The Innate Role of Fathers in Birth - Page 2

[cmb123]

Originally Posted by love_homebirthing

Well I can't really say for a fact what would be true in most male attended births (and again I'm speaking only of the male partner, not physician). I can only say how it was for *me*. I didn't *need* my husband at the birth in order to give birth but I absolutely wanted him there and his presence was helpful and calming for me. I romanticise about the idea of being support by other women in labor but ultimately it is not for me. I need a very intimate, private setting. Just me and dh - perhaps our kids. No stranger, mw, or even other close female friend or family member will ever provide me with the kind of comfort I need to give birth unhindered. In fact, being in the presence of anyone but my dh makes me hold back somewhat. I witnessed this in my first birth (mw attended) vs. my second (unattended). But with him I don't need to hold back. It's comfortable.

If that's what works for you, that is wonderful.

My biggest problem with the push for men at birth is that at this point, it has become "expected" that the male partner attend the birth. There are a LOT of women, who really don't want them there, but they have them there because they feel like they "should" KWIM? This causes a lot of stress during labor and birth.

Originally Posted by klothos

but i guess this is wheere feeling comfortable with, and completely trusting, one's partner come into play ~ you have to be able to tell them exactly what you need / want at any given moment, and trust that they will understand you and do it (even when you're communicating in grunts and inarticulate gestures).

Very true, but I think that deep of a mutual understanding between a woman and a male partner is unusual.

[captain crunchy]

It makes me feel sad that a lot of you feel this way about your husbands/partners (with regard to birth)...

honestly, we haven't gone through it yet so in the moment I might tell him to buzz off and get out of my face...he's annoying me etc....but I imagine that will be more due to the fact that I might want *anyone* to buzz off and get out of my face, rather than my husband not being what I need...know what I mean?

I mean, thusfar, he has been the most attentive, loving, caring, responsive, helpful person during this whole pregnancy and I really feel he will be that way during labor too...

That is not to say he is perfect, no one is, but reading through the posts make me sad that a lot of you women didn't feel that way....

That is in NO way suggesting that your husbands/partners aren't absolutely wonderful in every other aspect of things... I am specifically speaking about birth...

I think of course women are more *naturally* better in labor situations... but somehow I feel like all this talk of male partners being useless in labor and so on really perpetuates a society and thought process that is very "ya know how guys are" in its attitude, thus never holding men to a higher level, thus letting them off the hook to pace in the waiting room handing out cigars like 1954...

I dunno, it doesn't sit well with me somehow this idea that men are just bumbling, helpless, confused, annoying dullards who run into walls when a woman is in labor...

I guess I can only speak from the perspective of my husband and how he is... as I said, he needed a bit of info, a bit of guidance, a bit of reassurance... but all along he really had a STRONG desire and need to be a part of things and has done everything to ensure this is a process we are BOTH going to experience....

[akmbloom]

My DH wasn't feeling well the night I took the "in labor" part of my childbirth class (I took a sort of short, condensed version) - so I asked my mom instead. And I was really angry with him for missing that class, I thought it would be crucial that he know all the stages of labor, what I would be acting like, etc. I was really worried that, if he didn't know what was going on, I wouldn't be able to handle it. I hadn't decided for sure yet whether I'd have my mom in the suite while I delivered, but I was leaning towards it, so I thought she'd be a good person to take the class with me.

It turned out that my DH was supportive in the exact way I wanted him to be - getting ice and water, cold washcloths, holding my hand, walking around with me, etc - he basically stayed up near my head once I was in active labor, and his knowledge of the physical process was not at all necessary. I had my mom in the room and I was SO GLAD that I did - I would have been whether or not she took the class. I felt, after going through the birth, that I would much rather have the "real work" stuff supported by women and specifically *elders* than have my DH try to do it, I just don't think that he would've understood. And my mom was much less freaked out by the blood, etc etc than he would've been. She also took the complications in stride much better than he would've.... he was there when we were informed of them, of course, but it was my mom who helped me make decisions and clarified things for me. I think this situation may be particular to my DH (who has a hard time seeing me in pain) and my mom (who is an amazingly supportive woman, and had 2 unmedicated births before it was more common); I don't think this would apply to everyone. But it is my opinion that we should be pretty flexible about the father's role in the birth process - I think he got what he needed to out of it, but wouldn't have been comforable or have helped me in a more active role.

