Non-natural birth & immediate bonding - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 10:50 AM
 
felix23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: on a peaceful pond
Posts: 1,459
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchy_mommy View Post
How about just "Non-natural birth & immediate bonding" -- keep it neutral. I do agree that the title of your post is very hurtful, although I understand what you're trying to get at. Also, you are saying "lead to difficulties in mothering" or "lead to bonding problems" but you are also saying that you're talking about the immediate bond & it's relation to oxytocin & prolactin. I think you need to separate the time-frames here. I haven't done any research on it & the experiences of others as well as myself seems to contradict the basic theory -- i.e. I had a non-natural (medicated, pitocin, vaccum, vaginal) birth and did not experience any immediate bonding issues (although like many of the others, the trauma etc. of my birth experience did make me feel like a failure in some ways). However, I wouldn't doubt that the increase in the release of prolactin & oxytocin COULD (at least theoretically) make immediate bonding easier and more, well, IMMEDIATE maybe? Where I think that you're getting way off base is in suggesting that this could lead to "difficulties mothering." Maybe it could lead to a difficult first few days but I don't think it would lead to any long-term difficulties, and I definitely don't think it would make a mother less bonded after the initial week or so, nor would it make them more likely to CIO, not BF, etc. As I said before, I think there is a high rate of natural birth with AP moms and a higher rate of medicated & c/s birth with non-AP mainstream moms, so maybe some of what your suspecting could be attributed to that. I would also wonder whether prolactin & oxytocin have a cumulative effect... I'm going out on a limb here, so bear with me... Say you 'need' 5 units of prolactin & oxytocin to help with immediate bonding. Perhaps if you have a natural birth, your body is immediately flooded with the necessary 5 units... if you're BF'ing, maybe it's released at a rate of .5 units per a feeding... so it might take a day or so to reach 5 units. And if you aren't BF'ing, maybe it's released at a rate of 1 unit per day... then would take 5 days to reach 5 units. Like I said, I'm just speculating, but maybe this will give you some more direction with your research. But I will say again, I do not feel that this would necessarily lead to long-term bonding or mothering issues. I really feel that this would only be applicable during the very first days after birth.
ITA. I think keeping it neutral and not going into your research trying to prove that non-natural births cause difficulties is the best way. Maybe just take out the whole non-natural birth factor and focus on finding what causes problems with immediate birth bonding. I think you will find that there are a lot of factors and it isn't just a natural v non-natural birth issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loveneverfails View Post
I think if you're looking at hormones alone, you also need to take into account that different people produce hormones at different levels, metabolize them at different rates, and have different levels of sensitivity to hormones. I think it's far too complicated a question, because we don't have a way of knowing anyone's set point oxytocin-wise and there are too many factors involved. I think there's way way way too much going on to make a predictor of bonding and *especially* long term parenting out of oxytocin exposure. I mean if this stuff is true, does that mean that if I am walking around dilated at 6cm for a week without labor that I should stand on my head to prolong labor when it comes so that I have greater oxytocin exposure and therefore will bond more easily? At some point it starts to get absurd.

Not for anything but someone could naturally have very high levels of hormones because that's how her body works and she goes through an empowering c-section feeling wonderful and being a big ball of breastmilky goo starry-eyed in love with her baby. Someone else could have a completely natural birth, look at her baby afterwards and think "ok, who are you and what am I supposed to do with you?" The if oxytocin => then easy bonding and good parenting theory just doesn't work for me.

I think the natural versus "unnatural" is not the best place to look. I think fear and trauma are going to be more potent, and isn't adrenaline an inhibitor for producing oxytocin? If you have a calm and confident mother going into birth, I'd expect that to be more influential than whether she was a calm and confident elective c-section mom or calm and confident natural/home/unassisted birther. And fear is going to have psychological effects regarding confidence, regardless of whether there are any hormonal issues involved.

