the absurdity of attempting a "natural birth" in a hospital setting - Page 5

[Emilie]

I feel that this is a homebirth forum. I have trouble defending my homebirth choices on here in this manner? Anyone else feelng this way?
There is a difference between discussion, debate and defending.
We defend all the time. Why here too?

[moonfirefaery]

I agree. I think it is inappropriate for us to have to defend our choice to homebirth here on the homebirth support forum. This thread wasn't meant to be about hospital vs homebirth, just about the (lack of) likelyhood of actually having a completely natural birth in the hospital.

[_betsy_]

I'm sorry i my statements made anyone feel the need to defend. Not my intention. I'm fascinated by homebirth, and very curious about it, which is why I read this forum. As things stand now, I don't see us being comfortable having one. I guess I was feeling pretty defensive of my choice to birth in a hospital, and I may have overstepped my bounds.

[Emilie]

IIts ok!
We want women to come on here and discuss and learn and understand! keep reading and posting. Just do not be surprised when we do not think Hospital birth is hunk dory. Cause for many of us- it was not!

[Momma Aimee]

I think it is inappropriate for us to have to defend our choice to homebirth here on the homebirth support forum.

i never attacked hm

i simply disagree with the stated opinion that is is "absurd" to think you can have a natraul child brith at the hosptial.

it is abserd, it is possible.

hb is great -- but can be great without hosptials having to be bad.

[Emilie]

I guess it all boils down to how you classify NATURAL birth.
What your criteria and expectations are.

[mama_at_home]

hb is great -- but can be great without hosptials having to be bad.

I don't think most of us are saying hospitals are bad. We are saying they are not the best or safest place for a healthy mom to give birth. Hospitals are for sick people and emergencies-a healthy mom with a normal labor does not fall into either of those categories.

[PGNPORTLAND]

Who has put down homebirth? Where, on this whole thread, has anyone said anything negative about homebirth?

I came back to see how this thread was going this morning and found that yet more people, have called my hospital experienc "lucky". I would NEVER call anyone's homebirth "lucky". Ever.

Look at the title of this thread "The 'absudity' of having a natural hospital birth. That really offends me. My birth was not "absurd". No birth is "absurd". What an ugly, demeaning, hurtful word.

I have no problem with homebirth. I fully support a woman's choice to birth where she wants with or without attendants. But tell me this, why can't your beautiful homebirth be enough for you? Why can't you just be thrilled that you got the birth you wanted? Why do you have to criticize someone else who ALSO got the birth they want just because it was different from yours.

And your right, this is the homebirth forum. So why do you need to talk about "absurd" hospital births. It's not a freaking contest. And you have no right to call MY birthing experience "upsurd or lucky". It was beautiful and powerful and life-changing and perfect.

[Emmeline II]

Originally Posted by _betsy_

I'm sorry i my statements made anyone feel the need to defend. Not my intention. I'm fascinated by homebirth, and very curious about it, which is why I read this forum. As things stand now, I don't see us being comfortable having one. I guess I was feeling pretty defensive of my choice to birth in a hospital, and I may have overstepped my bounds.

I believe that most posters have given birth in a hospital and are speaking from experience. I had #1 in a hospital (AD military) with pre-eclampsia. Now everyone would likely agree that a mom with pre-e should be in a hospital, but, had I been working with my current midwife for #1 I don't think I would have become pre-eclamptic to begin with (just for the record I believe that many [not all] cases of pre-e are due to diet/lifestyle issues). I believe that MWs should be the standard of care and referrals to OBs when complications arise.

[EastonsMom]

Originally Posted by wednesday

Today I said to him, "You know, I think going to a hospital for a birth but wanting it to be natural and wanting my practitioners to be knowledgeable and experienced in dealing with natural birth...would be like going to McDonald's to order a Big Mac, but asking them to make it with organic, antibiotic-free pastured-raised beef, and have it be prepared by people highly educated in nutrition. What I'd be asking for just isn't on the menu."

LOVE that that is awesome!!

I shar eyour same fear! Where I had E. was amazingly perfect but Germany is a LONG way to go from Lil Rock! I have said more than once that I will not get preggers here that we have to go back to Germany for it to even be a thought!!

[momz3]

Originally Posted by PGNPORTLAND

Who has put down homebirth? Where, on this whole thread, has anyone said anything negative about homebirth?

I came back to see how this thread was going this morning and found that yet more people, have called my hospital experienc "lucky". I would NEVER call anyone's homebirth "lucky". Ever.

Look at the title of this thread "The 'absudity' of having a natural hospital birth. That really offends me. My birth was not "absurd". No birth is "absurd". What an ugly, demeaning, hurtful word.

I have no problem with homebirth. I fully support a woman's choice to birth where she wants with or without attendants. But tell me this, why can't your beautiful homebirth be enough for you? Why can't you just be thrilled that you got the birth you wanted? Why do you have to criticize someone else who ALSO got the birth they want just because it was different from yours.

