father's prescence and failure to progress? - Page 2

[LoveChild421]

Originally Posted by starlein26

I guess the fact that I "take a dump" in front of dh almost every morning made labor no big thing for me...:

same here
He slept through most of my labor- I really didn't care if he woke up or not- I just wanted to be with my midwife until labor got really rough and then I wanted him with me.

[pdx.mothernurture]

Originally Posted by phoebemommy

I read his book Birth and Breastfeeding, and he mentioned this in a different way -- if I remember correctly, he said it's awkward for most women to push like they're taking a dump in front of their husbands, and possibly take a dump in the process (my tacky verbage, of course)...

First, this is a facinating thread. With regard to Odent attributing many cases of "Failure to Progress" to women feeling awkward during pushing...FTP is a term usually relating to stalled dilation, rather than a long pushing stage. Unless he's suggesting that the anticipation of pushing in the presense of her partner stalls labor?

Jen

[pdx.mothernurture]

Originally Posted by MamaInTheBoonies

A mother in labor picks up on everything, even if she is not actively trying to, as it is an instinct to keep herself and her newborn safe, as that is when they are most vulnerable.

Thank you for reminding us of this so eloquently.

Jen

[LavenderMae]

Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds

I disagree with Dr. Odent. I think the most common cause for a long and difficult labor (in this country anyway) is the doctor and other medical attendants, both directly in their interactions with the mother, and indirectly by making the father uncomfortable and/or fearful (which transfers to the mother.)

I agree.
My first thoughts when I read the OP was it's not the father it's the OB, nurses and or midwives that hinder the woman. Of course in some cases the father probably does hinder the woman but I wouldn't jump to that conclusion right away, especially since she has been intimate with the father and not with the others attending her during her labor.
I do not poo in front of my dh ever but I have no hang ups at all birthing in front of him (I don't have a problem getting pregnant with him either ).

[LaceyTX]

I was definitely inhibited for a little while in the beginning pushing stage -- I felt a little weird with my husband "all up in my business" while I was supposed to be grunting and pushing out a 9lb baby. But pretty soon the back labor pain was so intense that modesty was overruled and I just wanted to "push the pain away" and get it all over with. It was weird, both that I felt shy about him watching me, and that he was such an inhibition and emotional support at the same time.

[huggerwocky]

Who knows, I took the opportunity to instruct my husband that he better fully expect me to poo and if he ever mentions that I did he'll die a slow and gruesome death. I also told him to stand behind me and not observe me from the front.

[cottonwood]

Originally Posted by pdx.mothernurture

With regard to Odent attributing many cases of "Failure to Progress" to women feeling awkward during pushing...FTP is a term usually relating to stalled dilation, rather than a long pushing stage. Unless he's suggesting that the anticipation of pushing in the presense of her partner stalls labor?

I think that was a misparaphrase from the poster. Odent doesn't attribute FTP to feeling awkward during pushing; he says that FTP *and* prolonged pushing phases are both attributable to feeling inhibited and having nervous people around.

[anniegirl]

What a fascinating topic. I really like the poop analogy, it makes total sense.

I wonder if part of the reason some women fail to progress is because they don't feel comfortable with bodily functions in general, especially in front of others. Some women never pass gas in front of their husbands or let them see them without makeup. So it becomes a catch-22...she can't relax enough to let labor progress because of the people around her (maybe in particular her husband), but our culture and modern medicine have taught her that she wouldn't be safe if she chose to be alone. A friend of mine recently had a c-section for failure to progress, she's the prim and proper type and I'm sure she never felt free to just labor unhindered and her dh is the kind of guy who would be too much in her face. She was horribly afraid of a c but I think it became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

My dh was there both times, neither of us has any bodily function hang-ups around each other and he was smart enough to keep his mouth shut unless I reached out for him. But I recently confessed to an irl friend that I didn't really need him during labor. I did want him there because I think it's good that he witnessed his childrens births and he would have been hurt to be left out, but I didn't need him.

[phoebemommy]

Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds

I think that was a misparaphrase from the poster. Odent doesn't attribute FTP to feeling awkward during pushing; he says that FTP *and* prolonged pushing phases are both attributable to feeling inhibited and having nervous people around.

:
On the misparaphrase... I wasn't really talking about the "failure to progress" part, but his thoughts elsewhere on the overall relationship between woman and her partner (and other people) during labor.

Though it does remind me of the stories in Ina May's Spiritual Midwifery where the father wasn't bringing good juice in the room and was screwing up the mother's vibes, thereby slowing her down. It overall seems more like a spiritual/emotional issue than a medical one, and I wouldn't put it past Odent to conflate the two.

[poetesss]

Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds
I disagree with Dr. Odent. I think the most common cause for a long and difficult labor (in this country anyway) is the doctor and other medical attendants, both directly in their interactions with the mother, and indirectly by making the father uncomfortable and/or fearful (which transfers to the mother.)

I also agree that the most common cause would be the medical attendants.... after all, if we want to take the poo analogy further would you rather poo in front of dh or in front of a stranger? Give me dh any day!