And I had immediate bonding with my adopted sister who is 15 years younger than me, and who was 3 years old and spoke a different language exclusively. We've been extremely close from the first time we met.
:

Never jump into a pile of leaves with a wet sucker. - Linus
felix23 is offline  
#122 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 11:10 AM
 
smeisnotapirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Jerusalem, Israel
Posts: 5,852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OP, just to play Devil's Advocate here, if you're truly trying to help your clients by conducting an anecdotal study on this idea, remember that science sets out to prove its theories INCORRECT, not correct. You then modify your theory until you can no longer prove it incorrect. Maybe you're going about it the wrong way? Just a suggestion to keep in mind.

Sara caffix.gif, Keith 2whistle.gif, Toby 6/08superhero.gif, Nomi 4/10blahblah.gif, Mona 1/12 hammer.gif

 

Mama of three, lover, student rabbi, spoonie, friend, musician, narcoleptic, space muffin, pretty much a dragon. Crunchy like matzoh.

smeisnotapirate is offline  
#123 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 11:11 AM
 
mistymama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by texmati View Post

I hate to break it to you, but your child's birthday is just one day. You don't need to have a great birth experience to be a good mom. You can have a crappy birth and be a spectacular mom. I am.
So true. I"m pregnant and planning a VBAC - I know natural birth will be healthier for me, and for my baby. I have an awful birth experience with ds that ended in a c-section and me not being able to see him for 8 hours.

BUT BUT BUT - It did not hurt our bonding. As soon as I could get my sore butt to see him, I did. I loved and held him and kept him by my side from that moment on. He was premature and we struggled to breastfeed, but we made it happen. I never let him cry, was (and still am!) an attached, loving and attentive Mama.

I have no doubt a natural birth experience would make things easier for me this time around and I'm doing everything in my power to make that happen. But trust me, you can have the worst birth imaginable and still be a wonderful, attached Mom.

Candacepeace.gif, Married to dh   guitar.gif, Mom to ds (8) biggrinbounce.gif , Gavin candle.gif (9/30/10 - 12/19/10) and cautiously expecting our rainbow1284.gif 4-29-12

mistymama is offline  
#124 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 11:36 AM
 
gcgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by smeisnotapirate View Post
OP, just to play Devil's Advocate here, if you're truly trying to help your clients by conducting an anecdotal study on this idea, remember that science sets out to prove its theories INCORRECT, not correct. You then modify your theory until you can no longer prove it incorrect. Maybe you're going about it the wrong way? Just a suggestion to keep in mind.
VERY good point. I was thinking the same thing.

Also, OP, please be careful when advising your clients. I have a friend who believes breastfeeding will prevent ALL post-partum depression: not true. I have ANOTHER friend who had NO bfing issues at all (and a natural birth and a good bonding experience) and had extreme PPD. So all the research in the world can't prevent things from happening. Just a caveat.
gcgirl is offline  
#125 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 12:50 PM
 
kitkatkaddoodle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Maybe you discussed it, but what about those moms who ended up having medicated or surgical deliveries after a long, NON-medicated labor? They would had lots of exposure to the natural hormone surge, but does the laboring to pushing without intervention get negated by the emergency c/s for fetal distress or failure to desend after pushing for hours? How about precipitous deliveries, as noted above? If a woman has only an hour or two of laboring and scant seconds of pushing, is she not going to bond as well as a woman who had been in labor for two days or more?

I think your initial scope is too broad to make any kind of reasonable study since there are so many variables to consider.
kitkatkaddoodle is offline  
#126 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 01:01 PM
 
channelofpeace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: missing the mountains
Posts: 2,768
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistymama View Post
I have no doubt a natural birth experience would make things easier for me this time around and I'm doing everything in my power to make that happen. But trust me, you can have the worst birth imaginable and still be a wonderful, attached Mom.

I think that this the the key. Yes, a natural birth (generally!) makes bonding easier- you have the good hormones, the baby and mom are not separated. But we are rational beings, not solely relying on our hormones- it certainly helps but it is not the end all be all of bonding.

