Do you think women have a "right" to a painfree childbirth? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 02:26 AM
 
lovebug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: back in the GREAT state of Minnesota! oh how i have missed you!
Posts: 5,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amatullah0 View Post
bolding mine

i don't know about this. I mean, I think a surgeon would deny surgery to someone who didn't need it, right? I mean, if I booked an appointment to get my tonsils out for no other reason than because I want to, or that I want my intestines shortened because I think its weird that they're so long, or, in an attempt to lose weight I ask to get a kidney removed, I would expect the doc to look at me like i'm crazy and tell me to go home. I don't think that any doctor is obligated to provide treatment to someone who doesn't need it, especially if it may be harmful to them. I mean, what if docs started giving c-sections to women at 30 weeks because they decide that they don't want to be pregnant anymore? I'm not suggesting there be legislation against it, because I think thats dangerous for women(and babies), I'm thinking about the doc's rights too...
I totally agree!

Your life doesnât change by the man whos elected. If your loved by someone you can't be rejected... decide what to be and go be it! If your a caged bird brake in and demand that somebody free it.
lovebug is offline  
#62 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 05:45 AM
 
mntnmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,835
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If I choose to have a "pain-free" birth, but the epidural hurts going in, have my rights been violated? Or if the epidural doesn't take has my autonomy been violated? Of course not. I have choices about what goes into my body, and what procedures I can allow, but mother nature and random circumstances don't recognize anyone's "rights". That said, if nobody makes sure that my informed consent includes the possible problems of epidurals, or refuses to give it for non-medical reasons, that's a whole different issue!.

Mom of 4 aspiring midwife "Friend"ly seeker
mntnmom is offline  
#63 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 06:21 AM
 
phoebemommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Anchorage, AK
Posts: 1,081
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
While the discussion is interesting, I just don't think the word "right" belongs in this context. Because where does that right come from? I think rights, by nature, have to come from a source, be it a god, the constitution, a legal precident, whatever, something recognized accepted as an inalienable foundation. And I don't know that there is one in this instance. Unless I'm missing something. Women have a right to medical care while in labor, yes, but is pain relief covered under EMTALA? And then there's the issue people have mentioned -- that the epidural might not take, or that before and after the epidural there may be a great deal of pain. It seems like, just logistically, a "painfree childbirth" can't be a right.

We really have to be careful when we start demanding that things are "rights" just because we think they're important. Where does it end?
phoebemommy is offline  
#64 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 09:19 AM
 
babygirlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I believe all humans deserve the right to have health care and the right to a pain free birth or a birth in any means they choose.

I was in excruciating pain before and with my epidurel and I could still feel the contractions. the magnesium however (which i did not want) made me not able to walk.

As someone who lives in excruciating pain every single minute of my life I do not need the ritual of another painful experience to prove I am woman. Though a week in the hospital I'm sure I felt plenty.

Why not say you do not have a right to a novocained tooth extraction. You ate the sugar you now must suffer the consequences. Just silly.
babygirlie is offline  
#65 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 09:42 AM
 
Kelly1101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 3,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrawberryFields View Post
As a pregnant or laboring woman I have the right to make medical decisions about my body. And that includes decisions about pain medication, homebirth/hospital birth, C-section etc. I will be damned if some doctor or natural childbirth advocate or the Pope himself tries to take that away from me or make my decisions for me. The idea that some provider could deny a woman something that is legal and available and force her against her will to suffer the pains of childbirth makes me ill. I do think that it would be a violation of her rights in this country. And yes, I advocate natural childbirth and planned two homebirths.
Like how you say it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amatullah0 View Post
i don't know about this. I mean, I think a surgeon would deny surgery to someone who didn't need it, right? I mean, if I booked an appointment to get my tonsils out for no other reason than because I want to, or that I want my intestines shortened because I think its weird that they're so long, or, in an attempt to lose weight I ask to get a kidney removed, I would expect the doc to look at me like i'm crazy and tell me to go home. I don't think that any doctor is obligated to provide treatment to someone who doesn't need it, especially if it may be harmful to them. I mean, what if docs started giving c-sections to women at 30 weeks because they decide that they don't want to be pregnant anymore? I'm not suggesting there be legislation against it, because I think thats dangerous for women(and babies), I'm thinking about the doc's rights too...
Now, keep in mind that I am pro-choice, so that may flavor my opinion on what you have said here, but I think the only thing that demonstrates a woman's "need" in this case is if she WANTS to. Her reasons are her own, and none of anyone else's business. It's her body and she is in control of her reproduction. I mean, your other examples are purely medical-- how would you like it if someone said "well, I know you want a homebirth or a waterbirth and a nice experience, but you don't NEED it, so really why don't you just go along with the standard of what we decide, because medically this is what is better." I bet a lot of people here wouldn't like that much. Since we come from the perspective that childbirth is NOT just a medical event.