That said, if you have an attendant who is outta the way and lets you do your thing but the dh is causing the hangup by his anxiety and fears, then I guess I could see this as causing a slowdown. Especially if the attendants have confidence in you and are calm but it's the dh alone who's "freaking out" so to speak. Not a good dynamic....

[poetesss]

Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds

So it's not a black and white "father at birth is always good" or "father at birth is always not good." It depends on several different factors.

I loved this post.... as my pregnancy goes along and I start to reflect on this stuff more and more I find myself wanting to scream when I hear the phrase "husband coached childbirth." I understand that for some ppl that's what floats their boat, but I personally don't like the idea of dh "coaching" me in any respect.

There's also the cultural aspect. For people of some cultures, childbirth is totally a woman thing, men not welcome. For them, feeling pressured to go along with this idea that the dh "should" be there could very well be counterproductive.

[phoebemommy]

My only theoretical concern about my DH has been not that he'll freak out, but that he has a tendency to be a steamroller. He's a take charge kind of guy and has ideas about how things should go, and if I'm showing any waffling or indecision, he jumps right in and takes over. I appreciate this quality in him, actually, because there are plenty of times where I want to fade into the woodwork, like social situations, buying a car, etc. We've worked on this a lot, and at this point I'm pretty confident that he knows when to charge in and when to back off. Plus, I think he'll be good at taking charge of the things I can't take charge of while I'm laboring, and if I hit that point I've seen in some birth stories where I say "I can't do this," even though I can, he won't wuss out on me.

[natashaccat]

Originally Posted by phoebemommy

My only theoretical concern about my DH has been not that he'll freak out, but that he has a tendency to be a steamroller. He's a take charge kind of guy and has ideas about how things should go, and if I'm showing any waffling or indecision, he jumps right in and takes over. I appreciate this quality in him, actually, because there are plenty of times where I want to fade into the woodwork, like social situations, buying a car, etc. We've worked on this a lot, and at this point I'm pretty confident that he knows when to charge in and when to back off. Plus, I think he'll be good at taking charge of the things I can't take charge of while I'm laboring, and if I hit that point I've seen in some birth stories where I say "I can't do this," even though I can, he won't wuss out on me.

I think it's a question of how you respond to his steamroller approach? Whould it make you feel safe or would it be irritating? Is there any chance he will panic if things get dicey and direct that energy against you? Is he patient?

Male impatience is something that really gets to me, I've been horribly conditioned by my father against making him wait. (He used to do things like leave for places without me when I took too long to get ready, it sounds kind of silly but this was part of a pattern of emotional abuse.) So anyway I've since realized this conditioning really came out during my first birth and caused wierd energy during the birth.

[pageta]

I find this a very interesting thread. My dh is terrified of birth - afraid that I or the baby will die. It would be perfectly fine with me if he wasn't there, but he seems to think he should be for some reason. I don't think my labor with ds was slowed by dh's presence even though it was a very long labor. But I would still be so happy to excuse my dh from being there if he didn't feel comfortable (since he can't do anything but watch me suffer).

I definitely don't want my mother knowing I'm in labor because I know she'll worry (even though she's in Florida and I'm in Nebraska). I didn't want my MIL knowing I was in labor, but with ds, we had to ask her to go let out our dog since labor was taking so long (about 24 hours from when we arrived at the hospital until ds was born). I just know everyone would be sitting there - regardless if they were at home or at work - waiting for the phone to ring to hear that the baby had been born and I don't want that kind of pressure.

I need to ponder this some more...

[phoebemommy]

Originally Posted by natashaccat

I think it's a question of how you respond to his steamroller approach? Whould it make you feel safe or would it be irritating? Is there any chance he will panic if things get dicey and direct that energy against you? Is he patient?

I think a year ago I would have worried about the steamrolling, but now, especially since I've been pregnant, we've really worked out a rhythm with it. He's grown up a lot, and so have I. He's been really receptive to all the ideas I've been offering up about how I'll need to release my intellect and become an animal, and he's really comfortable with the idea of homebirth (which we're doing). Anymore he steamrolls me only when I need it, if that makes any sense.

[Quagmire]

Wow, this is a really interesting thread.

I have been feeling more and more like birth is an innately private moment. When I picture myself giving birth, I'm very much in my own head. I thought DH would be right there, but he does have a tendency to panic and allow himself to be scared into decisions in situations where my health or the health of our baby appear to be compromised. That could include "troublesome" sounds once I hit transition.

So this is definitely something to consider.

[cottonwood]

Originally Posted by phoebemommy

Though it does remind me of the stories in Ina May's Spiritual Midwifery where the father wasn't bringing good juice in the room and was screwing up the mother's vibes, thereby slowing her down.

Well again, what I got from that was that it was the birth attendants (the midwives) who were creating that situation. In one story ("Susan's Birth") the mother and father are in great spirits when Ina May arrives, sitting together on the bed: "his blue eyes twinkled and his grin went from ear to ear." The mother "smiled until her nose wrinkled" and her pupils were dilated, a sign of relaxation and sex hormones being released in the body. So apparently they were doing well with each other up to that point.