Midwifery Student and Mama to 2 daughters and 3 sons.     
ribboncesarean.gif vbac.gifhomebirth.jpg I have given birth a variety of ways and I am thankful for what each one has taught me.

channelofpeace is offline  
#127 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 01:05 PM
 
Drummer's Wife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Enchantment
Posts: 11,793
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Good point, kitKat - two of my c-sections were after 39 and 36 hours of labor... Though, 2 were after no labor at all and I felt just as bonded, and all that other good stuff. Maybe it's just how I'm wired, b/c I am a baby person? I could fall in love with a newborn I see at the store.

I think the study doesn't exist, b/c it really doesn't play as big of a role as some people might choose to believe. I can understand it being important for someone who wants to be a midwife (knowing what can help the bonding and avoiding of PPD and such), but it can also do women a disservice if one puts so much importance in the all-mighty natural flowery birth. Just having those preconceived ideas sending energy out to the mom could be detrimental, IMO.

ribboncesarean.gif cesareans happen.
Drummer's Wife is offline  
#128 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 01:25 PM
 
anj_rn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of Spare Oom
Posts: 1,190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
The problem with the study as you have outlined it is that the study is correlational, and does not take into account the Mother herself. I would say that a mother who was not educated in bonding, BFing, etc, is more likely to go to the hospital, get the epidural, send the baby to the nursery to sleep, and feed formula. All these together would obviously affect bonding, not just the epidural.

You have to look at the whole picture. You also can't go into research trying to prove a point. You can try to discover causes, and then disprove theories, but not I have this idea and now I want to prove it.

BTW - I had 2 c/s, no PPD, and no bonding issues.

Wife to M , Mommy to DS aka Captain Obvious  (06/06) and DD aka Lissalot  (03/09, anoxic brain injury)
anj_rn is offline  
#129 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 01:54 PM - Thread Starter
 
amberskyfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 2,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchy_mommy View Post
How about just "Non-natural birth & immediate bonding" -- keep it neutral.
I like yours better and it's much shorter. I'm going to use that one. Thank you!

Mama to a bright 5 y/o girl dust.gif and a beautiful boy born 03/10/12 fly-by-nursing1.gif Loving unschooling, 2xuc.jpgfamilybed2.gif ecbaby2.gifand natural living in Hawaii.rainbow1284.gif
amberskyfire is offline  
#130 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 04:28 PM
 
savithny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by amberskyfire View Post
The post is in reference to new mothers who have difficulty bonding with their babies, not ALL mothers. The discussion is not suggesting that all mothers have problems bonding with their babies. As I stated, it is not saying that if mothers do not birth naturally, they will have problems. It is asking the question if there is a correlation between non-natural births and women who DO have problems. If a woman has problems bonding, can it be related to their birth? That is what I am asking.
You specifically said:

Quote:
I have long suspected that many of the current mainstream practices of birth in hospitals may be what is leading so many women toward being unable or unwilling to care for their babies properly after birth.
And then your next two paragraphs begin:

Quote:
Non-natural birth & immediate bonding
(Title change by request)

I am sure that most people in this community suspect this, but I was wondering if anyone knows of or can direct me toward actual studies which might deal with this issue.

I have long suspected that many of the current mainstream practices of birth in hospitals may be what is leading so many women toward being unable or unwilling to care for their babies properly after birth.

We all know that during natural birth, the mother releases oxytocin as well as other hormones which initiate the very short period of time in which mother and baby attach. These hormones cause the mother to become fiercely protective of her baby and they promote not only bonding, but a strong desire in the mother to keep her baby close and to nourish and protect it.

But most women in hospitals today give birth under some kind of anesthesia
Quote:
I have strong suspicions that these actions may be creating a lack of ability to mother in these new mothers.
There is NOTHING between those quotes that indicate you are only talking about new mothers who have difficulty bonding to their babies. Nothing. The argument you've crafted to this point of the post clearly indicates that oyu are arguing that labor anesthesia takes away the ability to mother.

And then you continue with the fact that "everyone" you know felt this way and everyone you know told you you would too. So now, you have built the argument that this experience is nearly universal.

You seem unwilling to accept that the process is complex and multifaceted, and instead keep looking for one article, one cause, one point. When over and over you are being told it isn't so simple.