Freedom of choice in birth should be absolute, not just limited to what one person or group decides they like best.

Kelly (28), in love with husband Jason (38) and our awesome babies:  Emma 4/09, and Ozzy 8/10

Kelly1101 is offline  
#66 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 10:05 AM
 
Amatullah0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 905
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly1101 View Post
Like how you say it.



Now, keep in mind that I am pro-choice, so that may flavor my opinion on what you have said here, but I think the only thing that demonstrates a woman's "need" in this case is if she WANTS to. Her reasons are her own, and none of anyone else's business. It's her body and she is in control of her reproduction. I mean, your other examples are purely medical-- how would you like it if someone said "well, I know you want a homebirth or a waterbirth and a nice experience, but you don't NEED it, so really why don't you just go along with the standard of what we decide, because medically this is what is better." I bet a lot of people here wouldn't like that much. Since we come from the perspective that childbirth is NOT just a medical event.

Freedom of choice in birth should be absolute, not just limited to what one person or group decides they like best.
hmmm, interesting point. but, if water was controlled (say we lived somewhere where water was so scarce it had become extremely rationed, with people not having enough to drink at times) then I would have to say that you do NOT have a RIGHT to a waterbirth. I can't go up to everyone I know and demand that they give me their water ration so I can give birth in it. similarly, I can't go to an OB office and demand they give me a c-section.

but, I do believe that as a human being, you DO have the right to use your own water ration for a water birth(even if it may only be a few cups of water, or even a polluted water source) and they you have the right to give yourself a c-section(no matter how silly that sounds)

No matter how much I would be against doing these things, both of which could easily mean death for yourself and your baby, I don't think the choice should be taken away from women. When the choice is taken away, sometimes better options and choices are taken away with it. When legislation comes out that is supposedly "in favor of the baby" it often comes at the expense of both of them. (such as fetal monitoring being required and leading to something more, or required(even court ordered, like in Florida) c-sections at 40(or even 42) weeks or because of a prior c-section, or whatever other reason a doc can cook up.

hijab.gif Childbirth Educating and Doula-ing wife toflowersforyou.gif , and mama to hammer.gif6/09. Story of my life:buddamomimg1.pngduh.gif knit.gifscared.gifsewmachine.gifdishes.gifcd.giftea6.gifread.gifsleepytime.gif

 

Amatullah0 is offline  
#67 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 10:06 AM
 
transylvania_mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: abroad
Posts: 1,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I had to re-read your question, I thought by "pain-free" you mean natural...
I don't mean to say that natural birth is painless (I've experienced two of them myself), but I would be VERY scared of recovery after c-section, catheter insertion, headaches after epidural, episiotomies and needles in my back. When I was labouring with ds, my midwife gave me a sterile water injection which took the edge of my back labor for about 30 minutes and it was horrible. She asked me if I wanted another one when the first one wore off, but I preferred back labor over that.

So yes, I think women have a right to a truly pain free childbirth...

caffix.gif

transylvania_mom is offline  
#68 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 10:51 AM
 
MsBlack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SE MO
Posts: 3,609
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is such an interesting discussion on various levels. Mainly, though, I think that the answers (no offense to anyone in particular or to the group) are narrowed down by a question that is in itself too small and individualized in it's scope (no offense to the OP either! I think it is all too easy in this era to come to a question from a limited perspective rather than a holistic one...given the strong and pervasive influences of our medico-legalistic society).

First: as a feminist and entirely 'pro-choice' woman, I absolutely believe in women's right to self-determination and autonomy with informed consent, where that is possible.

'Where that is possible' is one of the somewhat operative phrases here, because (at least in Free Republics such as the US, Canada, UK, others) as the cliche says 'Your own rights end where others' rights begin'. That is, we are not isolated individuals making choices in a vacuum; when it comes to birth we are also making choices for our babies. And when it comes to health care in general, we are also making choices that impact--directly and indirectly--everyone else in our world as well. More on that later. For now, I want to touch upon the other operative phrase, which is 'with informed consent'.