Ina May then took the father's place on the bed and started rubbing the mother's legs and belly and did a cervical check. She "could tell by how hard it was to get a good hold of her thigh muscles that she was going to have to relax quite a bit to let her baby out. Her legs began to shake and get rigid..."

Then, "they both began to look worried. Linda was obviously wishing that there was some way she could get out of this situation she found herself in. I stationed William on one side of Linda and had him rub one of her legs while I sat across from him, rubbed the other leg and talked to Linda about what she could change in herself that would make her better able to handle her labor. The first change she could make, I told her, would be to decide to give up being fat[...] Linda was trying hard not to complain but couldn't hold still enough during a rush to stay relaxed. I suggested that she and William switch positions and that she rub his legs for a while [...] it looked to me like she was squeezing his bare legs harder with each rush and not noticing that she was pinching and pulling hairs. It was interesting to me to see that William and Linda, although they obviously loved each other, weren't very easy about communicating with each other."

Ina May then had Linda start singing, in the hopes that it would relax her. It did, but "William didn't seem to have felt the change in the vibrations that everyone else [including four other midwives] had -- he had been strumming the chords to the song on his guitar, and he was trying so hard not to miss a chord that he didn't notice what a pure place his wife was in while she was singing... she looked at William, wanting to know if he had felt the same thing she had. He got huffy with Linda for questioning him, and when Margaret and I said something to him about being angry, he got angrier." This is when Ina May had him leave.

Now, c'mon. A husband and wife have this perfectly sweet intimate thing going. It's working for them. Then somebody comes in, breaks them apart, and takes over, directing each of them how to relate to each other and how to touch each other. It's not what they would have been doing naturally, so they're not doing it well and therefore it's making things worse. They're self-conscious, especially probably the husband, being surrounded now by five women who are telling him how to be with his wife and evaluating his performance. Ina May is meanwhile making judgements about them and they've got to be aware of that, especially in such an emotionally charged and sensitive atmosphere.

Ina May finally hits on something to help the mother relax, but the father still feels outside of it. The mother looks to him, hoping to see him inside again too, but he isn't. He's been put on the spot, and he's embarrassed and angry to now be outside when he was so recently in. Not to mention that Ina May has the mother's trust: even though she interrupted the flow of energy, putting her fingers up the mother's vagina, ordering people around, and casting her critical eye on the mother and father, no one is of a mind to consider that this might have thrown the labor off. So when she suggests something that helps the mother relax, well she's saved the day.

So, you know, there's two sides to every story. I have no doubt that my first midwife -- who practiced very similarly to Ina May -- felt my husband to be equally worthless. He didn't get angry, but he was very unhappy and worried. But looking back, I can see how her taking over robbed him of his ability to support me. She was the "expert", and we had hired her, essentially, to do this. We just didn't realize then the psychological effect it would have on us as a couple. We didn't feel comfortable being with each other as we usually are. We weren't being naturally physical and relating unselfconsciously to each other. We were literally incapable of doing so in that environment. Does that mean we weren't good at communicating with each other? No. It did mean that we were inhibited by the midwife's presence, and afraid to do anything she might not approve of.

Fast forward to my last birth in which there was no one to observe us or judge us or tell us what to do. He was fantastic, totally in it with me. Hearing that, my first midwife might say, "well, he learned how to be with you in birth." Not so. He always knew, he just finally felt free to be that way.

[sapphire_chan]

Which is why I don't recommend Spiritual Midwifery to anyone who's already decided to have a homebirth. The stories drive me crazy.

[poetesss]

Holy cow, is that the type of story you'll find in Spiritual Midwifery? I've never really read it, just heard raves about it, although the more I poke around here I find mentions like this of the annoying interfering-ish stuff done to the mammas (I think I remember someone mentioning ina may suddenly massaging a laboring mom's nipples or something). Yow...okay, this is pushing me more towards UC!!

[cottonwood]

Actually, there are some great stories in Spiritual Midwifery. Ina May didn't attend all the births. But yeah, she was (I don't know if she still is) very hands-on, heavy on the directing and monitoring. She learned how to attend a birth from a doctor, after all. She also considered herself something of a spiritual mentor to these women. She was really one of the first to be talking about homebirth so boldly and gathering statistics, so she kind of set the standard. There are a lot of midwives from that generation who do the "take charge" thing and like to think it is their place to psychologically evaluate their clients, especially the "difficult" ones (that is, the ones who want to have some say in the management of their births.) I see this all the time over at the Midwifery Today forums and it's galling. I just cannot imagine inviting someone into this sacred space and her having this attitude that she's going to whip things into shape and save these ridiculous women from themselves.

But, on the other side, are the midwives who are humble and respectful and compassionate, and who really understand the ramifications of birth being a sexual process (unlike the lip service given to it in Spiritual Midwifery.) I've met many like this. So if your desire is to have a midwife-attended birth, don't give up hope!