Human beings are not computers and our hormones are not computer programs that make us perform in precise, scripted ways.

savithny, 42 year old moderate mom to DS Primo (age 12) and DD Secunda (age 9).

savithny is offline  
#131 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 04:44 PM
 
choli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllyRae View Post

Seriously, moms who aren't able to give birth with "the perfect birth" really don't need to hear that because of that, they are statistically supposed to be crappy moms. I know several moms who have had homebirths that do CIO and don't breastfeed past a couple months old and swat their infant's hands. And a lot of moms who have non-natural births who are fantastic AP parents.
Not even the mother's OWN idea of "the perfect birth", someone else's idea of "the perfect birth"...
choli is offline  
#132 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 05:08 PM
Banned
 
SneakyPie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Somewhere around here . . .
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's not just that one can have a difficult birth and still be v. attached. Your idea that some mothers can "overcome" that b/c they have access to sites like these is pretty far-fetched as well. My mother had all her babies in the 1960s in v. difficult circumstances; she was not allowed to breastfeed, and had little support in the form of groups or media to move her toward attachment parenting. My father was kept away from her during all 3 of her births, and men had even less support for attachment parenting in those days than women did.

And yet both parents were v. attached to us, and taught us the techniques we still use with our own children.

The logic mistake you're committing here is that if natural birth supports bonding then birth difficulties must therefore hinder bonding -- and that early bonding equals the ability to be an appropriately attached parent/child unit, that no other factors enter in.
SneakyPie is offline  
#133 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 05:47 PM
 
bebebradford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think this thread has given GREAT insight on how it depends on the person.. not the birth route taken. There have been great examples in here of moms who have had problems bonding despite the fact they had natural births, and the complete opposite. I think more people WANT to prove that moms with natural births bond better while non natural birthing methods cause problems, but from personal experience and what I've seen in here it doesn't look like that's the case.
Kelly1101 likes this.
bebebradford is offline  
#134 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 06:00 PM
 
MittensKittens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,058
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I read the first few pages, and then come back today to find lots more. I don't know if this has been mentioned, but I vaguely remember a study that showed a connection between war-torn nations and a tendency to separate mom and baby immediately after birth (taking them to hospital nurseries), as well as non-baby friendly birth practices. Does anyone else know what study I am talking about, and where it can be found? It was certainly fascinating, and touched on how less than ideal birth practices are presumed to affect bonding.

I'm Olivia. I blog about physiological childbirth, homebirth, and unassisted homebirth!
MittensKittens is offline  
#135 of 154 Old 03-17-2010, 06:57 PM
 
4myfinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I did not have a natural birth (although I desperately wanted one) and also had no knowledge of AP until my son was about 7 weeks old. I also did not have any problem at all bonding with my baby. From the moment I saw the doctor lift him up after catching him it was an instant love-athon that has not stopped. When he became jaundiced and had to be put under the lights at the hospital, I sobbed and sobbed because I couldn't be holding him constantly.

I had always assumed that DS would sleep in his crib in the nursery we so lovingly decorated. My DH even built his crib himself. However, when we came home from the hospital with DS and I put him in a cradle next to our bed to sleep, it felt wrong, physically. It's hard to explain, but it just felt absolutely unnatural not to be close to him. For the first few nights I tried to let him sleep in the cradle but I couldn't sleep at all. Finally I just listened to my instincts and brought him into bed with us. We've never looked back.

I don't believe having an epidural during delivery affected our bonding at all, but that may partly be due to the hospital staff's help. They gave him to me right away and the nurse helped me immediately take off my gown for skin to skin contact. They helped me breastfeed. He roomed in with me the whole time and was only taken away for baths and to be weighed, and even then DH went with him. If my epidural had any potential to affect bonding, it was probably countered by some of these other things.
4myfinn is offline  
#136 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 06:45 AM
 
calpurnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: south of the thames
Posts: 2,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I skimmed some of the posts.