[Chiromom]

I want to reply to some of your specific posts...but I don't have time right now. (I'm at work) but I do want to say that I am interested in the conversation that this is engendering.

I think in many ways I agree with most of you in many of your subpoints about what worked well for you or what you did based on what you experienced. It is not the actual choice you made/make of whether your husband should be there or what he should do that is in question.

The true question I am asking (not that I am uninterested in other dialogue) is: How do we come to the conclusion of what role the father takes? Ultimately, what I am advocating is that the decision or process of deciding/discovering his role be allowed to occur as organically as possible (just like birth itself YKWIM?)


More to come. Must work.

[Artisan]

Originally Posted by Chiromom

The true question I am asking (not that I am uninterested in other dialogue) is: How do we come to the conclusion of what role the father takes? Ultimately, what I am advocating is that the decision or process of deciding/discovering his role be allowed to occur as organically as possible (just like birth itself YKWIM?)

I think the answer is: whatever the mom wants. And that might be "leave me alone, I don't want you here right now."

I think my big issue is that the pendulum has swung so that often the only person at a woman's birth it the doctor, nurse, and her husband. And in that environment, there's no way she can ask him to leave -- she certainly does need him there under those circumstances.

Also, on the subject of Bradley, let's not forget that in his book he advocates for women lying still on the bed (quietly) during labor, and that episiotomies should be the NORM. (And yes, I have read the book.) And he noticed marked improvements in mom's experiences, but look at what he was comparing it to: a mom sitting ALONE in the hospital with unfamiliar faces! If he compared it to a homebirth situation with the females of a woman's choice around, that would be comparing apples to apples. If it were me, I would be happy to have anyone I knew around for support in a hospital situation like that.

[stafl]

Originally Posted by reader

I think the answer is: whatever the mom wants. And that might be "leave me alone, I don't want you here right now."

I think my big issue is that the pendulum has swung so now often the only person at a woman's birth it the doctor, nurse, and her husband. And in that environment, there's no way she can ask him to leave -- she certainly does need him there under those circumstances.

I agree. I don't need anyone feeling sorry for me that my DH was not a good doula. I never expected him to be (well, I did expect that with DD1, but knew better with DD2). He's good at the things he does, but being sensitive and intuitive (what I needed during labor) are not among his strengths. Expecting him to be this wonderful birth attendant when my first was born was unfair of me. It's not a role he's cut out for. Sure, some men might be, but not *my* man!


Cap'n, I would be very interested in hearing your point of view *after* your baby is born, and to know whether your expectations of your DH were realistic or not. I'm not doubting that he might be great during labor, some men are, but I think you need to realize that not all men can think straight, much less be much help, when the woman they love more than anything else in the world is screaming and moaning in pain (or when doc says your baby will die if you don't agree to whatever intervention).

[cmb123]

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I think of course women are more *naturally* better in labor situations... but somehow I feel like all this talk of male partners being useless in labor and so on really perpetuates a society and thought process that is very "ya know how guys are" in its attitude, thus never holding men to a higher level, thus letting them off the hook to pace in the waiting room handing out cigars like 1954...
.

As for my part in that...I do not think less of men for not (IMO) having an innate role in birth.
I don't think leaving birth to the "womenfolk" is letting them off the hook, or not holding them to a higher level...I just don't think it's their place as men, overall. I don't think we have to make every life event "all inclusive" to everyone. In many cases I don't think it's even fair to "expect" a man to "get" labor and birth the way another woman would. I think it puts pressure on them to be something they can't possibly be...a woman.