And your right, this is the homebirth forum. So why do you need to talk about "absurd" hospital births. It's not a freaking contest. And you have no right to call MY birthing experience "upsurd or lucky". It was beautiful and powerful and life-changing and perfect.

Ditto. Also the "healthy moms" phrase was a little disturbing as well. Because a person gives birth in a hospital does NOT make them unhealthy and their experience "lucky". There is bad on both ends. There are horror stories on both ends...

[Momma Aimee]

I came back to see how this thread was going this morning and found that yet more people, have called my hospital experienc "lucky". I would NEVER call anyone's homebirth "lucky". Ever.

Look at the title of this thread "The 'absudity' of having a natural hospital birth. That really offends me. My birth was not "absurd". No birth is "absurd". What an ugly, demeaning, hurtful word.

excately

[pamamidwife]

what is true is that the chance of having a natural, unitervened birth is a HUGE challenge in a hospital setting. Not that it doesn't happen, because it does. It just requires tons of defensive planning and/or a great provider. It's not easy to have a good, natural hospital birth experience. I hope even those people that have those good hospital experiences can recognize this.

[mama_at_home]

I had a hospital birth with my first. I dont' want to go into details but despite arriving there dialated to a 9, I still ended up with pretty much every intervention except a c-section.

I don't think anyone here is calling anyone's birth absurd. I believe the OP was trying to point out that no hospital birth is ever truly 100% intervention-free. They just aren't. If you enjoyed your hospital birth so much, then why are you in the homebirth forum defending it? I don't go to the UC forum defending my midwife-attended homebirth. I am not going to go over there and criticise mamas who believe that midwife attended births are unnecessary and potentionally negative. If you loved your hospital birth so much, why does it matter what we think? But the point is, we really aren't saying anyone's birth experience is absurd, we are saying that trying to have a 100% intervention-free birth at a hospital is not going to happen. Anyway, I have 3 kids wanting my attention, so I cannot finish my thoughts right now.

[Momma Aimee]

what is true is that the chance of having a natural, unitervened birth is a HUGE challenge in a hospital setting. Not that it doesn't happen, because it does. It just requires tons of defensive planning and/or a great provider. It's not easy to have a good, natural hospital birth experience. I hope even those people that have those good hospital experiences can recognize this.

that is why it is not "lucky" -- it does not happen by chance any more thana good home birth "just happens"

Birth -- no matter who, how or where -- is work.

Aimee

[wednesday]

Originally Posted by Aimee21972

i simply disagree with the stated opinion that is is "absurd" to think you can have a natraul child brith at the hosptial.

it is abserd, it is possible.

hb is great -- but can be great without hosptials having to be bad.

Well, I still think it's "absurd." I don't think there is anything natural about total strangers coming in and out during labor, or about having to put up signs and notes telling those strangers about your preferences, or being in an unfamiliar institutional setting.

Also, the more I thought about the opinion that homebirth should be chosen for itself, as opposed to being chosen for "not being the hospital," the more I realized that didn't quite sit right with me. It's not like they're two totally equal choices and you can just pick one or the other. The hospital is the default, expected choice. Practically every single conversation you have with anyone before, during or after a pregnancy regarding homebirth would boil down to "Why didn't you want to have the baby at a hospital?" So I don't think framing one's desire for a homebirth in terms of what the hospital does not offer is a "poor" reason to choose HB. I think it is simply a reflection of what the thought process is, since the norm in our culture is to give birth in a hospital.

To continue with the analogies I attempt to live as car-free as possible. I don't like spending money on gas, or car payments or repairs, or what auto dependency does to our environment and culture. So, I walk and I bike a great deal. If you asked me all the reasons I ride a bike to work instead of driving a car, I would be more likely to tell you "I like to save gas by not driving," than "I like to feel the wind in my face when I ride my bike." My answer would be framed that way because the norm in our culture is to drive everywhere. It certainly wouldn't mean my choice to bike to work is a poor choice.

I think you don't really support homebirth as much as you think you do. Why would you counsel someone that her DH's discomfort/anxiety with HB should pretty much have priority over her own preference to birth at home? You wouldn't say something like that unless you truly believed a hospital birth should be, in fact, the default. What if *I* was the one who wanted to birth in a hospital, and DH was pushing for homebirth? Would you still think the mother should follow what makes the father more comfortable, even if the father was the one who wanted to stay home and the mother wanted to go to the hospital? It's clear that YOU are more comfortable with hospital birth, so in your opinion if couples have conflict over this, whoever is leaning towards the choice you find "riskier" should just give in.

[wednesday]

Originally Posted by PGNPORTLAND

Look at the title of this thread "The 'absudity' of having a natural hospital birth. That really offends me. My birth was not "absurd". No birth is "absurd". What an ugly, demeaning, hurtful word.

