or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Vaginal delivery does not equal Natural Childbirth
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Vaginal delivery does not equal Natural Childbirth - Page 3

post #41 of 164
I think that it is very telling when natural is considered anything that is not a csection. How far gone are we with this accepting interventions that are many times unnecessary that this is ok?

I also dont understand how "some women just dont go into labor". I dont know a single woman who has stayed pregnant forever...
post #42 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by almadianna View Post
I also dont understand how "some women just dont go into labor". I dont know a single woman who has stayed pregnant forever...
Ok, I know that this thread isn't about the necessity of inductions....and I do believe that inductions are definitely overused.....but.....

some women don't go into labor *in time*. Sometimes inductions save the lives of women and babies.
post #43 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnmama View Post
Ok, I know that this thread isn't about the necessity of inductions....and I do believe that inductions are definitely overused.....but.....

some women don't go into labor *in time*. Sometimes inductions save the lives of women and babies.
while i dont necessarily doubt that, i dont know of a single time that has really happened in a healthy pregnancy. i talked to my midwife about it and she even admitted that in her 27 years of being a midwife she had seen people go overdue and be induced because of fears but not a single case of the women needing to be induced in a healthy pregnancy, some women can go to 44 weeks and still be ok.

(of course when there are cases with no fluid, or other things like that... this would be necessary but i am talking about pregnancies that dont have any of those things, i am just talking about women going overdue and nothing else being wrong.)
post #44 of 164
I said this in the other thread we had about this topic. I am very happy that my hospital did not define "natural childbirth" as 'any birth where the baby exits through the vagina'. Because they defined natural childbirth as intervention free/drug free, we had an immediate understanding. I never had to talk about pain medication and I was never asked...it was understood that when I said I wanted to have a natural childbirth that meant don't ask me questions about pain meds and the like.

I feel that it would have made me very uncomfortable and upset if I enterred a hospital with a definition of 'natural childbirth' being 'comes out the vagina.' Not only would I have had to field questions about medication (something I know would have planted the idea in my head-- ya know, kinda like back in college when my then boyfriend now Dh would say 'lets skip class' and that idea would be in my head and i would skip! )...but also I would have been uptight and worried about section pushing and other intervention pushing.


So that is why I feel I like to have the definition.
post #45 of 164
Not really related to the natural vs other discussion as I don't really care what people call their births. Mine are born at home with no one present but family, but I don't think I've ever referred to this as "natural".....

But I'm not sure I'm very fond of the term vaginal either. Not because I'm a prude, but because I find the etymology of the word vagina to be questionable.

~Kat
post #46 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by rajahkat View Post
But I'm not sure I'm very fond of the term vaginal either. Not because I'm a prude, but because I find the etymology of the word vagina to be questionable.
You made my day.

I have been calling my last birth natural. I was induced with pitocin because of ROM and 18 hours with no labor. Anyway, it was painful beyond belief and I never asked for pain meds. Until this thread popped up, I thought nothing of calling my experience natural childbirth. I suppose it was medicated and I had some interventions. But calling it a medicated childbirth sounds like I had an epidural.
post #47 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by almadianna View Post
I think that it is very telling when natural is considered anything that is not a csection. How far gone are we with this accepting interventions that are many times unnecessary that this is ok?

I also dont understand how "some women just dont go into labor". I dont know a single woman who has stayed pregnant forever...
i never went into labour but that was because i had an emergency c-section at 35 weeks.
post #48 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwerydd View Post
i never went into labour but that was because i had an emergency c-section at 35 weeks.
and that is expected, you werent full term yet.
post #49 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnmama View Post
Ok, I know that this thread isn't about the necessity of inductions....and I do believe that inductions are definitely overused.....but.....

some women don't go into labor *in time*. Sometimes inductions save the lives of women and babies.
I agree. Sometimes by the time the mama goes into labor naturally it is too late. My mom is still grieving the loss of a baby 14 years ago because the dr refused to believe her that something was wrong and told her to just wait till she went into labor on her own.
post #50 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by shelleyd View Post
When don't women go into labor on their own? I think that we've lost sight of what the natural physiological process of labor and birth is in our country. The process is interfered with the majority of the time and we don't know what it even is to not have that messed with. We think that an artificially induced labor is natural.
exactly, its not like we're going to be carrying around a 7 year old in our wombs.
rachel
post #51 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by rachel_eva View Post
exactly, its not like we're going to be carrying around a 7 year old in our wombs.
rachel
what you said but i want to add to that, i am talking about people that just go overdue, not when there is something wrong.. if you had to have a csection before your due date because something was wrong of course you didnt go into labor!
post #52 of 164
I like to refer to it as Normal birth. Soem of you would call mine un-natural. I had to be transferred for 20 to augment with pit. But I consider the other 16 hours to be 100%. It was beautiful. Just me in my own time. Eventhe twenty min at the hospital was not that bad. NO forced pushing, I did have to be on the monitor but the nurse ignored it an kept massaging my tight hip joint. Everyone let me call the shopts because I did not want a CS. Instead of saying ones bith is unatural ie hospital I say delivery for hospital and birth for birth center /Home.
post #53 of 164
when i was pregnant with my second child and interviewing homebiirth MWs, i was asked to describe my first birth, the birth of my daughter. i explained she was born at 33 1/2 weeks in a hospital, and that it was a natural birth. she was adamant that i did NOT have a natural birth, there was no way possible, even after i explained that we fought like hell to proceed with the same plans for labor and delivery as we had when we planned on delivering at home, much to the dismay of the hospital staff. i had intermittent external monitoring as she was premature, but no IVs, no medication, and labored and delivered on my own with my partner "catching" her, and we were both prepared for the consequences of our decision. thankfully, all's well that end's well, and after a brief stay in the NICU, my daughter was and continues to be fine, great. for someone, anyone to tell me that her birth, while not my ideal, wasn't natural seems insulting, and double-y so from a birth professional who is supposed to honor the spectrum of women who are bucking the system of inductions, epidurals, c-sections, etcetera. i know it's not intended as a "judgement" but it really feels that way when a woman works so hard to have some semblance of control over something that should be entirely in her control, but with the intervention of insurance companies and malpractice attorneys has become anything but.