As one pp has stated, 'informed consent' is pretty much a joke in the world of allopathic medicine. Most people utilizing medical care don't have the foggiest notion what true informed consent even is. I won't go into it here, but believe me it involves WAY more than 'taking the epidural class' at your local hospital, and WAY WAY more than signing the General Consent Form upon admission to the hospital. What I am getting at here is the reality that women choosing medicated births and csecs are very far from choosing on a basis of informed consent.

See, not only are we not given a clear picture of the real risks of medicalized birth, we are also not told about the numerous real and irreplaceable benefits to natural birth for mothers and babies, in both the short and long term. Those benefits are very much physiological as much as emo-psychological, impacting the 'whole life' of both mother and baby, and entire lifespan of both (and family also). Also, while we are promised (and generally given, after the tech-mechanical fashion of industrial medicine anyway) full staff 'support' for medicalized birth, we are certainly NOT supported in the choice to go natural.

Mind you, it is very difficult indeed to even find a medical provider who is 'ok with' natural birth, or who actually knows a freakin thing about normal birth. Beyond that, however, those who really do want a normal, natural birth in the hospital do not have institutionally-provided access to labor support, nor to evidence based practices that most greatly benefit natural labor (such as free mobility, food and drink, birthing tubs)--the kinds of things that are well demonstrated to minimize women's experience of pain and maximize motherbaby's health as well as comfort during labor. The med system is all over having the nurses and other techies whose primary job is mind the machines, NOT the people having a birth--they utterly neglect the provision of similar staff support of natural birth.

Well, why would they? We cannot forget that Tech Medicine is Big Business indeed. Follow the money, follow the money, follow the money. If you think your 'choice' of pain med or elective csec is 'freely made', then you need to think again--because what you are told IS very much impacted by the MONEY. Hospitals make more money on hi tech. Docs make more money on surgery, and NICU and all that. The tales we are told about 'safety' of med birth, and the seductive inducements of 'no need to stay pregnant any longer, no need to experience labor, no need to feel any pain at all are ADVERTIZING, plain and simple. We don't expect any other advertizing to give us a whole, reliable picture--we are taught to be skeptical and wise about such things--why do we seem to believe the crass promotional efforts of docs and hospitals as GodsOwnTruth?

And what about the baby? What about the baby's rights??? Do I support even elective csec? Well, yes--in theory. But ONLY if families are made fully aware of the very real and even prevalent risks of that to their baby (and so, by the by, to a woman's/family's OWN well being and happiness) for being surgically removed early enough to prevent the woman's 'experience of labor'. "Late term premies" are a very real group of babies who spend otherwise needless time in the NICU with feeding and breathing problems. Now, our med brethren (and regardless of the sex of your OB or neonatologist, let's be clear that this is a MALE/PATRIARCHALLY created and dominated field) don't have to deal with this in the short or long term. They don't have to worry about the risks and the negative impact--hey, they are fully confident that they can rescue babies from the folly of elective csec (or induction); they have meds and machines to fix all that! But are parents clearly receiving the Informed Consent they need, in order to make a truly intelligent and free decision about such things? NOT.

And are women, in our rush to allow each other 'the right to self-determination', really being asked to consider the ramifications of their choices on their baby's health, now and forever? I really don't think so. This is one way in which the question, IMO, should be broadened to include the 'Democratic --self-determining-- Ideal' that one's own rights end where others' rights begin.

And what about the costs involved? Oh, you say, I have insurance! I can pay for this myself. Um, sorry, you are NOT paying for it yourself (and for the time being, let's leave aside the poor who can't). You are directly placing a burden on the entire group of insured people, and the economic ramifications are simply too far reaching to even start on here. So--if you really must have that epidural or elective induction/csec in the pursuit of personal right to choose, then maybe that is a cost that should come out of your own pocket, in the name of keeping everyone's insurance costs as low as possible. And further, required to personally cover all costs incurred if you or your baby become needful of further med care as a result of your epidural or your elective med birth

Sure, you've got rights. And your rights end where others' rights begin. This, first and foremost, means if you are going to exercise your rights most effectively on your own behalf, then you owe it to yourself to become FULLY informed about ALL the risks of medicalized birth and ALL the benefits of natural birth. Frankly I think no one should be allowed to 'choose' medicated birth, or other elective procedures of birth, without being required to know all that. Required, yes, I did say that. Because your choice is NOT just your choice, it is not just about you. It's about your baby, and it's about society on the whole...these choices do impact your whole world, after all. And which of us would really desire all the medicalization of our births if A) We really were informed about the risks to ourselves, and the benefits of natural birth to ourselves? and B) we were really fully informed about the risks to our babies in medicalization along with being informed about all the numerous benefits to our babies/families of natural birth and finally C) We really truly had the option of fully supported, fully evidence based natural birth in the hospital (labor support and all the rest)?