: I think you are taking that choice of word way too personally. I never said anyone's birth was absurd.

[Momma Aimee]

Why would you counsel someone that her DH's discomfort/anxiety with HB should pretty much have priority over her own preference to birth at home? You wouldn't say something like that unless you truly believed a hospital birth should be, in fact, the default. What if *I* was the one who wanted to birth in a hospital, and DH was pushing for homebirth? Would you still think the mother should follow what makes the father more comfortable, even if the father was the one who wanted to stay home and the mother wanted to go to the hospital?

I do not advocate EITHER side over the other -- I am saying, again and again, that BOTH parents have a say in the birth of their child ... that teh father can not be removed from the equasion, he is a parent not a sperm-doner. If the dad wanted the hm and the momt he hosptial -- a comermise would still ahve to be reached. What I don't like is the "F**K the dad if he dosn't agree" theme. ANd that is true no matter what the birth dis-agreement is. the dad is the dad.

I do not think a birth choice that leaves the dad uneasy is a good birth choice -- no matter what it is (home, hosptial, unassisted, or drugged). And I thik that the dad's thoughts nad feels need to be part of what is considered when chooseing a birth location or "style".

[Arwyn]

To clarify - as I understand it, it is not hospital births that are being called absurd, just the odds of achieving a wonderful, natural, non-interventive hospital birth. The odds are absurd, the policies and procedures that create those odds are absurd, not the rare beautiful, empowering births that do take place there.

Secondly, I'm making an official moderator request that people stick to "I" statements ("I feel..." "I believe..." "In my experience..." etc). Accusations or insinuations about another person's education or preparedness or intentions will not be allowed.

Mod hat off.

Pauline, I don't understand why being called lucky for your amazing birth is insulting or offensive to you. I am lucky, and forever grateful, that I have an amazing partner who loves and supports me (I also worked darn hard to have as good a relationship as we do). I am lucky to have been born naturally, to have spent my first hours snuggled between my parents in one big bed. I am lucky to have been nursed for two years. I am lucky to be able to afford an awesome turkey dinner spread this week, to have two living, loving parents to come join me. I am lucky for so, so many things, I acknowledge that I am different and blessed in these things in a way the majority of Americans are/were not, and that does not devalue my experiences, but enhances my appreciation of them.

Yes, you worked hard to have the experience that you did, and that paid off for you. Why is acknowledging the element of luck in that experience offensive to you? In what way do you feel it diminishes it? Do you feel your work and effort are being discounted and your experience the product of only luck? These are serious questions, because I really don't understand.

[moonfirefaery]

I came back to see how this thread was going this morning and found that yet more people, have called my hospital experienc "lucky". I would NEVER call anyone's homebirth "lucky". Ever.

The two are not comparable. The risk of unnecessary intervention preventing you from having a natural birth in the hospital is much higher than at home. Anytime you take a huge risk, compared to a lower one, and get by unscathed, that's lucky IMO.

No birth is "absurd". What an ugly, demeaning, hurtful word.

Nobody called anyone's birth absurd, nor did anyone mention the 'abserdity of having' a natural hospital birth. The word attempt was use, not stating that it is absurd to have a natural hospital birth but to think that in the average hospital it is possible or easy to do so.

Why do you have to criticize someone else who ALSO got the birth they want just because it was different from yours.

Nobody is criticizing anyone, just stating that the risk of intervention is lower at home which is accurate.

that BOTH parents have a say in the birth of their child ... that teh father can not be removed from the equasion, he is a parent not a sperm-doner

I beg to differ. He can be removed if his negativity is causing a problem, and it has happened in many hospital births. Birth is a lot more about the mother than the baby or the father, and homebirth is safer for the baby anyway. Why should the parent do what is more dangerous to her and her child just to ease a father's feelings? Why are his feelings more important? No one is saying his feelings aren't important at all, only that the mother's outweigh his when it comes to HER body. That you don't OBEY your husband doesn't mean he doesn't have a say. You are confusing 'having a say' with 'obedience.' Having a say means your opinion is heard, not necessarily heeded.

What I don't like is the "F**K the dad if he dosn't agree" theme.

I don't like your 'F**ck the mom if she doesn't agree" theme. No one is saying we don't care what they think, only that we're not going to obey if we feel something else is best for us. No one is saying F the dad, and I think it's quite offensive that you insinuate we are saying that if we don't go along with whatever they want for our bodies.

I do not think a birth choice that leaves the dad uneasy is a good birth choice

I think it is better for the dad to be uneasy than for the mother (you know, the one actually pregnant and doing the birthing) to be uneasy. Ideally neither parent should be uneasy, but if it comes down to a situation where the parents disagree on birthing and neither can sway the other, the mother whose body it is should have the final say. Life for me is not all about appeasing my husband and keeping him comfortable, & that's not true of most or all women either. It's not up to you to decide what a good birth choice would be for the entire world.