oh, and we decided after that meeting to go with another MW.
post #54 of 164
I saw an article recently (too lazy to google it now) about a woman somewhere in North Africa who was "pregnant" for a very, very long time, something like 40 years. The baby had died in utero, calcified, and her body for whatever reason never went into labor.

So, it's possible, but highly unlikely.

I think that birth in a hospital can be natural. External monitoring doesn't interfere significantly with the natural process of labor, and massage, warm baths, a bit of encouragement etc. are all reasonably natural in my opinion, even though they require resources outside of the mother herself.

I would not consider a chemically induced labor natural, but if someone jolts herself into labor by walking 5 miles fast, that's natural to me.

So for me, natural childbirth means without chemical interventions of any kind, and without surgery, forceps, or vacuum extraction, and that it is not dependent on setting, so it can happen in a hospital, too.
post #55 of 164
actually if it is the one that everyone always talks about, she did go into labor but she was scared of her doctors because her baby was breech and they were going to give her a csection and she knew that many women had died of those in her village, so she never went to the hospital she just waited until the pain went away and went on with her life and they found it many years later.

And I agree that hospital births can be natural births, they just rarely are because most hospitals demand at least a heplock and will push for everything.
post #56 of 164
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by aikigypsy View Post
I saw an article recently (too lazy to google it now) about a woman somewhere in North Africa who was "pregnant" for a very, very long time, something like 40 years. The baby had died in utero, calcified, and her body for whatever reason never went into labor.

So, it's possible, but highly unlikely.

I think that birth in a hospital can be natural. External monitoring doesn't interfere significantly with the natural process of labor, and massage, warm baths, a bit of encouragement etc. are all reasonably natural in my opinion, even though they require resources outside of the mother herself.

I would not consider a chemically induced labor natural, but if someone jolts herself into labor by walking 5 miles fast, that's natural to me.

So for me, natural childbirth means without chemical interventions of any kind, and without surgery, forceps, or vacuum extraction, and that it is not dependent on setting, so it can happen in a hospital, too.
Interestingly enough that all fits into my definition as well. I think I just make the exception in MY birth. Because I did have a hep lock, which didn't interfere with anything but it was there. And I did push her out while on my back in a bed. And the OB (whom I love) was so strange looking in his protective gear, he looked more like he was prepared for a space walk than for catching a baby. So I call my birth and unmedicated hospital birth. But I don't actually correct anyone else who calls it natural. I would correct them for my first birth though, I had an epidural for the pain.

Even though I started this thread I would never tell any woman her birth was unnatural. I just feel here at MDC is a good place to discuss the rapid growth in medical intervention in Birth. Something that for thousands of years was so much more, I don't know, basic? Has become so very complicated. So much so that it has confused the definition of Natural Birth. I still like the definition I found and quoted in the OP best.
post #57 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by aikigypsy View Post
I saw an article recently (too lazy to google it now) about a woman somewhere in North Africa who was "pregnant" for a very, very long time, something like 40 years. The baby had died in utero, calcified, and her body for whatever reason never went into labor.
It was an ectopic pregnancy. Here's the link.



Shelley
post #58 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by aikigypsy View Post
I saw an article recently (too lazy to google it now) about a woman somewhere in North Africa who was "pregnant" for a very, very long time, something like 40 years. The baby had died in utero, calcified, and her body for whatever reason never went into labor.
I saw a TV show about that. I think the baby was actually an abdominal ectopic pregnancy. The woman did go into labor and went to a hospital. She got scared when she heard a woman having a Cesarean with inadequate pain relief and ran back home. Her baby died and her labor stopped. Then her body mummified the baby.

But that is really off topic for this thread.
post #59 of 164
Even she went into labor though! The baby was not born during that labor but she did go into labor! So even an ectopic pregnancy that goes to term will trigger labor.

Shelley
post #60 of 164
Thank You!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Birth and Beyond
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Vaginal delivery does not equal Natural Childbirth