So....sorry for the ranty ramble, but this is why I think the question was too 'small', and cannot be answered so simply as a matter of 'pro-choice'.
MsBlack is offline  
#69 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 10:58 AM
 
emnic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 1,214
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
MsBlack -

Em, married to Alex, mom to Samantha (11 yrs) and Cullen (5yrs) and Maybe (5/16/2010) Trying to grow 4,000lbs of produce on .2 acres. See my blog!
emnic77 is offline  
#70 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 11:00 AM
 
Amatullah0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 905
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsBlack View Post
This is such an interesting discussion on various levels. Mainly, though, I think that the answers (no offense to anyone in particular or to the group) are narrowed down by a question that is in itself too small and individualized in it's scope (no offense to the OP either! I think it is all too easy in this era to come to a question from a limited perspective rather than a holistic one...given the strong and pervasive influences of our medico-legalistic society).

First: as a feminist and entirely 'pro-choice' woman, I absolutely believe in women's right to self-determination and autonomy with informed consent, where that is possible.

'Where that is possible' is one of the somewhat operative phrases here, because (at least in Free Republics such as the US, Canada, UK, others) as the cliche says 'Your own rights end where others' rights begin'. That is, we are not isolated individuals making choices in a vacuum; when it comes to birth we are also making choices for our babies. And when it comes to health care in general, we are also making choices that impact--directly and indirectly--everyone else in our world as well. More on that later. For now, I want to touch upon the other operative phrase, which is 'with informed consent'.

As one pp has stated, 'informed consent' is pretty much a joke in the world of allopathic medicine. Most people utilizing medical care don't have the foggiest notion what true informed consent even is. I won't go into it here, but believe me it involves WAY more than 'taking the epidural class' at your local hospital, and WAY WAY more than signing the General Consent Form upon admission to the hospital. What I am getting at here is the reality that women choosing medicated births and csecs are very far from choosing on a basis of informed consent.

See, not only are we not given a clear picture of the real risks of medicalized birth, we are also not told about the numerous real and irreplaceable benefits to natural birth for mothers and babies, in both the short and long term. Those benefits are very much physiological as much as emo-psychological, impacting the 'whole life' of both mother and baby, and entire lifespan of both (and family also). Also, while we are promised (and generally given, after the tech-mechanical fashion of industrial medicine anyway) full staff 'support' for medicalized birth, we are certainly NOT supported in the choice to go natural.

Mind you, it is very difficult indeed to even find a medical provider who is 'ok with' natural birth, or who actually knows a freakin thing about normal birth. Beyond that, however, those who really do want a normal, natural birth in the hospital do not have institutionally-provided access to labor support, nor to evidence based practices that most greatly benefit natural labor (such as free mobility, food and drink, birthing tubs)--the kinds of things that are well demonstrated to minimize women's experience of pain and maximize motherbaby's health as well as comfort during labor. The med system is all over having the nurses and other techies whose primary job is mind the machines, NOT the people having a birth--they utterly neglect the provision of similar staff support of natural birth.

Well, why would they? We cannot forget that Tech Medicine is Big Business indeed. Follow the money, follow the money, follow the money. If you think your 'choice' of pain med or elective csec is 'freely made', then you need to think again--because what you are told IS very much impacted by the MONEY. Hospitals make more money on hi tech. Docs make more money on surgery, and NICU and all that. The tales we are told about 'safety' of med birth, and the seductive inducements of 'no need to stay pregnant any longer, no need to experience labor, no need to feel any pain at all are ADVERTIZING, plain and simple. We don't expect any other advertizing to give us a whole, reliable picture--we are taught to be skeptical and wise about such things--why do we seem to believe the crass promotional efforts of docs and hospitals as GodsOwnTruth?

