or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Homebirth › This Dr. Amy Tuteur woman drives me crazy.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

This Dr. Amy Tuteur woman drives me crazy. - Page 7  

post #121 of 168
Obviously, we don’t see eye to eye on many points.  But in a way, we actually agree on the most important thing: a woman has the right to make any decision that she wants to when it comes to her body.  Where we disagree, however. is the extent to which certain institutions are ethically obligated to participate in or facilitate all of these choices.  
 
Can I ask you two questions?  Feel free to answer either, both, or neither of them:
 
1. Re: birth rape/medical assault
 
I see the term ‘birth rape’ being applied to two very different (in my view) situations.  In the first, a woman actively and clearly refuses consent and the practitioner goes ahead and does the intervention anyway.  I want to make it clear: I am horrified by these stories.  I don’t know how often the stories themselves are true, and, if so, how often this happens, but it’s absolutely and totally unacceptable.  If doctors really are strapping gas masks on women who are screaming that they don’t consent to a C-section while lying to them and saying that it’s just oxygen, then those doctors need to be arrested and tried.
 
However, I also see the term ‘birth rape’ being used to describe traumatic experiences in which women feel that they were pressured into making certain decisions that they come to regret.  
 
Do you think that this characterization is accurate?  If so, would you describe the second category of experiences as birth rapes, or just the first?
 
2. Should women who are contemplating home birth be given accurate information about the relative risks?

Edit: Whoops, I missed your last post (119) before writing this. Didn't mean to talk past you.
post #122 of 168
Like in a sexual context could you imagine of strapping someone to a bed for an hour and subjecting them to pain against their will while psychologically abusing them until they finally relented and allowed the act to be done constituted consent? Doesn't seem right, does it? Why are our standard for how we treat pregnant women so deplorable? Why do
Most conversations focus on what choices should be available to women when this shit is happening? Is it some kind of massive gender based self loathing?

When we talk about risks associated with hositpal birth why don't we discuss the risks of being assaulted or abused or getting PTSD? I suspect it's because most of us have bought in to the message that as mothers we don't matter, that our voices don't (and shouldn't) matter. This is deeply problematic.

With birth there are no risk free options.
post #123 of 168
And with rape, I do want to say that I have been raped in the traditional sense and then again I was birth raped.

There was no way I could have foreseen that how I was treated while I gave birth would be so similar to being raped. But now, I see the similarities to it all the time. Like for example, people not believing the woman that it happened, people thinking maybe she did something to deserve it, people saying maybe she actually consented but then regretted it after the fact.

Also, the feelings for the survivor were the same, at least for me - shame, rage, constant flashbacks of the event, avoidance of triggers.

They are so similar it's weird. It's just so disturbing that these acts are tolerated in our society, but i guess rape is always like that.
post #124 of 168
Also remember that care provider/ birth attendant matters too independent of hospital.

I think it's a false assumption that Hospital=Horrible birth experience. If so sites like "Hurt by Homebirth" would have no content. Hubris affect all humans, even midwives and Doctors. I think a lot of this stems from privileged people having the wiggle room to jump on the bandwagon and reject midern western medicine. If the are a mainstream, they are wrong.

We can idolize ancient customs, romanticizr the practices of more "primitive" cultures, and turn the clock back on childbirth, but the reality is that modern medicine has continued to expand and become more adcance is because their is a need for it. I have no desire to give birth alone, in a rainforest, or without the need for immediate(minutes) medical attention if my child needed it. The most chilling sound is your childs heart essentially fading before your eyes and ears. And I litdrally was in an OR in five minutes. Cut me open, up down, left, right, just get him out! I didnt give a shyt. I cried about it after and felt bad for myself because I didnt have my ideal, "healing" vbac that was going to make me abirth goddess and bring world peace upon the earth, but I cried whilst holding my live, perfectly fine little boy.
post #125 of 168
Yes absolutely thank god for hospitals and modern medicine. I too would not hesitate to go there in an emergency and like you though I'd mourn the loss of my perfect birth id ultimately get over it and be happy that baby and I were saved. The problem is that hositpals sometimes cause these emergencies, which is what happened to me and what has happened to others. That is why I personally believe the hospital is not the right place for a normal, healthy low risk labour. For any woman whose baby was endangered by over zealous intervention in an otherwise normal hositpal, going back there when there is no need will make little sense.
post #126 of 168
An additional problem is that midwives sometimes cause emergencies, treat women badly, and leave them feeling assaulted. Neither set of providers is withput problems, and those problems can't always be spotted in advance. That absolutely doesn't mean we should give up - health care professionals at all levels need to accept professional standards, and structures that hold them accountable for maintaining those standards.
post #127 of 168
One more perspective.

