound cruel, but they have their babies to cuddle at night and you deserve yours too. I just encourage women to not scoff and roll their eyes about medical practices. Calculating from your LMP to get a due date is just to give the doctors a round about estimate of when you'll deliver; please remember 37-42 weeks is a HUGE window of time to have your baby. Any longer then that and you need to be concerned; calculating a due date isn't like it was 100 years ago with a guess-and-check hope for the best system. If your measuring accurately at your sonograms, accurately at your fundal height measurement, then your baby should be born no later then 2 weeks after his due date. Just my opinion. Be safe ladies.  

[zoebird]

In the UC ideology, instead of looking to an outside authority -- medical professionals -- for what is right and best, UCers look to *themselves* as educated individuals with agency to form opinions. 

UCers, in general, encourage women to seek answers to their questions and make the best decisions for themselves. When it comes to UC, we encourage other UCers to research what they feel they need to in order to learn about birth and have this inform their decision making process. 

It doesn't take medical training to understand the material available to us on this topic, nor does having medical training mean that everyone is going to agree with your assessment as to what should be done. And, from this information, women can decide for themselves when and whether medical intervention is required.

I, personally, do not think that doctors, midwives, nurses, or other medical professionals are somehow wrong or evil, but I do think they sometimes hold themselves above others, holding that their opinion of a given circumstance holds more value than the person in the circumstance. I think that this is inappropriate. I see professionals as advisors, not as people who are telling me what I *must* do. And when i don't do what these sorts of professionals want, they get very angry and coercive very quickly. Instead, I seek out professionals who understand their role in my process, and support the decisions that I make. Yes, I have a *doctor* who does this (he also attends births at home and in the hospital). 

I would love to hear from the mother whether or not her experience was "hellish." This is just your assessment, but I think it sounds like a lovely birth (no-pushing of a 15 lber! wow!) which required medical attention for the mother afterwards -- which I assume she both sought and received. 

Perspective is everything. It seems to me that she did everything well and safely, though she may also look back and think about how she did things differently. It would be interesting to hear from her, rather than a third party who didn't really support her and thinks that she was "silly."

[sosurreal09]

Induction can and does have complications too...

I have never UC'd and I honestly don't think I ever will (but I am hoping for a home birth with the next babe first was at a birth center) BUT anyone going over their due date has nothing to do with UC. Plenty of people choose to go over their "due date" regardless of where they birth...

[leahestey]

I like the fact you used percentages (I love numbers) to explain your case. What the problem is the lack of flexibility in making a choice. In my case, my doctor(s) already made their minds that a c-section is the only way to go. Personally, I would like to see if I can do it on my own. I rather not go to the extreme of doing a UC to know for myself. There are not many options (or not told by the doctor or not supported). I had to research on my own to found out everything I wanted to know. I am not a person who accepts "it's more risky." Why and where are the cold hard facts you are using is what I want! too bad there wasn't a neutral party that can look at the facts and put them in a chart or something to show the "real" facts and not a bias view.

The truth is no matter where or how you have your baby, there will be risks!

[greenmama66]

"I would love to hear from the mother whether or not her experience was "hellish." This is just your assessment, but I think it sounds like a lovely birth (no-pushing of a 15 lber! wow!) which required medical attention for the mother afterwards -- which I assume she both sought and received."

WORD. I find it unfair to judge this woman's birth as *hellish*. Hellish in her perspective? Or yours?

[zoebird]

Sadly, Leahestey's statement is a reason why many women are choosing UC who would prefer not to.

As a UCer, I would prefer that women choose UC because they want to, not because they feel that they have to.

In the current system, you have options, but they are limited. If you go post dates, it's an automatic induction. If your baby is breech at a certain week's sonogram, it's an automatic c-section. Many women do not want these things, and would prefer to take a more relaxed our even cautious approach to these interventions. THey may ultimately decide that, yes, an induction or c-section is absolutely the right thing to do  (and a UCer supports that too!), but being told it's automatic is not the appropriate behavior on the part of the doctor. Then, the woman doesn't have a choice.

Or rather, she does. Refuse the intervention and thereby get "dropped" from care (doctor refuses to care for her), which means she MUST get a UC. Midwives may or may not take her at this point (many won't -- for very real reasons regarding insurance, lawsuits, etc). The only way that she can decide for herself is to UC.