And what about the baby? What about the baby's rights??? Do I support even elective csec? Well, yes--in theory. But ONLY if families are made fully aware of the very real and even prevalent risks of that to their baby (and so, by the by, to a woman's/family's OWN well being and happiness) for being surgically removed early enough to prevent the woman's 'experience of labor'. "Late term premies" are a very real group of babies who spend otherwise needless time in the NICU with feeding and breathing problems. Now, our med brethren (and regardless of the sex of your OB or neonatologist, let's be clear that this is a MALE/PATRIARCHALLY created and dominated field) don't have to deal with this in the short or long term. They don't have to worry about the risks and the negative impact--hey, they are fully confident that they can rescue babies from the folly of elective csec (or induction); they have meds and machines to fix all that! But are parents clearly receiving the Informed Consent they need, in order to make a truly intelligent and free decision about such things? NOT.

And are women, in our rush to allow each other 'the right to self-determination', really being asked to consider the ramifications of their choices on their baby's health, now and forever? I really don't think so. This is one way in which the question, IMO, should be broadened to include the 'Democratic --self-determining-- Ideal' that one's own rights end where others' rights begin.

And what about the costs involved? Oh, you say, I have insurance! I can pay for this myself. Um, sorry, you are NOT paying for it yourself (and for the time being, let's leave aside the poor who can't). You are directly placing a burden on the entire group of insured people, and the economic ramifications are simply too far reaching to even start on here. So--if you really must have that epidural or elective induction/csec in the pursuit of personal right to choose, then maybe that is a cost that should come out of your own pocket, in the name of keeping everyone's insurance costs as low as possible. And further, required to personally cover all costs incurred if you or your baby become needful of further med care as a result of your epidural or your elective med birth

Sure, you've got rights. And your rights end where others' rights begin. This, first and foremost, means if you are going to exercise your rights most effectively on your own behalf, then you owe it to yourself to become FULLY informed about ALL the risks of medicalized birth and ALL the benefits of natural birth. Frankly I think no one should be allowed to 'choose' medicated birth, or other elective procedures of birth, without being required to know all that. Required, yes, I did say that. Because your choice is NOT just your choice, it is not just about you. It's about your baby, and it's about society on the whole...these choices do impact your whole world, after all. And which of us would really desire all the medicalization of our births if A) We really were informed about the risks to ourselves, and the benefits of natural birth to ourselves? and B) we were really fully informed about the risks to our babies in medicalization along with being informed about all the numerous benefits to our babies/families of natural birth and finally C) We really truly had the option of fully supported, fully evidence based natural birth in the hospital (labor support and all the rest)?

So....sorry for the ranty ramble, but this is why I think the question was too 'small', and cannot be answered so simply as a matter of 'pro-choice'.
excellently stated

hijab.gif Childbirth Educating and Doula-ing wife toflowersforyou.gif , and mama to hammer.gif6/09. Story of my life:buddamomimg1.pngduh.gif knit.gifscared.gifsewmachine.gifdishes.gifcd.giftea6.gifread.gifsleepytime.gif

 

Amatullah0 is offline  
#71 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 12:28 PM
 
gcgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yes, of course they do. Unfortunately it's not always going to be an option. Pain relief isn't 100% foolproof, so IMO it's *foolish* to not prepare for pain relief failure. But a right? Why not?! You can talk blue in the face about the various *risks* of pain relief methods, but there are risks to Tylenol too. Women have the right to CHOICES, and if pain relief is an option then yes, it's a woman's right to choose it.
gcgirl is offline  
#72 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 01:40 PM
 
*MamaJen*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 5,362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ha, I'm so steeped in the natural birth mindset that when I read this question I thought at first that you were asking whether women had a right to a beautiful, gentle, nearly pain free homebirth -- I was going to say that women had a right to maximize their chance of getting it through midwifery care, waterbirthing, emotional support, etc., though of course there was no guarantee.
As far as the pain-free goes, I do think that women have every right to choose the epidural, or even a scheduled elective C-section if that's what floats their boat. It's their body and their choice. BUT, I also think they have a right to good information about those choices, which I think is what is lacking in the current system.
Of course, there's no guarantee that an epidural is going to yield a pain free birth.