[amyjeans]

Originally Posted by klothos

Hhhmmmmmmm.

well for us, birth is the ultimate finale to an act of love-making. it is a time to connect and welcome the new little spirit... and, as in love-making, the best thing my partner does is make me feel relaxed, and listen to my needs. ok that's 2 things, sorry i'm rushed and NAK...

i can't imagine birth with anyone but my partner (eh-hem, no "womenfolk") because to me, that would be like bringing in other people to the bedroom while my partner and i are having a long, slow love-making session. it would just feel... wrong.

but i guess this is wheere feeling comfortable with, and completely trusting, one's partner come into play ~ you have to be able to tell them exactly what you need / want at any given moment, and trust that they will understand you and do it (even when you're communicating in grunts and inarticulate gestures).

:

...yesssss totally that!

Marilyn Moran Fan here! ...(me...)

There were 3 people present when we made our baby; God, Greg and I. The same 3 people there when she was born. That's all that is needed.
My DH and I are Catholic and believe this is part of our religion and spirituality- as birth is sacred, private, personal, intimate and not to be shared outside our bedroom, just like intercourse.
As far as his role in the actual event? He stays out of the way unless called upon. Its just understood between us. He is there. In every sense.

[2+twins]

Originally Posted by reader

Also, on the subject of Bradley, let's not forget that in his book he advocates for women lying still on the bed (quietly) during labor, and that episiotomies should be the NORM. (And yes, I have read the book.)

FWIW, Dr. Bradley's book (I'm referring to the latest edition) is out-dated. He did not advocate routine episiotomy in his book (and incidentally his rate was always much lower than his peers) and he came to realize that his rate was still too high by the end of his life AND he also came to see that homebirth was a better option for most women - an opinion he didn't hold in his last revision. Also, his book is NOT the Bradley Method. Yes, the Bradley Method is founded on it and named for him (by Jay & Margie Hathaway - not Dr. Bradley), but it's based off of Dr. Bradley's ideas. TBM does not advocate routine episiotomy at all and suggests the side-lying position as *one way* a woman can labor IF it suits her in the moment. It can be a very good position in later labor if the woman is having trouble getting into a deep relaxation mode. I, for one, didn't use it in either birth with the exception of trying it out at the start of my second birth. It hurt like hell so I abandoned it and moved on (exactly how a Bradley-trained person should). It just irks me that the data for what TBM is so skewed here. People have one idea of it in their minds and no amount of actual information will change it so I guess I'll shut up about it from here on out. But as a person who knows in detail exactly what is taught (since I'm an instructor) I can say with confidence that the view of it is often incorrect here on these boards.

[Artisan]

Originally Posted by love_homebirthing

FWIW, Dr. Bradley's book (I'm referring to the latest edition) is out-dated. He did not advocate routine episiotomy in his book (and incidentally his rate was always much lower than his peers) and he came to realize that his rate was still too high by the end of his life AND he also came to see that homebirth was a better option for most women - an opinion he didn't hold in his last revision. Also, his book is NOT the Bradley Method. Yes, the Bradley Method is founded on it and named for him (by Jay & Margie Hathaway - not Dr. Bradley), but it's based off of Dr. Bradley's ideas. TBM does not advocate routine episiotomy at all and suggests the side-lying position as *one way* a woman can labor IF it suits her in the moment. It can be a very good position in later labor if the woman is having trouble getting into a deep relaxation mode. I, for one, didn't use it in either birth with the exception of trying it out at the start of my second birth. It hurt like hell so I abandoned it and moved on (exactly how a Bradley-trained person should). It just irks me that the data for what TBM is so skewed here. People have one idea of it in their minds and no amount of actual information will change it so I guess I'll shut up about it from here on out. But as a person who knows in detail exactly what is taught (since I'm an instructor) I can say with confidence that the view of it is often incorrect here on these boards.

I have no doubt that TBM has changed since the original version of his book, and that TBM has helped many people. I do not think it is a bad thing -- I think it has helped many people have natural births who otherwise would not have.