We talk a lot about "informed consent" in and around the medical world, but it's rare that a woman who is pregnant is actually *allowed* to *consent*. She is told "this is what we are doing" and sometimes "this is what we did" when it's after the fact (common, apparently with episiotomies and also with labor enhancing drugs). 

In my opinion, this is a *massive* violation of a woman's choice in how to care for herself and her infant.

But it's also a huge disservice to her "do what we say, or you are forced to do it on your own." I don't want women "forced" to UC -- I want them getting the care that they want, which includes going to a hospital to birth if they feel that is safest for them! But *doctors* are refusing women this.

The UC movement grows in two ways. First, the positive -- women looking at it and deciding it is what is right for them (this was my method), and second, women who have no other options. I do not want it to grow because of this second group. I want women to get care! Real, honest to goodness care.

[sunshinemoma]

I too, would love to hear from your friend.  I was intrigued to hear this type of story but was disappointed to find it was written in 3rd person.  Maybe you could encourage her to post her story?  

Originally Posted by theRN 

She gave birth to a healthy, if not huge, baby boy. He weighed 15 lbs 4 oz and she birthed him totally natural. On her knees. With no pushing. I do not want to hear the B.S. line "our bodies can handle anything", because if they baby is crowning there is obviously no other choice to how it will come out (this is also true if one has progressed to far). My friend didn't push and gave birth in an 'optimal' position (according to natural birth websites). She still walked away with a third and fourth degree tear (which is quite uncommon naturally). 

I would like to point out something here.  Statistically your bolded statement is very true.  In fact such a severe tear is extremely rare in undisturbed births.  Do you know how extremely rare an "undisturbed birth" is in a hospital (you should, cause you are experienced in that area, right?).  A 4th degree tear is actually more common in a hospital setting,  Still rare, yes, but less rare in a hospital setting than in a home/UC setting.  This isn't to say that your friend *might* have avoided it had she gone the hospital/intervention route...but then, she could still have experienced different awful risks come true.  Or, like my own experience, she *could* have gone to birth at the hospital and *walked* away with TWO 3rd and 4th degree mediolateral episiotomies.  Of course anyone who fully understands the gravity of such extensive tearing knows you do not "walk away".  I feel awful for what your friend might be experiencing right now.  It can be quite a devastating time as the recovery can be slow and grueling on a mother/partner/wife.  My condolenses go to her.  Can I suggest you offer her as much support/help at this time.  Try, of course, not to pass on your judgements and reasonings of why she experienced what she did- as it will be completely useless to her at this time and may only serve to increase her grief. 

[ursusarctos]

Originally Posted by sunshinemoma 

I feel awful for what your friend might be experiencing right now.  It can be quite a devastating time as the recovery can be slow and grueling on a mother/partner/wife.  My condolenses go to her.  Can I suggest you offer her as much support/help at this time.  Try, of course, not to pass on your judgements and reasonings of why she experienced what she did- as it will be completely useless to her at this time and may only serve to increase her grief. 

Sunshinemoma, I'm sorry for your experience as well

Also, OP, size doesn't necessarily have anything to do with tearing. I was a normal 8.5 lbs at 42 weeks and my mom had a 4th degree tear with me. Whereas a friend of mine has had 10 lb babies and not torn at all. There are many factors involved.

[sunshinemoma]

A couple other points I'm wondering about, from your (theRN) professional yet probably limited perspective (not trying to be rude there but obviously I don't consider this site to be a source of "medical" information so don't worry, I wont pass your opinions on as sound medical advice):

• If a baby grows to such a large birthweight in those extra weeks post date doesn't that mean the placenta is still giving tons of nutrition etc, to him?  Was her placenta red or old looking?  If it did look thin and expired than the look/age of it doesn't seem to accurately reflect its ability to function effectively..
• On the otherhand if the baby is at risk of losing it's supply from a 'past due' placenta would there not be a stall in fundal height measurements, etc signifying a problem?  In which case mother would most likely feel prompted to seek care, for sake of her baby.  This was obviously not the issue for your friend and I hope she feels confident that she insured a very gentle birth for her son.   

Thank you for trying to put some insight on these two issues, severe tearing & post dates.  However I've found great tips on avoiding such extreme tears from medical journals/studies and from the personal info from "been there done that" moms.  Medical journals have stated that avoiding episiotomies and other surgical techniques will give me the best chance at preventing repeat of such an awful morbidity.  Mothers who have been generous enough to share their stories of fourth degree tears and subsequent births have given me more tools on avoiding a repeat tear (or, at the least, reducing the degree of tearing).  From my reading, 'hands and knees' is actually not, as you mentioned, the "optimal" position to birth.  In fact, my interpretations from the moms here is that there is no ONE optimal position for every mom, every time.  For moms with compromised perineums or babies with bigger head measurements slowly is probably the "best position"  this might be 'hands and knees' for some or it might be any even slower 'side lying' position for others.  