Jen, journalist, policy wonk, and formerly a proud single mama to my sweet little man Cyrus, born at home Dec. 2007 . Now married to my Incredibly Nice Guy and new mama to baby Arthur.
*MamaJen* is offline  
#73 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 02:01 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by babygirlie View Post
Why not say you do not have a right to a novocained tooth extraction. You ate the sugar you now must suffer the consequences. Just silly.
We don't have a "right" to a novocained dental work. I actually get mine done without novocaine. The reason for that is that, after my dentist tried the fourth needle of novocaine (two on one visit, and then we rescheduled), I told him to just do the filling...the tooth was really hurting, and I just wanted it dealt with. I then discovered, somewhat to my surprise, that I preferred the pain of drilling and filling to the pain of the needle...and vastly preferred either to the numbness of the novocaine.

I did consent to novocaine when I had a root canal, but that was as much because I was concerned about what would happen to my mouth when I started thrashing as it was because I knew the pain would be really bad.

In any case, there is no "right" to pain-free birth in this sense, because epidurals aren't foolproof, and more than one woman has had a needle in the spine, and the pain of childbirth.

I really, really dislike the "right to a pain-free birth" language, simply because the most common use of it (at least ime) is by OBs dismissing women who don't want the epi as self-hating, self-destructive martyrs and crazy women. It's not about our "right" not to feel pain. It's about their "right" to keep control of the process.

Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#74 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 02:33 PM
 
MegBoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 2,125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juvysen View Post
(I actually think I read something about deliveries during one of the hurricanes a few years ago where they didn't have the facilities to do all the drugs/meds/whatever so these women were stuck doing natural childbirth)
That was actually the opening of the awesome book "Pushed" by Jennifer Block! It was in Florida during a hurricane. They ended up sending women home who weren't yet in active labor (whereas they previously would have admitted them, then probably augmented). They canceled inductions (not sure if they canceled all of only those deemed not medically necessary.) I think they even canceled elective RCS.

A nurse told the story & said she was amazed. Women were delivering at all hours of the day & night (whereas before the odds were stacked for daylight births), the scheduled inductions ended up coming in within a few days of that induction laboring on their own, and the CS rate plummeted to a small fraction of what it was previously.

The nurse said this was incredibly enlightening for her & she actually left the profession of L&D nursing soon after.
MegBoz is offline  
#75 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 02:34 PM
 
prancie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
IMO you cannot grant as a "right" a finite resource. We have a right to the things we can pay for. If a hospital refuses to grant procedures and medications to people who cannot pay on the spot, that is the hospital's right. If a hospital allows payment plans and government subsidies then that is their right too.

Wife to Doug, mom to Hank and Logan !!!
prancie is offline  
#76 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 02:40 PM
 
AlexisT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central PA
Posts: 2,265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
By that logic, prancie, a woman with no resources isn't entitled to have a professionally attended childbirth. She can't pay for it. (In the real world, EMTALA says she does.) TO me, appropriate pain relief is part and parcel of maternity care. Some women need the epidural, some women don't, but it's not the hospital's choice to make on cost grounds.

I think a woman does have a right to pain relief. Whether or not this will result in a pain free birth isn't necessarily up to us. But the hospital does not have the right to decide who really needs it. (MegBoz - you may be thinking of a story I told here once, with an acquaintance whose hospital told her she could not have an epidural.)

DD 01/2007, DS 09/2011

AlexisT is offline  
#77 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 03:14 PM
 
Joyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,604
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think a woman should be able to choose what sort of birth she wants. I've had one birth with an epidural, one without, and am considering a homebirth. I am in Canada, a socialist and wholeheartedly and vehemently believe that everyone should have a right to health care as well. Even though I don't agree with elective c-sections, they are here, legal and covered. I do believe strongly in education around this. My doctor who used to deliver was not partial to them either and has always advised her patients of all the risks and she believes strongly in that as well.

Some can make the arguments that pain relief can hurt the baby, but some also make the arguments that caffeine or a glass of wine or a million other things that women do during pregnancy is not good or harmful to the baby. I dunno, where does this begin and end?

I also do not believe that me thinking I or anyone superior because they've given birth one way or another is very women or family friendly.

Don't trust anyone under 5! Mom to 3 boys under 5. Blogging to save my sanity.
Joyster is offline  
#78 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 03:36 PM
 
FireWithin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boston area
Posts: 3,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Haven't read most of the replies.

I think have the right, and responsibility, to be fully informed about birth choices. I think birth knowledge, knowledge of dangers, and potentials (both positive and negative) have been removed from women. They should understand the ramifications of their choices.
eta: looks like many others said what I wanted much more eloquently.