I am referring to Husband Coached Childbirth, the book, which is what I brought up in my previous post. It does advocate routine episiotomy. He says most women need it, and that under the best of all possible circumstances, 50% of women need it. But since we don't have the best possible circumstances, more than 50% should have it. My other issue is with the concept of husband-coached childbirth. At the time the book was written, it probably was a big improvement. But I don't see it that way today.

[Aura_Kitten]

Originally Posted by cmb123

... I think that deep of a mutual understanding between a woman and a male partner is unusual.

wow. how unfortunate.

[CrunchMama]

Two posters brought up some interesting thoughts. One said that we should go back to "The Red Tent' era births where it's only women being there for the birth, and another brought up how not having the father there sounds like something from the 1950's. Really interesting and got me thinking.

It's kind of a viscious circle. If we don't involve the fathers, they don't know what's going on. The reaction to ignorance is often fear, which leads not to respect and reverence but to disrespect,flippancy and feeling threatened. I think in the red tent days, it was an accepted fact that women had a certain power to give birth. It was their department and men left it to them. It was a Mystery to men, but in a good way. I'm not a historian and if someone knows more about this, please share, I'd love to learn more.
It seems like in the more recent 1950's scenario, men have no respect for the power of birth or for women. And they're scared of, and threatened by it. But hey, they figured out a way to get control of the situation! Enter modern male-centered obstetrics and you have men who love to micro-manage and control every aspect of pregnancy and birth, from telling you how much you should weigh to slicing your vagina to "help" the baby out. Sorry, bit of a rant and maybe lost track of my thoughts a bit. Whew!
Anyway, my point being (I think) that it's dangerous not to include them without explaining to them why. I guess that starts with teaching our children to appreciate the beautiful and sacred gifts of both women and men.

[amyjeans]

Originally Posted by Chiromom

The true question I am asking (not that I am uninterested in other dialogue) is: How do we come to the conclusion of what role the father takes? Ultimately, what I am advocating is that the decision or process of deciding/discovering his role be allowed to occur as organically as possible (just like birth itself YKWIM?)

If you look at other cultures, perhaps those that have not evolved "socially" as we have (good?bad?indifferent?) some have chosen to exclude the male from the birth event. Whether its because their ignorance concludes that birth is a "female" thing and should be kept to that sex as routine, or that they believe men's role in birth is not significant enough to warrant participation.
When I talk about "socially" evolved, I consider those cultures who are not socially driven, or "be as the others" mentality. OT, this type of thinking leads to mainstream, follow the heard lifestyles and causes those of us who stray from the path to be viewed as outcasts. Pity our society has come to this...
Back on topic...sorry.
I believe there are so many different factors that guide an individual to consider a partner in the birth experience. Not just social, but emotional, spiritual, historical and even financial. What is important to note is the individual's choice.
Allowing the decision to occur organically depends greatly on the relationship and if both parties are open to the full knowledge of birth. What have they been taught? How do their view the birth experience as individuals, and as a couple? Are the partners comfortable providing the needed support, or would they feel shunned by the womans need for privacy?
If the couple embraced the birth for what it is...natural and beautiful, and without fear, perhaps they would both find the experience mutually benefical.(sigh...if only...)I think this embrace, would lead to the organic path, but only with sound knowledge of its intricacies.

[Artisan]

Originally Posted by klothos

wow. how unfortunate.

I don't view it as unfortunate, unless the mother is desirous of something that she's not getting from the father. I don't believe men are meant to be midwives, that is, "with woman" during birth. I'm not saying they should not be present, just that they are different people . They are not women, nor can we expect them to be women, even with lots of classes and training and spiritual connectedness.

[philomom]

Jeez, reader, I so disagree. I do not even want to think about the kind of birth I would have had with only the women of my family there and no Dp. It would have been the hugest nightmare.
I do think that a loving male partner is the only doula I will ever need. I'm sure that there are some women out there who agree with me.
My Dp, as I said in my pp, was amazing and totally respectful of the birth process. He followed all my orders and helped tremendously to keep the the hospital staff out of my hair and off the midwife's back.
I'm so happy to tell my children their birth stories and include all the bits about "what Dad did to help me birth you".