Have you ever talked to someone and their words didn't match their actions/body language? Didn't it make you feel scared and uncertain? I am willing to accept the MANA stats, but I am not willing to accept that the hospital is a good safe place to go. I understand that ultimately, it probably is.

But, as someone who also chose to homebirth because of hospital treatment, and has ha to deal with a significant fear of doctors, I get it. I'm just now feeling like I can have confidence in a ny ddoctor, and it has been nearly 7 years since my last hospital birth.

I took my dd to urgent care over the weekend, and we were brought two meds. They weren't even going to tell me what they were, check her arm band, or offer an option for consent in any way. That is what I expect from a hospital. My grandpa died last summer because of medical neglect/incompetence. These problems are real. Hospital bullying is real. I've only had a handful of scenerios that didn't involve bullying, and I have never been in a life threatening situation (me and the kids). I was with a friend when her baby was born, a tad early, not breathing, and with a bit of blood loss. The doctors were awful. Mean, and hateful coercive bullies. Seconds after she was born, baby pinked up and was breathing. The bad stuff all happened after that. Oh, and no one even was there when baby was born.

Choosing to have a baby in a hospital is a choice to check yourself at the door. And it is really scary. I'm trying to figure out where this baby will be born, and...whew...I don't know.
post #128 of 168
Typing on my phone +autocorrect=fail. lol
post #129 of 168
I have had two hospital births. One in a crappy facility with crappy care providers and an experience that left feeling emotionly scarred, humiliated, and caused PTSD and PPD. I had another hospital experience where I absolutley had no complaints. My provider, the staff, my post partum care, and the pediatricians were excellent and I felt in control and treated like a VIP.

We are consumers, just like we research when we buy a car we need to do the same with our birthing options, including safety concerns.

The one thing that doctors and hospital have that many lay midwives dont is insurance and accountability. If a child dies or is injured due to gross negligence in a hospital, money can be accessed for future care or in a punative manner, and licenses can be lost and people can be put out of practice or face jail time. Usually with a lay midwives the parents have no course of action.
post #130 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viola P View Post

Having someone strapped to a bed, refusing to let them leave when they ask, refusing to allow them to eat and forcing them to go two days without food despite them crying in agony and begging for sustenance, badgering a patient for an hour into one position and abusing a woman by implying that she is a bad mother ("it's what's best for baby, why don't you want what's best for baby" in a very snarky tone) then withdrawing all care, repeatedly placing monitoring belts on a woman's stomach while she's screaming "no, no, no" and while denying her pain medications while refusing to stop administering other medications (pitocin) sure as hell does not constitute consent. In any other situation could that be construed as consenting? Again, somehow because someone is pregnant it's suddenly ok to treat them horridly because after all, all that matters is a healthy baby and mothers are just vessels.

As for the other thing, I reject entirely any notion that baby and mother's interests can (or should) be separated. I think any acceptance at all of the idea of a "patient within a patient" model will lead to problems if mother does not do what doctor wants because since the interests are severable it becomes possible to view the mother/baby relationship as adversarial and therefore the baby in need of protection or advocacy. I think that the patient within a patient model is probably the primary cause of all these problems and that of we just viewed mom/baby as one patient none of us would even be having this conversation.

We can pretend its science all we want but really so mich of this is culture, and in our culture women's bodies are not respected and there is a lot of misogyny. To pretend that these issues don't somehow inform modern medical practice is like saying obstetrics exists in a cultural vacuum.