At any rate, anything based on anatomy and physiology should tell us that back lying is NOT an ideal position for any birthing situation, which makes it very discouraging that that is such a common position in hospitals.  And ime in hospitals it is too often forced on the mom with no potentional benefit -other than to the practitioner to gain ease in performing their techniques(which can be both helpful or harmful) 

[sunshinemoma]

Originally Posted by ursusarctos 

Sunshinemoma, I'm sorry for your experience as well

Also, OP, size doesn't necessarily have anything to do with tearing. I was a normal 8.5 lbs at 42 weeks and my mom had a 4th degree tear with me. Whereas a friend of mine has had 10 lb babies and not torn at all. There are many factors involved.

Thanks ursus.  Likewise I am sorry for your moms trauma :(  Did she come out okay eventually?  Does her experience with you cause you any anxiety?

I agree that many factors go into whether a moma stays intact or tears badly.  My son was only 7lbs 2oz I was 38weeks.  My sister who is seems to be just as small as I had a 9lb baby at 41 weeks with the added complication of shoulder dystocia.  Her midwife used manual techniques to resolve the complication, did not perform episiotomies and she and baby made it through okay.  She had NO tearing.  Bigger baby and more serious complications yet walked away without any tearing at all.  My other sister, a first time mom, also had a bigger baby than I, 8lb15oz and had a minor skid mark tear with no need for a single stitch.  Because my sisters and I are all pretty much equally healthy (we all pay attention to good nutrition and exercise) and we are similar sized (small frames and about 5'1"-5'2") I would say the avoidance of typical/unneccessary labour management is the important factor here which contributed to the extreme differences in outcomes...

[tracymom1]

I smell a troll...

[terrordactyl]

this sounds a bit like a troll.... also isn't it against the rules to post someone elses birth story online.

[Unbound]

Possibly a troll, but if not:

there needs to be some serious moderating done on this website.

I agree.  For a start, your post is completely against the forum rules:

we will actively discourage individuals from posting with no sincere interest in exploring UC. Proselytizing against UC will not be permitted. Controversial subjects of discussion related to UC can be found elsewhere on the internet, and we invite you to seek out other venues for that purpose.

Plus, you are condescending, sarcastic, and disrespectful:

I'm a 29 y.o. mother of one who is a labor and delivery nurse (yes, one of the so dreaded medical professionals)

I found that I quickly became annoyed with the silliness and ignorant statements

after a brief conversation with her she used the tired line "I'm going to let my body do what it knows how to do".

I do not want to hear the B.S. line "our bodies can handle anything",

Listening to the few women that are 'poisoning the well' about due dates is NOT good for you.

And you've thrown in a dead baby card for good measure!

It might sound cruel, but they have their babies to cuddle at night and you deserve yours too.

You have come in here and told us that we are silly and ignorant, that our beliefs are "tired" and "BS", and basically thrown a whole lot of condescending "I'm a nurse and here are the facts and I don't want to hear your rubbish excuses" statements at us. All while saying that it irritates you that some of us don't like medical professionals. Perhaps you should take a look at yourself and this post, and you'll see why that is.

Thanks for stopping by to dictate to us, but you shouldn't be posting here.

[LadyJennifer]

I agree. And how many mothers in the hospital get 3rd or 4th degree tears with MUCH smaller babies?? If I went into the hospital birthing forum and said a friend's birth was "hellish" simply because she tore badly and hemorrhaged, I'd get raked; not to mention sometimes these things do just happen. I thought this was a very strange post. Especially since baby WAS fine, mother WAS fine; and obviously no pushing with a 15lber - her body WAS made for it!
 

Originally Posted by greenmama66 

"I would love to hear from the mother whether or not her experience was "hellish." This is just your assessment, but I think it sounds like a lovely birth (no-pushing of a 15 lber! wow!) which required medical attention for the mother afterwards -- which I assume she both sought and received."

WORD. I find it unfair to judge this woman's birth as *hellish*. Hellish in her perspective? Or yours?