Have you read Birth in Four Cultures, by Brigitte Jordan & Robbie Floyd? Get the later edition, & she mentions in her foreword/afterword how surprised she was, revisiting the topic of birth in America some 10 years later, that women did not have better births when they had fewer interventions, but when they felt prepared & that they had had the birth they wanted.

She also points out that, absolutely everywhere, childbirth is socially patterned - the birth is physiological but the organisation is always cultural. There is no natural birth.
calpurnia is offline  
#137 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 06:49 AM - Thread Starter
 
amberskyfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 2,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by calpurnia View Post
I skimmed some of the posts.

Have you read Birth in Four Cultures, by Brigitte Jordan & Robbie Floyd? Get the later edition, & she mentions in her foreword/afterword how surprised she was, revisiting the topic of birth in America some 10 years later, that women did not have better births when they had fewer interventions, but when they felt prepared & that they had had the birth they wanted.

She also points out that, absolutely everywhere, childbirth is socially patterned - the birth is physiological but the organisation is always cultural. There is no natural birth.
I have not read it, but it sounds absolutely like what kind of info I'm interested in. Thanks for the help! I'll head to the library first and see if one in our state has it. If not, I can order it used on Amazon.com.

I think that that explanation makes a lot more sense than my theory, actually - that women had better births when they felt prepared and had the birth that they WANTED. I believe emotions are tied into it so much.

Mama to a bright 5 y/o girl dust.gif and a beautiful boy born 03/10/12 fly-by-nursing1.gif Loving unschooling, 2xuc.jpgfamilybed2.gif ecbaby2.gifand natural living in Hawaii.rainbow1284.gif
amberskyfire is offline  
#138 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 09:51 AM
 
RedOakMomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: A little stone house
Posts: 6,913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by savithny View Post

There is NOTHING between those quotes that indicate you are only talking about new mothers who have difficulty bonding to their babies. Nothing. The argument you've crafted to this point of the post clearly indicates that oyu are arguing that labor anesthesia takes away the ability to mother.

And then you continue with the fact that "everyone" you know felt this way and everyone you know told you you would too. So now, you have built the argument that this experience is nearly universal.

You seem unwilling to accept that the process is complex and multifaceted, and instead keep looking for one article, one cause, one point. When over and over you are being told it isn't so simple.

Human beings are not computers and our hormones are not computer programs that make us perform in precise, scripted ways.
savithny, thank you. I was thinking/feeling this, too. And yes, this thread seems like a highly unusual (not to mention inaccurate and biased) way to gather information to condense for clients...especially in the way of official advice. And how are these responses being used? Will they be quoted?

RedOak ~ Momma to DS (8) , DS (4) , DD (3) , & DD 9/10 ~
RedOakMomma is offline  
#139 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 10:02 AM
 
RedOakMomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: A little stone house
Posts: 6,913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by amberskyfire View Post
But most women in hospitals today give birth under some kind of anesthesia. Even the women who are lucky enough to have natural births have their babies taken from them immediately after and the mother is usually left waiting as she listens to her baby screaming while the doctors and nurses run tests, measure, weight, poke, prod, and wash the baby before giving it back to the mother.
OP, this is from your first post and is one of the reasons I find this information gathering so strange. How many hospital births have you attended? Where do you get the stats for saying that the women "lucky enough to have natural births have their babies taken away from them immediately after, etc......"

This hasn't been the experience I've witnessed, in my own or others' births. It may be policy at some hospitals, but the experience you relate (and I'm wondering, perhaps exaggerate?) is hardly universal. Many hospitals put a huge emphasis on post-birth bonding...whether the mom has had an epi or not.

Perhaps, before you decide what kinds of awful things are happening in medicated births, or hospital births, you need to conduct a study (or find an actual one, not just an anecdotal one) about what is actually happening in hospitals after medicated and non-medicated births. You've had many, many women describe how your idea of what happens after a medicated or hospital birth is not accurate. Are you listening?