 

 

 

Huh... well I never had this happen to me.  I had wanted to have my last at home but too many variables caused me to have to have him in the hospital and I never once had an experience like you're describing.  In fact I've never met anyone who had experienced anything like that...  Interesting.

post #131 of 168
I don't even know what to say about this thread but it makes me sad.
post #132 of 168
I know people who had bad things happen in the hospital. It does happen. I was treated terribly during my first birth. (Not in the US, and the midwives, not the OBs, were the culprits.) NPO is certainly standard of care in many hospitals, though strapping down is not (it is on the decline for surgery as well).

However, "bad things happen in the hospital and that is why women choose home birth" is not an answer to whether or not women should be provided with all the available information to make the choice. "Someone wants to stop us from having a choice, so we're not going to give all the information" is not providing a service to birthing women.

If we're going to compare the US to other countries, the choice model breaks down eventually. I have seen, more than once, the justification of high risk homebirth because "Women want the choice" or "it's not available in the hospital." Other countries do eventually deny women the choice or provide it only when forced to do so. While availability of vaginal breech, twins, and VBAC may be higher, it is not necessarily available on an individual basis, and that availability does not factor into whether midwives are permitted to do them at home.
post #133 of 168
My other post that you'd asked about, appalled20, was about statistics being statistics and the need to look at individual cases too. For one thing, I believe that I birth best in my own environment and being in a hospital would set me up for problems. I have not had a bad hospital experience. I just know who I am. That may not seem relevant to you but it has gone into my decision making process. Also, some of what Viola was saying is where I was going with my comment. Some people have bad hospitals near them.

And yes, deadbabydeadbaby can be coercive. There is a way to explain risk and there is a way to scare people. Same information, different approach and goals.
post #134 of 168
I guess what bothers me is that I'm sensing there is a difference between supporting home birth and supporting the right a woman has in choosing home birth. I can support the right of people to choose lots of things that I think are really stupid. I wouldn't count myself as a supporter of those things though.
post #135 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by salr View Post

My other post that you'd asked about, appalled20, was about statistics being statistics and the need to look at individual cases too. For one thing, I believe that I birth best in my own environment and being in a hospital would set me up for problems. I have not had a bad hospital experience. I just know who I am. That may not seem relevant to you but it has gone into my decision making process. Also, some of what Viola was saying is where I was going with my comment. Some people have bad hospitals near them.

And yes, deadbabydeadbaby can be coercive. There is a way to explain risk and there is a way to scare people. Same information, different approach and goals.

But the heart of the discussion is why would MANA feel the need to hide and then skew their statistics if the goal is to empower women to make educated decisions? There is no need to be deceptive, we are all big girls, we can understand and weigh risk. There is nothing"wrong" per sae in saying their is a higher neonatal mortality risk with homebirth, it is what it is. My son has a higher risk of penile cancer, UTIs, and STD communication because he is currently and may remain uncircumcised, I weighed that risk against other things and decided to still keep him intact.
post #136 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by salr View Post

I guess what bothers me is that I'm sensing there is a difference between supporting home birth and supporting the right a woman has in choosing home birth. I can support the right of people to choose lots of things that I think are really stupid. I wouldn't count myself as a supporter of those things though.

I agree with you that there is a difference. But I also don't think that "supporting homebirth" means ignoring evidence or studies relating to risks. MANA released numbers that made them look good and then waited years to release numbers that suggest homebirth has an increased risk of death to the baby compared to a hospital birth. That is shockingly unethical. Sure, not all women view a "baby with a pulse" as the only important thing. But, I'd guess that for most women who chose to carry a pregnancy, it is a pretty significant factor. Women deserve to have all the information available.

I believe that supporting something means that you value it and, if possible, want to improve it. The MANA stats have important information that could be used to create safer environments for homebirth and allow women to make more informed decisions based on what factors a woman deems most important to her family. MANA had that information and waited years to release it. I see that as being incredibly unsupportive of both homebirth in general and women making informed choices.
post #137 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by appalled20 View Post

“The whole dead baby card irks me because I remember last time I gave birth if I questioned anything my midwife recommended it was "dead baby, dead baby". Like I had to labour on my back with my knees pinned to my chest or dead baby, dead baby, dead baby. And I had to go two days without food or dead baby dead baby dead baby. As though all that matters is a dead baby, as though I don't matter, by virtue of becoming pregnant I am consigned to some kind of secondary status, a type of non person whose views, feelings and ideas are totally unworthy of any kind of consideration.”
 