Children deserve the respect of puzzling it out.
FireWithin is offline  
#79 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 06:02 PM
 
Megan73's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by witchygrrl View Post
This was an old feminist argument--that because men ddn't have to undergo such a painful experience to have a child, why should women? That led to the "twilight sleep" kinds of births, wherein teh woman would actually have a traumatic experience but because she was blacked out during it, she had no real memory. Kind of like the date rape drug, IMHO.
I don't think you can pin this on feminism. The "twilight sleep" stuff was well underway by the 1950s (and women had been using chloroform in labor since the 1850s) - before feminism's second wave hit. And it was feminists of the "Our Bodies, Ourselves" credo that helped women think about reclaiming birth from male doctors - which included questioning being so doped up you had no idea what was going on.

Megan, loving her sweet rainbow1284.gif boys, born Aug. 2008 and Feb. 2011, and their sister, born still March 2007 candle.gif
Megan73 is offline  
#80 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 09:11 PM
 
Harmony08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 797
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wonder what kind of responses this question would get in the Birth Trauma forum? Since the wording of "rights" etc is confusing I 'll clarify that I am taking the initial question to be asking if women have a right to pain meds in birth. Taken that way YES it is absolutely a woman's right to request pain meds if she wants/needs to. Of course some true information would be very helpful and I think the natural birth movement is doing a good job encouraging women to educate themselves. When I said yes to the epidural after 30 hours of labor I knew EXACTLY what I was saying yes too but I felt that if I didn't get it and get some rest I was heading for a c-section. Sometimes a woman may need one intervention in order to avoid others. We all have different labors, different pain, different needs. How can one woman decide what another woman should or should not need?

I have boys! My first baby boy was born 10/08 and my second baby boy was born 7/12

Harmony08 is offline  
#81 of 162 Old 03-03-2010, 09:17 PM
 
Harmony08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 797
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loveneverfails View Post
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Can every woman *survive* childbirth pain without anesthesia? Obviously. That doesn't mean she can just "suck up" the pain without there being unnecessary trauma done to her. There is a tremendous amount of variability between an orgasmic birth and one that results in PTSD due to traumatic amounts of pain and suffering. The decision of how much pain is too much is something that needs to be left up to the woman. Someone else may be able to tolerate what I don't find tolerable, and I may be able to tolerate what another woman would find intolerable.

I'm not arguing about free market forces here. I'm saying that it's such a widely variable, personal decision that doesn't fall into the category "has a right to" very easily. The question is framed oddly. Women have a right to choose between options that are available for them based on their own judgment of their situation, not because of some overarching entitlement to a pain free birth or because of some lofty moral ideal where Real Women and Real Moms Don't Have Epidurals.
Are you 100% sure about this. I have heard many stories of women who labor so long hard that they need some rest in order to make it through. What do we think happened to over exhausted burnt out mamas in the past???

(I get that you didn't literally mean "survive childbirth" just adding an idea)

I have boys! My first baby boy was born 10/08 and my second baby boy was born 7/12

Harmony08 is offline  
#82 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 02:45 AM
Banned
 
accountclosed3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
in the modern area, violence and abuse leading to premature labor and birth, or the need for a c-section and one not being available that leads to poor survival rates in developing nations.

second to this, issues of nutrition and hygiene are tops on the list for not surviving. in regards to nutrition, it's really the nutrition of the mother over time and how that affects the growth of her body as she matures that is at play, adn then hygiene at birth when the time comes.

exhaustion is not a common cause of birth-related death from what i understand from my reading. this is not to say that it wouldn't cause any number of problems, but i don't think it's one of the top causes.


---

i'd also point out that i have no objection to the use of any measure of medical methods that a woman and her advisors deem as necessary.

but, dehydration may be at issue with exhaustion--they usually interplay with each other--and that coudl lead to a high risk situation.
accountclosed3 is offline  
#83 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 07:13 AM
 
choli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think every woman should have the right to birth in the way she herself chooses - whether a home birth with no pain medication, or an elective C section. Nobody's business except the mother.
choli is offline  
#84 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 08:53 AM
 
possum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: the far north (sort of)
Posts: 798
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
~~Quote Removed
There are lots of things we don't have rights to that are not illegal. No one has an inherent right to have a big screen TV or a veggie garden or wall to wall carpeting, but they are also not prohibited.
possum is offline  
#85 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 09:06 AM
 
MsBlack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SE MO
Posts: 3,609
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by choli View Post
I think every woman should have the right to birth in the way she herself chooses - whether a home birth with no pain medication, or an elective C section. Nobody's business except the mother.
Respectfully disagreeing here. Not sure if you read my previous post--it was very long, so maybe lots of you skipped it! --anyway, in briefer fashion I will say that none of us lives or births in a vacuum. Our actions/choices at birth impact not just ourselves, but our babies, our families and society on the whole in numerous ways-- having both broad and enduring effects, on all of us.