RedOak ~ Momma to DS (8) , DS (4) , DD (3) , & DD 9/10 ~
RedOakMomma is offline  
#140 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 10:03 AM
 
bebebradford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedOakMomma View Post
savithny, thank you. I was thinking/feeling this, too. And yes, this thread seems like a highly unusual (not to mention inaccurate and biased) way to gather information to condense for clients...especially in the way of official advice. And how are these responses being used? Will they be quoted?
OH honey don't worry, she won't use any response that doesn't support her theory. Haven't you already figured that out?
bebebradford is offline  
#141 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 11:01 AM
 
CherryBomb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 8,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedOakMomma View Post
OP, this is from your first post and is one of the reasons I find this information gathering so strange. How many hospital births have you attended? Where do you get the stats for saying that the women "lucky enough to have natural births have their babies taken away from them immediately after, etc......"

This hasn't been the experience I've witnessed, in my own or others' births. It may be policy at some hospitals, but the experience you relate (and I'm wondering, perhaps exaggerate?) is hardly universal. Many hospitals put a huge emphasis on post-birth bonding...whether the mom has had an epi or not.

Perhaps, before you decide what kinds of awful things are happening in medicated births, or hospital births, you need to conduct a study (or find an actual one, not just an anecdotal one) about what is actually happening in hospitals after medicated and non-medicated births. You've had many, many women describe how your idea of what happens after a medicated or hospital birth is not accurate. Are you listening?
My hospital vba2c was great. She placed on my chest immediately, they cleaned her off some on my chest and then I held her for over an hour (and she nursed for 45 minutes of that) before I told the nurse to go ahead and take her for the weighing, etc (they did it right next to my bed while I ate a turkey sandwich, I was starving!) They actually didn't even have a nursery for awhile because they really wanted moms to room in, but they found that that wasn't meeting the needs of the moms (especially c/s moms who were coming out of anesthesia) and so they brought it back, but really urged you to keep your baby with you as much as possible. No one ever tried to "take her away" from me. Everything was always done in my room with me right there. I had a birth plan, too, and all the nurses took the time to read it when they came in and did their best to honor our wishes. Everyone was really great and supportive.
CherryBomb is offline  
#142 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 11:26 AM
 
betsyj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 671
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
My hospital vba2c was great. She placed on my chest immediately, they cleaned her off some on my chest and then I held her for over an hour (and she nursed for 45 minutes of that) before I told the nurse to go ahead and take her for the weighing, etc (they did it right next to my bed while I ate a turkey sandwich, I was starving!) They actually didn't even have a nursery for awhile because they really wanted moms to room in, but they found that that wasn't meeting the needs of the moms (especially c/s moms who were coming out of anesthesia) and so they brought it back, but really urged you to keep your baby with you as much as possible. No one ever tried to "take her away" from me. Everything was always done in my room with me right there. I had a birth plan, too, and all the nurses took the time to read it when they came in and did their best to honor our wishes. Everyone was really great and supportive.
As was mine. As soon as my son was born he was placed right on my chest to nurse with the cord still attached. My husband cut the cord when HE was ready. When I birthed the placenta my doctor said, "and here is the most amazing thing," while taking the time to show me what had nourished my baby.

They weighed him right next to me, wrapped him up and gave him right back. He roomed in with me. There were several breastfeeding classes conducted every day by a lactation consultant. I found the whole experience to be wonderful. Nothing got in the way of our bonding.
betsyj is offline  
#143 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 03:03 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 RedOakMomma View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by amberskyfire
But most women in hospitals today give birth under some kind of anesthesia. Even the women who are lucky enough to have natural births have their babies taken from them immediately after
OP, this is from your first post and is one of the reasons I find this information gathering so strange. How many hospital births have you attended? Where do you get the stats for saying that the women "lucky enough to have natural births have their babies taken away from them immediately after, etc......"
<snip>
Perhaps, before you decide what kinds of awful things are happening in medicated births, or hospital births, you need to conduct a study (or find an actual one, not just an anecdotal one) about what is actually happening in hospitals after medicated and non-medicated births. You've had many, many women describe how your idea of what happens after a medicated or hospital birth is not accurate. Are you listening?
Whoa, ok, first of all, even if the OP were "listening" to those of us on this site, we are not representative of mainstream America! So even if 90% of MDC Mamas have had a certain experience, that hardly means it's likely that 90% of all American women have had that experience! (Sorry, I'm only familiar with birthing in the US.)

