|First how do you know if the birthing mother finds the touching distracting? Maybe she finds it reassuring. Why do we EVER touch eachother? I dont see why she would be stretching the perineum - espcially without asking first - but the rest of it?
I was responding in the context of mwherb's post (and the context of the whole thread, really,) in which she says she doesn't see the mother reacting negatively to the midwife "moving mom's tissues". In other words, touching her genitals. I'm sorry I wasn't more clear about that. I don't remember all the rest of the touching that was going on, except for her touching her belly which I don't understand either. But at any rate, like I say, what I was referring to was specifically the touching of her genitals. And in general (personally, I don't know any exceptions,) women do not appreciate having their genitals touched by people who are not their lovers. They find it distracting, inhibiting, at the least uncomfortable, and often (as in this case) painful.
|If you have decided to begin with to see something negative going on here then ofcourse that is what you will see.
You're saying it's subjective. I'm saying it's not. It doesn't matter what I'm looking at, if it is unnecessary and has potentially negative consequences (inhibition which hinders birth, pain, etc.,) I don't see any reason to not point that out, and see plenty of reason to
point it out. We don't continue to learn unless there is discourse.
|So the mom has been "led to believe" - someone has lied to her? Someone has betrayed her? Is what that MW is doing really that harmful?
No, I am not saying (and did not imply) that the midwife lied to her. I am saying that the only reason any mother would agree to such a thing would be if she believed it beneficial. She's not going to get that idea into her head out of nowhere. She was led to believe it by someone or something, and the midwife (by her actions) sanctioned that belief through her actions at least.
Speaking for myself, I believed it was necessary also. That belief did not make it any less distracting, inhibiting, emotionally unpleasant, and painful (again, as it was unnecessarily
for this woman.) And yes, I regard that as harmful.
|The way she touches the lady may not be evidence based but it is part of the birthculture and is seems to be percieved that way by the woman. She is not causing any harm but believing to do good - and if both the MW and the birthing women agree that something positive is going on (that is not harmfull as far as I know - you keep talking about evidencebased - well then show me that touching the perineum - with the womans consent and accept - is harmful or dangerous) then what is the problem?
The most obvious problem is that she suffered additional pain for nothing. We can argue forever whether ignorance = bliss and not come to an agreement. I'll just say that I believe that we all have the duty to speak out against whatever we know to be untrue and/or harmful, despite what the prevailing cultural perception of it is.
As for evidence that touching the genitals with the woman's consent is harmful, I know of no studies that have looked at its effect on the woman as far as distraction, inhibition, discomfort, etc. But do we really need studies to know that those things do occur to some degree or other with the exposure and handling of genitals by those who are not the woman's lover?