[IwannaBanRN]

Of COURSE she had severe tearing and bleeding. She had a 15 lb baby for crying out loud. I would also like to hear from the mother wether or not this experience was hellish or that things shouldn't have turned out the way they did based on her decision not to be induced. If she were as educated as she thought she was, she should have known how big her baby may get that far into pregnancy. Me, for myself, I would have been doing anything in MY power to induce myself at 42 weeks. And if that didn't work, I may THINK about being induced by a medical professional.

I don't think this person is a troll as much as an opinionated health care professional.

[OSUvet]

Originally Posted by greenmama66 

"I would love to hear from the mother whether or not her experience was "hellish." This is just your assessment, but I think it sounds like a lovely birth (no-pushing of a 15 lber! wow!) which required medical attention for the mother afterwards -- which I assume she both sought and received."

WORD. I find it unfair to judge this woman's birth as *hellish*. Hellish in her perspective? Or yours?

THIS!!! I had planned a home birth (with a midwife but I support UC for educated individuals), had a beautiful and short first stage of labor but ended up transferring after 4 hours of pushing. My son was nearly crowning and not malpositioned but I just wouldn't stretch enough no matter what. I am small, but he was only 8lbs 1oz. We were treated like garbage by the OB at the hospital, I blacked out due to a mask of NO being held on my face against my wishes, and was given a 4th degree tear due to rough forceps use. Yes I needed assistance and am glad the hospital was there to make sure my son and I turned out ok. But would I have rather had the birth the OP described? Transfusion included? Hell yes. 

[tutucrazy]

What is the point of this post????? Seems like the intention is to instill birth fear rather than support moms. Also, I don't think it is right to judge another woman's birth as "hellish". As a victim of birth rape i consider my hospital birth to have been a hellish experience, but it is my experience to judge with my own words. Many woman have truly gruesome and horrific medicalized births. UC and/or homebirth don't increase that likelihood. In fact, I venture to say that the dramatically decrease the chance of a woman having such an experience.

I'd like to add that induction could have resulted in a surgical birth which is far more damaging than a tear IMO!!!

[greenmama66]

I'm having a hard time actually believing this  story about  the woman not push out a 15LB 4 ouncer and end up with 4th degree tears. Something about this story doesn't sit right. I think it's made up to scare women - just my opinion.

[ursusarctos]

Originally Posted by sunshinemoma 

Thanks ursus.  Likewise I am sorry for your moms trauma :(  Did she come out okay eventually?  Does her experience with you cause you any anxiety?

I agree that many factors go into whether a moma stays intact or tears badly.  My son was only 7lbs 2oz I was 38weeks.  My sister who is seems to be just as small as I had a 9lb baby at 41 weeks with the added complication of shoulder dystocia.  Her midwife used manual techniques to resolve the complication, did not perform episiotomies and she and baby made it through okay.  She had NO tearing.  Bigger baby and more serious complications yet walked away without any tearing at all.  My other sister, a first time mom, also had a bigger baby than I, 8lb15oz and had a minor skid mark tear with no need for a single stitch.  Because my sisters and I are all pretty much equally healthy (we all pay attention to good nutrition and exercise) and we are similar sized (small frames and about 5'1"-5'2") I would say the avoidance of typical/unneccessary labour management is the important factor here which contributed to the extreme differences in outcomes...

Thanks sunshine. She did recover fully and had 3 more kids with only minimal tearing. There were many factors involved, including her history, her position (semi-reclining), an episiotomy, and being uncomfortable with some of the people in the house. None of which are going to be the same for me. I accept the risk that I might have bad tearing simply by having a vaginal birth, but if I do I won't feel like it was inevitable because my mom had it, you know?

[zoebird]

i actually had a lot of thoughts about this post after the fact, too -- whether or not it is real.

if this mother in question does go to this site and others, I would assume she wouldn't be a lurker (few are), and I also assume she would not be happy with her friend coming in and describing her birth in these ways. (or her or us in these ways). as a friend, knowing that my friend would be reading this site (at least), I really would be cautious in how I put up my opinion.

I haven't seen reports from anyone on the boards I frequent of a similar birth -- or a woman going this long -- in quite a long time. That is to say, I frequent three forums that have UCers, and I haven't heard of this birth from anyone but someone who is adamantly against UC and using this tear/hemmorrhage thing as a tactic to be rude.

And, the mother hasn't shown up to share -- though that may not be too unusual. Most of the UCers whom I know get a note up in the announcements within a week, and then a birth story within a year or so. :) but are still posting a bit now and again in those first few weeks. So, yeah, not sure if this "friend" exists.