[cmb123]

Originally Posted by reader

I don't view it as unfortunate, unless the mother is desirous of something that she's not getting from the father. I don't believe men are meant to be midwives, that is, "with woman" during birth. I'm not saying they should not be present, just that they are different people . They are not women, nor can we expect them to be women, even with lots of classes and training and spiritual connectedness.

I don've view it as unfortunate either. Not at all. If I had a male parter, I wouldn't send him to classes or training etc..to teach him how to be a woman.

Originally Posted by philomom

I do not even want to think about the kind of birth I would have had with only the women of my family there and no Dp. It would have been the hugest nightmare.

Well, that's part of the issue too, really. Our society today doesn't continue to support us having strong female connections,the way women used to. Hence, why we even HAVE things like Childbirth CLASSES, and breastfeeding CLASSES and the like. All things that we as women should already know about by the time we are ready to have children.

Originally Posted by philomom

My Dp, as I said in my pp, was amazing and totally respectful of the birth process. He followed all my orders and helped tremendously to keep the the hospital staff out of my hair and off the midwife's back.

Same with this part... women should be able to birth without worrying about fending off enemies. The birth environment should be safe and supportive without the need for "protectors".

There are clearly lots of women who have loved having their husbands there. That's great- I certainly am not trying to invalidate your feelings, that's for sure. I just still don't think that males have an "innate" role in birth.

[Aura_Kitten]

men have an innate role in birth because they are half of the reason WHY the birth is happening in the first place!

i just view birth as such an intimate, spiritual, personal experience, and i just can't imagine sharing that with anyone other than the person who helped make the baby to begin with.

but maybe i should also clarify... my partner is also my best friend, and i've always felt somewhat distanced from other women. (in a way, women have felt like the "opposite gender" to me...) so these are probably (definitely) coloring my perspective on this...

[akmbloom]

I think the answer is: whatever the mom wants. And that might be "leave me alone, I don't want you here right now."

I think this is true, and I also think that the mom (especially a first-timer) might not know what she wants in advance of labor.... I sure didn't. It was important for me to have everyone involved in the birth be really flexible and to understand that I might want to change my mind - maybe other people could plan out their partners' and support persons' role ahead of time. I wasn't one of those laboring women who underwent a change of personality, but I wouldn't have been able to predict how I'd respond either. In the end I was happy with everyone's roles (well, except for my MIL who snuck up to the birthing suite door and opened it in order to listen to me laboring ) but that was only because I felt comfortable telling them exactly what they should be doing.

[Aura_Kitten]

Originally Posted by akmbloom

I think this is true, and I also think that the mom (especially a first-timer) might not know what she wants in advance of labor....

even those of us (eh-hem, like me) who are fully prepared might realize that, in the heat of labor, they really want something completely different than what they had expected or planned for. i think mamas should be prepared for the things that they can't really plan for, like what they are going to want when they are pushing, when they'll need something to drink, when they want people to rub a certain spot or keep their hands off of them, etc. and everyone / anyone present at the birth needs to be comfortable with just letting the mama listen to her own instincts and give directions... and the mama herself needs to be comfortable with telling other people exactly what she wants.

[Artisan]

men have an innate role in birth because they are half of the reason WHY the birth is happening in the first place!

You could say this about so many things... do men have an innate role in breastfeeding? No one would be breastfeeding if there weren't men to procreate with. But most women consider BFing to be a woman thing -- most of us don't turn to men for help with BFing. Are there exceptions? Yeah. Dr. Sears and Dr. Newman, maybe. But we're talking two people out of billions.

I also think that the mom (especially a first-timer) might not know what she wants in advance of labor.... I sure didn't. It was important for me to have everyone involved in the birth be really flexible and to understand that I might want to change my mind.

YES. You can't know ahead of time.

Listen, my husband was at both of my births -- he will be at any future births. I'm not advocating a "kick 'em to the curb" attitude here. To reiterate, it's the notion of husband coached childbirth that I have an issue with.