My GMIL hospital birth in the early 60's (warning, very sad)

[~Boudicca~]

I was talking to my husband's Grammy the other day. She is 85 and is such a lovely, beautiful woman. We love her. We got on the subject of her childbirth experiences (she had 3 daughters that lived, one that was born at 20-something weeks and a full-term stillbirth). Her story about her stillbirth was so heart wrenching to me.

In 1963, she was pregnant with her 5th and final child. She was in her early forties. Pretty late to be having a baby in those days. Her water broke while she was making dinner, and she and the family went to the hospital for her birth. After an agonizing labor, during which she was medicated and she doesn't really remember much, she gave birth to a stillborn little girl. As soon as the child was out, the nurses became very quiet and almost seemed like they didn't want to be there. Instead of the doctor showing her little girl to her, he had one of the nurses whisk her away very quickly. Grammy asked the doc if something was wrong, to which he replied, "You have a daughter, but she was born dead." And that was all.

She never saw her little girl. No one in the maternity ward would tell her where she was. The doctor explained to her that her organs were on the outside of her body, and her head was deformed. And that was all that they would tell her. It was hospital "policy" not to let the mother see her child in a situation like this, that it was better for her not to know.

So she went home, devasted and empty handed. She went through birth only to never meet her child. They never even named her. A few weeks later, Grammy couldn't stand not knowing what was done with her daughter's body, and she went back to the hospital to beg one of the nurses to tell her what they did with her baby. It was against hospital policy to tell where they buried babies that did not survive, but the nurse took pity on her and found out for her where her baby would be.

Apparently, her baby along with 20 other stillborn children were buried in a mass grave in a cemetary outside of the city. Why were there so many? Grammy went there with some flowers to pray for the baby she never knew, and then she never went back. She and her husband decided not to have anymore kids, they were too devastated and did not want to chance it. She told me that she thinks it was her fault because she was too old.

Grammy's story shocked me beyond words. Why would they not let her see her child? Is this a case of doctors assuming that they know what is best for the mother? Does medical arrogance have anything to do with it? If a child were still born today, regardless of the condition, the mother is allowed to see him/her, say goodbye, make arrangements, right? Hello, closure? I cannot believe that not doing so wouldn't be damaging to the healing process. Different times, I guess, but still...

Anyway, this seems like a really sad thing to share, but it was really bothering me. And I wasn't sure where to post this, so I hope its in the right place.

[Finch]

: Bless her heart. That's awful. It just kills me to hear stories like that...my MIL had a 25 week stillbirth and her experience was similar. They whisked the baby away, didn't tell her the exact cause of death (it sounds like she had previa or something....all she says is she was bleeding profusely and the doctor said she was fully dilated and sent her to the hospital...), and she never did see or name the baby. So sad.

[ColoradoMama]

What a sad story.: That poor woman - how heartbreaking.

[mommyminer]

Originally Posted by honeydee

Is this a case of doctors assuming that they know what is best for the mother? Does medical arrogance have anything to do with it? If a child were still born today, regardless of the condition, the mother is allowed to see him/her, say goodbye, make arrangements, right?

Yes - the doctor assumed he knew what was best for her, and in those days, they thought it was best for the mother to not see the baby. The medical profession truely thought that was best for the patient. Fortunately, if a baby is still born today, they will be able to see the baby and say goodbye - if they choose to. Also, at many hospitals, mementos are done - footprints, lock of hair, picture. If a mom chooses not to take the mementos with her, many hospitals will store them for awhile. At least, this is done where I am employed, and I am under the impression that it is common. We've come a long way in birth - but not far enough!

[applejuice]

I always loved to talk to older women about childbirth in their days. I had neighbors I talked to and I talked to women in a convalescent home I worked in for a short time. They loved to share stories about their time and I do believe they loved sharing with me. It is a lesson in life. Things were not always the way they are now. It is interesting to see how things were and how things have changed.

I know about the babies buried at the edge of cemetaries also. That is sad. My first house was near Valhalla Cemetary and along the edge, near the city park, is a complete row of babies all buried in a row near the fence. I am glad your DH's grandmother was able to have some kind of closure on her grief allbeit, a bit late and incomplete.

[mwherbs]

personal bias of the doctor and maybe some advice from the modern"psychology" folks of the day--- my mother had a younger baby sister that died in the 40's and the doctor came to the home-to pronounce the death and they dressed her at home and took pictures both holding her and in the coffin-- now my mom still has very strong memories of this and she would not have done the same thing at all she would have wanted everything wisked away if she had a loss she had my younger sister in 1961 basically around the same time your grandma had her baby-- hard to say with all the different experiences and beliefs why that was done--- and definately doctors of the day were quite the authoritarians--- and I may even suspect that they made no attempt to revive or try to keep this baby alive since there was obvious serious malformations--

[hetaera]

so sad. Thanks for sharing though.

[Romana]

Originally Posted by honeydee

Is this a case of doctors assuming that they know what is best for the mother?

Yes. It's called medical ethics. Medical ethics has four facets - Non-maleficence (do no harm), beneficence (help), justice, and autonomy (patient autonomy). You're supposed to respect and balance all four. Of course, this means wildly different things in different times and circumstances, but medical interpretation of ethical issues continues to override autonomy a good deal of the time, as it did in the situation you described. I personally am strongly in favor of autonomy because I do not believe that doctors "know best" - I believe patients typically are in the best position to know what is the best course of action for them when faced with a difficult decision.

