or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Is a vaginal delivery w/ drugs still "natural"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is a vaginal delivery w/ drugs still "natural" - Page 2

Poll Results: Is having a vaginal delivery w/ drugs still a "natural birth"?

  • 6% (17)
    Yes, I believe it is.
  • 93% (226)
    No, for a natural birth you need to have been drug free.
243 Total Votes  
post #21 of 62

Natural is drug-free
with drugs it is just vaginal
post #22 of 62
Originally Posted by pamamidwife View Post
I think this is more a reflection on the increased rate of cesarean births...that a baby that comes out of your vagina is natural.

yes.... very....
post #23 of 62
Originally Posted by AllisonR View Post
What if a mom tries for natural, and then right before she delivers the placenta some medical person gives her pit in the thigh without asking because it is "routine"?
I'm not sure how this would bear on it at all. If she's about to deliver the placenta, her baby is already born. How can anything done after the baby is born have any bearing on whether or not the childbirth was natural?
post #24 of 62
Originally Posted by paxye View Post

Natural is drug-free
with drugs it is just vaginal
May I just say that after three unwanted c-sections, "just vaginal" is a rather bizarre term to me?
post #25 of 62
Hmm.. I'm not sure about this. I had a small amount of entonox during my labour, but I gave birth at home, in water with no dilation checks, or interventions, my husband caught our baby and the cord was left intact until after the placenta turned up in its own time. Dd had no vitamin K or anything else so it was 99% natural. I know people who have had drug free births but have had waters broke, lying on a bed with a monitor and their babies have had vit k, eye drops etc so I would say their entry to the world was less natural.
I guess I believe that active birth without pitocin/hands on medical assistance is more natural with or without drugs than the most drugfree ob/gyn birth.
post #26 of 62
Natural birth, to me, means giving birth the way nature intended - without medication.

I can see how there might be some grey area because some women have small doses of medication, some women have medication but it doesn't work, others take homeopathic remedies or herbal remedies, so really I guess "natural" is in the eye of the beholder.
post #27 of 62
so since I had nitris with DS1 does that mean I did not have a natural birth?
post #28 of 62
I think that a natural birth is one without pain medications.

My first birth, I had nubain and it was a vaginal birth. I don't consider that natural.

My second, I had no pain meds at all, but did have antibiotics for GBS. Though abx are drugs, I do consider that a natural birth. I was feeling it just like we have for millenia, lol.
post #29 of 62
Sounds like a potentially loaded question to me, when you consider how very much emotional valuation we place on the term "natural birth". Would we use the term "unnatural birth" to refer to anything else? Personally, I prefer more specific descriptive phrases instead; such as unmedicated vaginal birth, vaginal birth w/ IV pain meds, etc, when it's appropriate to use such descriptions. Other times, of course, it's just more practical to stick with the phrase "natural birth". And if we're gonna be sticklers on that, well then anything other than unassisted, unmedicated vaginal birth would be something less than natural, wouldn't it? Splitting hairs, of course. If you had to pin me to the two answers in the survey, I guess I'd have to say that no, the medicated birth is not "natural". No offense to anyone who might perceive that negatively. It happens to be what I had w/ three of mine though (a dose of IV pain meds or two), and I felt pretty "natural" about them all. Then again, maybe the hair-splitting doesn't matter to me.
post #30 of 62
heck no. drugs aren't "natural." however, i don't think not natural=wrong or horrible.

to me a "natural" birth is both vaginal and drug-free, that means labor augmenting drugs as well as pain meds.
post #31 of 62
I had two epidurals and will never claim to have a natural birth. I will joke that I had a "natural epidural birth" because aside from the epidural I had a lot of non-standard things at the birth like delayed clamping of cord and no shot of pit and other things.
post #32 of 62
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
May I just say that after three unwanted c-sections, "just vaginal" is a rather bizarre term to me?
I'm bitter....
post #33 of 62

I voted yes..........

but with a lot of reservation.

I am a firm believer in "natural as possible" birth.

If a mama births the best she can and ends up with a demerol shot in her butt or a hit of laughing gas....I wouldn't deny her her 'natural birth' status.

*I* think that drug free is THE way to go, but I never like ending up in a pissing contest kwim?

p.s. IMO Epidural voids Natural
post #34 of 62
Originally Posted by paxye View Post
I'm bitter....

I'm so sorry.
post #35 of 62
so although I voted no I think that there could be things like one shot in an long labor -- that would be closer to natural- than say a full on epidural. KWIM
post #36 of 62
The whole idea here is that you are in a "natural" state during childbirth. This means that you are essentially giving birth as women have for centuries before you - before IVs, before epidurals, before C-sections. You can say that you've had a "vaginal" birth, but this doesn't make it "natural". To me, a natural childbirth is one with the least amount of interventions - declining all that are not necessary (and this includes most).

Some women take this as an insult - as though I think less of them for using meds. Not so! I wholeheartedly believe that every woman should do what is best for herself and her child. But I also don't think that a medicated birth should be dressed up as "natural". Pain is natural when you're pushing a 7-10lb living being out of your vagina.
post #37 of 62
why does natural vs medicated mean a pissing contest?

the fact of the matter depends upon what you're saying. however, if a woman has an epidural (or even shots of narcotics), it's not natural childbirth.

I had two shots of Stadol during my 29 hour labor. I also had Pitocin. I don't think that either of these drugs are "natural" or meant that I had "natural" childbirth just because my baby emerged from my vagina.

I think any negative feelings about natural vs medicated come from the person with the feelings, not the meaning of the words.
post #38 of 62
Originally Posted by lotusdebi View Post
No, but I do recognize that some people use the terms "natural" and "vaginal" synonymously - especially in mainstream circles. I always ask for clarification ("by 'natural' do you mean 'vaginal' or do you mean 'drug-free'?" and I specify when I'm discussing birth.
EXACTLY!!!!!!!! I usually say "natural doesn't simply meant it comes out the same way it went in". You'd be shocked how many people look at me funny.
post #39 of 62
Nope, I dont believe it is.. I have had three pitocin induced births and went pain med free with two of them and I still don't concider them "natural".. I call them my "natural as possible" births. LOL
post #40 of 62
"I call them my "natural as possible" births. LOL"

ok that is more what I was getting at and as I said I voted no natural and vaginal are not the same
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Birth and Beyond
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Is a vaginal delivery w/ drugs still "natural"