Second of all, that IS a fact that the majority of births in the US are medicated!!! Are you honestly questioning that? That seems to me an odd point to question the validity of.

Thirdly, the fact that birthing women are treated poorly in American hospitals is also well documented. I recommend the books, "Pushed" by Jennifer Block as well as "Born in the USA" by Dr. Marsden Wagner.

Now, as to the issue of whether or not a difficult/abusive/or simply medicated birth experience leads to difficulty mothering, well, that is another issue.

But I didn't think it was up for debate that:
1. birthing women are frequently mistreated in American hospitals
2. Most women have epidurals (like, well, WELL over 50%)
MegBoz is offline  
#144 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 05:54 PM
 
RedOakMomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: A little stone house
Posts: 6,913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MegBoz View Post
Second of all, that IS a fact that the majority of births in the US are medicated!!! Are you honestly questioning that? That seems to me an odd point to question the validity of.
Nowhere in my post did I question that. I'm fully aware of the stats on epis and medicated labors. What I question is the assertion that "Even the women who are lucky enough to have natural births have their babies taken from them immediately after and the mother is usually left waiting as she listens to her baby screaming while the doctors and nurses run tests, measure, weight, poke, prod, and wash the baby before giving it back to the mother."

This seems like an exaggeration, or at least an assertion based on a limited or biased viewpoint...not one based on statistics or surveys of actual birth experiences. It's a strange, absolute statement to make.

RedOak ~ Momma to DS (8) , DS (4) , DD (3) , & DD 9/10 ~
RedOakMomma is offline  
#145 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 05:56 PM
 
RedOakMomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: A little stone house
Posts: 6,913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bebebradford View Post
OH honey don't worry, she won't use any response that doesn't support her theory. Haven't you already figured that out?
I did, which is why I removed my personal experiences from this thread. I don't want to support this effort at gathering information for clients.

RedOak ~ Momma to DS (8) , DS (4) , DD (3) , & DD 9/10 ~
RedOakMomma is offline  
#146 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 06:07 PM
 
kitkatkaddoodle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree that most births in the US are medicated in one way or another, but I'd like to see some sort of proof that we've had a decrease in the amount of immediate bonding within the time where medication/anesthesia during labor has been popular. In order to do that, of course, we'd need at minimum to have some kind of criteria hammered out for how we're measuring "immediate bonding" and a control group who have not had medication but is similar in makeup to the group who did, with similar labor and birth trauma patterns, etc.
kitkatkaddoodle is offline  
#147 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 07:31 PM
 
matthia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 121
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think I would be VERY hesitant to try and correlate birth trauma or even a great medicated birth with a lack of maternal bonding.

I think the trend in the last...oh 50 or 100 years in society at large has been a move from informed consent, intellectual consideration, hard work, and necessary inconvenience towards a less informed, less intelligent, towards a populace at large that is less willing to put in hard work for results or put up with necessary inconveniences if there is any way around them. From the food we eat (from fast foods that are slowly killing us to eating any vegetable or fruit we want no matter where it;s grown or what it's growing season is) to the clothes we wear to the lifestyles we adapt, society is tending towards a seperation from intuition and tradition and what little instincts humans still possess. Fad anything is swallowed by the masses with very little regard for truth or reason. From fad diets to fad parenting, many people are looking for the easiest possible way to accomplish a certain goal.

Someone who is willing to question advertisements and fad lifestyles and all that is LIKELY to also question fad parenting tips. That being said, I don't agree that someone who doesn't AP is a "bad" parent, just as I don't think a baby who is fussy is a "bad" baby. People who have no access to this information or who don't agree with it can still be amazing people and amazing parents. I also very much DON'T think its a good idea to assume SO MUCH importance to such a small moment in both yourself and your baby's life. As important as I think immediate mother/infant contact is, and as much I could wish is on everyone in an ideal world, I DO NOT think that you can't recover that time later.