Some women facing a full-term stillbirth would choose a c-section in order to be more disassociated from the experience and not labor and birth a baby that is deceased. However, there are very few medical practitioners who will perform a c/s for a stillbirth. The reasons for this are that c/s carries more risk to the mother and there's no baby to worry about, and that women will heal better from laboring and vaginally delivering dead babies than having them removed by c/s. Personally, I think individual women should make this choice, fully informed of the risks and benefits of a c/s versus a vaginal stillbirth.

I have also read of parents who did not want to see their stillborn babies being forced to do so, because the staff said it would help them grieve and heal. For some families, this is not the right thing to do. The pendulum has swung the other way, and while choice/autonomy is more involved in these kinds of situations, it is still extremely common for the parents' wishes to not be respected in the interest of "doing what's best" for them. Because of course they cannot know their own minds.

While I understand encouraging parents to birth vaginally and spend time with their stillborn baby, I don't see how forcing it on them is justified. It is just as bad, in my opinion, as believing that seeing the baby will make it worse and therefore taking him or her away without allowing the mother time to see and experience her loss fully. My idea of the best way to grieve and/or heal is not necessarily best for everyone else. Nor is the statistically most effective method, because what is best for the majority is not necessarily best for this individual patient or family.

Sorry to rant, but I have issues with the way doctors make ethical decisions. I do not believe that a semi-impartial medical professional who has only known me for at best a few months in a couple of visits knows better than I do what's best for me. I know. I should be informed and have the opportunity to choose.

[rmzbm]

Oh, this poor lady has been carrying this around for years, how horrible.
to her!

[Jilian]

How incredibly sad, I cannot even imagine going through something like that. That poor mama.

[Spirit Dancer]

That is so sad. It sounds like it still bothers her. Poor mama.

[kim_nz]

It so sad to hear stories like this! My dad born in the 50's and was one of a twin, the other was born dead and my grandmother never even got told what sex it was!

[gcgirl]

Ugh, what a nightmare. In California, just this year, a law was passed allowing parents to get a birth certificate for a stillborn child. It's not a certificate of "live" birth, but an acknowledgement that a baby WAS born. Seems like it took 'em long enough to get around to it...

[applejuice]

A miscarriage or stillborn has always been part of the "score card" kept for parity on all women. It is on the part of the birth certificate a person normally does not get. It has # of gravidas-#of terminations-#of miscarriages-#live births.

This has always been part of a woman's health record whether she is 14 or 94.

Ugh, what a nightmare. In California, just this year, a law was passed allowing parents to get a birth certificate for a stillborn child. It's not a certificate of "live" birth, but an acknowledgement that a baby WAS born. Seems like it took 'em long enough to get around to it...

When I worked at the Greek Orthodox School, the Church did have a ceremony to acknowledge the existence and passing of a late miscarriage or stillborn baby; one of the teachers suffered one and there was a ceremony a week later. It seems that the birthday in the old Greek Church is the day of conception; even the conception day of Jesus is the Greek Independence Day or the Feast of the Annunciation, March 25.

[ashesofyou]

I am so sorry for your hubby's Grammy. People are still treated unfairly during a loss. Maybe, by sharing her daughter's story, and listening with caring ears, and a heartfelt concern, it helped her heal a little.

[shee_na]

What a horrible story. I lost a child after he was born at 27 weeks. He died 18 days later due to complications of NEC. I've met many, many women that have told stories to me of horrific treatment even now when giving birth to still born babies or having a child that dies. Most are no where near as traumatic as the ones women tell from the 50,60's or 70's those women were never able to see their own babies. As a society we've grown some but there is still a lot to be learned on how to treat a bereaved mother. There are still states that do not recognize still births and give no recognition to the family that the baby was born. The bill that is now being passed is called the Missing Angels bill.

Thank you for sharing your Great MIL story. My heart goes out to her as I know she has suffered all these years.

[Carma]

That is a sad story I am sure it helped her to tell the story to you.

Carma

[coldfeet]

A truly heartbreaking story. Times were definitely different back then. I'm sure it helped her heal a little bit that she was able to tell you her story.

[Sandstress]

As a physician and a mom who lost a baby, I know for a fact that NOTHING is worse than what a mom imagines. I'm all for letting the mom see the baby- no matter how malformed. With gentle education, the experience is better than letting the mom imagine all sorts of horrible things for the rest of her life. I also believe that if there's strong feelings NOT to see the baby, that decision should ABSOLUTELY be adhered to as well.

[thebarkingbird]

UGH! sadly, i can believe that. my mother worked for a catholic cemetary when i was a kid. it was a historical site that had fallen into disrepair. she had alot of old tombs rebuilt and such. we were not catholic and mom was confused by all the little tombs on the perimeter of the cemetery. an old friend of hers informed her that before Vatican two babies who were stillborn were not buried on consecrated ground. the woman remembered her mother having a stilborn baby and burying it under priests supervision outside consecrated soil and then paying the familys gardener to dig it up and reinter the body in the family plot.

the neat thing my mom did was to search records and find the family members of those babies in unmarked tombs. many mothers and siblings were able to mark them with names and bring flowers and such after the ground was blessed. i'm not catholic but i understand this is important to catholics, especially older ones.

goodness i feel for your granny. that must have been horrible.