It is only in 'free countries', where individualism is so highly prized, and our belonging within a group (and within Life generally) is so little acknowledged, can we have such thoughts as yours (and others here). Yet none of us would be here without that group, and without this planet. This is a complex question, I don't pretend to have THE answer--I just think we must look beyond 'personal preference' and individual freedom in exploring it.
MsBlack is offline  
#86 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 10:27 AM
 
Kelly1101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 3,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harmony08 View Post
I wonder what kind of responses this question would get in the Birth Trauma forum?
I had the same thought. I'd like to see the response of a woman who has been ripped open to the point of incontinence, when told that she doesn't "need" an elective c-section.

Quote:
We all have different labors, different pain, different needs. How can one woman decide what another woman should or should not need?
I think many women who say that no one should have a right to pain relief just don't have painful labors. To draw a parallel-- I didn't get morning sickness with my first child, just a couple twinges of nausea. So it would be easy for me to say "Oh, stop complaining, people with HG-- you don't NEED medication, people were pregnant long before there was medication and they did just fine, just eat some crackers or something."

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsBlack View Post
Respectfully disagreeing here. Not sure if you read my previous post--it was very long, so maybe lots of you skipped it! --anyway, in briefer fashion I will say that none of us lives or births in a vacuum. Our actions/choices at birth impact not just ourselves, but our babies, our families and society on the whole in numerous ways-- having both broad and enduring effects, on all of us.
It's still a woman's choice. Many people would point out that a UC poses unnecessary risks to the baby and so it shouldn't be allowed. Would you agree with that?

Kelly (28), in love with husband Jason (38) and our awesome babies:  Emma 4/09, and Ozzy 8/10

Kelly1101 is offline  
#87 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 11:08 AM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You can't have a 'right' to something that costs 1000. When the world's women don't have to worry about unpollouted/contaminated drinking water, then I'll start worrying about needles in the back. And what about women whose epidurals don't take? Are their rights being violated?
dinahx is offline  
#88 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 11:15 AM
 
Marylizah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,905
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post
You can't have a 'right' to something that costs 1000. When the world's women don't have to worry about unpollouted/contaminated drinking water, then I'll start worrying about needles in the back. And what about women whose epidurals don't take? Are their rights being violated?
This is a red herring. Lots of things that we have rights to cost money. Trials, for example, before a jury of our peers. Education. You know, the public kind, that all children have a right to in the US and the Western world. Just two examples that come to mind.... There are more. Clean drinking water in other parts of the world have nothing to do with how women in the rich countries of the world should be treated when they are in a hospital, or what they should be offered as part of their care.
Marylizah is offline  
#89 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 11:45 AM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marylizah View Post
This is a red herring. Lots of things that we have rights to cost money. Trials, for example, before a jury of our peers. Education. You know, the public kind, that all children have a right to in the US and the Western world. Just two examples that come to mind.... There are more. Clean drinking water in other parts of the world have nothing to do with how women in the rich countries of the world should be treated when they are in a hospital, or what they should be offered as part of their care.
You have a right to a trial, before the state can incarcerate you. Children have a 'right' to an education so that they can comply with compulsory education laws. Once there are 'compulsory childrearing' laws, then I'll agree it is a 'right'. It is really just a priveledge tho. No one has answered the question as to who is violating your rights in the case of a delayed or ineffective Epidural? And when your baby crashes from your BP drop, do you have a whole other set of rights then? Do you have a right to immediate general anesthesia, safety be darned, should you be determined to be feeling an iota of pain?
dinahx is offline  
#90 of 162 Old 03-04-2010, 11:53 AM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have to add that I can't see why we are even discussing this. Most women have to forcibly refuse an epidural at least once in the course of hospitalization, nevermind several times. Most hospitals have 'epidural compliance' rates that top 90%. Does anyone really feel that this priveledge is at all threatened? Why shouldn't we worry about say the rights that are threatened, like the rights of CNMs to practice independantly, the right to be free of harassment to accept elective & costly procedures, the right to choose our place of birth, VBAC rights, etc.???
dinahx is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off