From this comment and from others you’ve made in the past, I get the sense that you don’t really think that a mother can consent if her provider is “playing the dead baby card,” that any attempt to “scare” the mother into adopting a particular course of action is a coercive act that opens the provider up to accusations of “birth rape.” If a medical provider performs an intervention without the consent of the patient, that’s a big, big problem.  But I don’t think you’re talking about that.  You’re talking about a provider who convinces a patient to give consent by stressing the negative consequences that they’re hoping to avoid.

 

This really disturbed me, and I felt I had to say something, because I do not get that impression from Viola's horrible story at all.

 

Yes, if negative consequences to a decision are possible, they need to be discussed with the patient as part of informed choice. That does not mean that all ways of bringing them up are perfectly fine and all just part of informed choice. It is totally possible for health care practitioners to use potential negative consequences as a way of shaming or guilting women, and that is not OK. There is such a difference between the attitude of "Unfortunately, there is this potential problem with this course of action which I need to tell you about so that you have the chance to make an informed decision as the adult you are", and "Because this bad thing might happen you are clearly a SELFISH AWFUL WOMAN for even considering this course of action". And, of course, a whole big spectrum in between.

 

So, when Viola talks about the things that happened to her... well, for starters, I can't see ANY way that labouring in that position or going without food for two days would be necessary for your baby's life or wellbeing. So I can't see how the things they were getting her to do can be justified at all. But, also, it sounds as though what happened to her was above and beyond just 'stressing the negative consequences', and I don't think it right to dismiss her experience, which sounds horrible and abusive.

post #138 of 168

I also have to add, though, that I do not think it a good idea to define 'homebirth supporter' as 'someone who won't bring up any negative information about homebirth risks' and ban everyone else from the forum. That isn't differentiating between 'discussion of the risks' and 'shaming/guilting women' either, and it's important to differentiate between the two (and I recognise it can be a fine line, especially with such a sensitive subject where so many people have had terrible experiences like Viola's).

 

I think women deserve the information to make a truly informed choice, and that includes hearing about possible risks of homebirth if that's what the studies show, not whitewashing them. Keeping information from women under the guise of 'support' is not supporting their rights and autonomy either, and there needs to be a place where these things can be discussed openly and without trying to guilt women.

post #139 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by appalled20 View Post


No. She argues that breast feeding has real benefits when compared with formula, but that these benefits are small and often overstated. See, for example, this post (http://www.skepticalob.com/2013/06/two-crappy-new-breastfeeding-studies-make-irresponsible-claims-of-benefits.html), which begins, "Why aren’t breastfeeding advocates satisfied with the real, albeit small, benefits of breastfeeding?"

   As someone who has breastfed 3 children, i would hardly describe the benefits of breastfeeding as 'small'.

Her article cited a bunch of statistics and fallacious philosophical arguments which led to her  misleading conclusion , that the benefits are only 'small'. (she even breastfed her own children, i wonder why she bothered?)

 

So i stand by my original statement, saying that the benefits of breastfeeding  are 'small', is tantamount to saying that it isnt really superior to formula, or certainly not worth the effort it takes to establish breastfeeding.

 

I happen to disagree with that, and i also disagreed with her method of argument. (based as it was on many fallacies which she cleverly tried to disguise as actual philosophical argument and scientific enterprise)

 

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by contactmaya View Post
 

Isnt that the same woman who argued passionately against the  nutritional superiority of breastfeeding over formula?

I rest my case.

post #140 of 168
I didn't say that a supporter would not talk about negatives.

Rereading, I see that Viola already suggested a new thread be opened so I guess we're just talking about two different things. This thread took a turn that made it not the thread for me. No prob.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Homebirth
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Homebirth › This Dr. Amy Tuteur woman drives me crazy.