People who are less inclined to want to think for themselves, who often or always allow themselves to be swayed by what others say, regardless of how they feel, IN ALL ASPECTS OF THEIR LIFE, are PROBABLY more likely to be unattached or have a harder time bonding with an infant, if only because infants are SO instict driven that it can be scary to someone who has ignored that part of themselves their whole life.

I DO NOT think this trend is caused by or a result of medicalized/emergency births, nor even of outdated hospital procedures.
matthia is offline  
#148 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 07:48 PM
 
Encinalien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Texas
Posts: 490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by amberskyfire View Post
<snip>
This is, in essence, taking the responsibility of the baby away from the mother right at the critical moments in which she should be forming an attachment to her baby. Instead, she is forming an attachment to not holding her baby and hearing the sound of her child's cries.

<snip>

Everyone I know was terrified after the birth of their baby and even with their second and third babies, they told me it was like the first time and they didn't know what to do. All of them had problems bonding.*

Everyone told me that I would also be a scared first-time-mom, but it wasn't that way for me at all. I had a home birth and was absolutely intent on my baby.

Yes I can see why you wrote the first snippet because natural birth gives the woman back the power of producing her own delivery. *It's the big selling point.

And I can see why you would want to address the problems mentioned in the second snippet. *I know many girls in the south who might have said the same exact thing as your friends said, however:
**
Quote:
Originally Posted by CherryBomb View Post
I think when women spend their whole pregnancies hearing that they MUST give birth a certain way to be a "real" mother and a "real" woman, THAT'S what causes problems. *I never felt bad about my first c/s until other people told me I should. *I take responsibility for allowing people to influence me like that, but it's hard to ignore that when you're young (I was only 18 when I had dd1) and trying to figure out how to parent and where you fit in.

I think it's great you're studying midwifery in an area of the country where it sounds like it's lacking. *Just be careful to stay with the principals of natural birth and natural medicine in general which empowers the patient and fosters the belief that our bodies are capable, we are capable. *Lecturing someone with a medical problem doesn't really make them feel more capable, less scared, or more able to bond. *

To help with the emergency-transferred clients you could take some extra courses on lactation consulting, maybe work with a local herbalists to learn more about PPD and birth trauma healings.

Again it's a noble cause you're persuing. *Helping people is always worth studying ever more in depth. *There are no stupid quiestions. *Just keep searching for the truth.
Encinalien is offline  
#149 of 154 Old 03-18-2010, 08:00 PM
 
kitkatkaddoodle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthia View Post
I think the trend in the last...oh 50 or 100 years in society at large has been a move from informed consent, intellectual consideration, hard work, and necessary inconvenience towards a less informed, less intelligent, towards a populace at large that is less willing to put in hard work for results or put up with necessary inconveniences if there is any way around them. From the food we eat (from fast foods that are slowly killing us to eating any vegetable or fruit we want no matter where it;s grown or what it's growing season is) to the clothes we wear to the lifestyles we adapt, society is tending towards a seperation from intuition and tradition and what little instincts humans still possess. Fad anything is swallowed by the masses with very little regard for truth or reason. From fad diets to fad parenting, many people are looking for the easiest possible way to accomplish a certain goal.
Really? I see us as heading toward MORE choices, informed consent, and intellectual consideration, not less. After all, 50 to 100 years ago, how many choices did society as a whole have regarding their food, clothing, medical care, etc? How would they have known better without being able to share and compare with others as we can now?

Today, with our ability to find resources and information about things outside our immediate community or social circle, I think we are far better equipped to and willing to question and chose intelligently amongst these things.
kitkatkaddoodle is offline  
#150 of 154 Old 03-19-2010, 01:10 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 RedOakMomma View Post
Nowhere in my post did I question that. I'm fully aware of the stats on epis and medicated labors.
Ah, gotcha, my bad. Based on what you quoted & your response, I thought you were questioning more of the content of her post than just the assertion that babies are removed from their mothers.
MegBoz 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