Originally Posted by Joezmom
I won't say anything more about Odent, other than I personally put very little stock in much of what he says. Extra large egos hold no appeal for me, and older doesn't mean wiser.
Wow. Just wow. I've been reading Odent for at least 18 years, and I find him to be quite humble and respectful of women and their power. He is an acclaimed OB, yet has chosen to step out of the birthing room and to vocally recommend that other males do the same. He has been very outspoken about the power of a birthing woman, and the fact that the presence of someone such as himself can diminish that power even if unintentionally. He chooses to remain on the premises, within easy access in the very infrequent event that he is needed, while saying that a midwife sitting quietly in the corner knitting is the best attendant.
He is adamant that women will instinctively be able to healthily birth their babies with no intervention, as long as they are allowed to access their inner selves. With few but definite exceptions, thus the midwife and the access to an OB.
Strongly stated opinions do not equal ego to me.
And a traditional backpedaling American OB, who says "sometimes" and "maybe" and cushions his/her words but ends up with an over 90% episiotomy rate and an over 60% c-sec rate is perfectly fine? Who sees birth as a dangerous event requiring intervention and close monitoring, strapping women down when they request otherwise (to monitors routinely), performing episiotomies and pressuring pitocin and putting time limits on labor- that is preferable to someone who firmly states his belief in the normality of birth?
I don't understand.
I don't even know how to address the claims that women are not being routinely abused during birth. As a PP said, if a woman says no, that means NO. That does not mean "coerce me by lying to me". That does not mean "treat me as a hostile party and do what you can to make me feel powerless so that I'll submit". The episiotomy rates and c-sec rates are so far over the rate at which they are necessary that it is completely insane.
Although the inventor of the EFM has clearly stated that it is not to be used routinely, and both his words and subsequent studies have shown that to use EFM routinely directly causes fetal distress (not just detects it), American OBs and hospital protocols consider it to be too risky for a laboring woman not to be monitored.
Although c-sec is known to present many health risks for baby and mother over vaginal birth, women are allowed to choose this as an option
yet are not allowed to choose to forgo EFM.
Not to mention all of the many women who are being pressured into elective c-sec for 'dates', even on their supposed due date
. Despite the studies which show that dates alone are not reason for induction, much less c-sec.
As for c-sec being seen as more tidy, yes it is. In our culture, we consider even the messiest surgery with the messiest recovery to be less 'messy' or even disgusting, than hours of various, maybe somewhat mysterious, substances coming out of our vaginas. An incision can't be helped if you have surgery. The seepage and pain and other facts of recovery can't be blamed on you. But just going around with *stuff* coming out of your body? Gross. Even shameful.