Regarding "The Business of Being Born" - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-12-2008, 06:24 PM - Thread Starter
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
... I just finished watching it on Netflix.

I have to say... I have mixed feelings about it. There were so many good parts about it, and I'm glad that they posed the questions in public. But I think I was a little disappointed in the way they didn't talk about the effect of hospital interventions on breastfeeding; the way they didn't even touch on birthrape; and the way it ended with the c/s, and the woman talking about how the baby will have no place to sleep...like co-sleeping wasn't even on her radar... which to be honest it probably wasn't.

To me it felt like they implied, well, at the end of the day, none of it matters because you'll still end up with a c/s.

I don't know. I guess I am just disappointed by what I wish had been addressed, and at the same time, I'm glad it put birth choices on the radar.

you know what I mean?
saimeiyu is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-12-2008, 06:50 PM
 
Peony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 15,918
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
I understand. I really like that it showed options to women, I feel that the movie opened many people's eyes, but the ending.... I felt myself wishing that they hadn't included Abby's birth. I was thinking that women would watch it, say yeah, some people can have a natural birth, but look... the film maker knew all this and still couldn't have one. But on the other hand... that WAS her experience and we never want to demoralize a woman's birth experience. I still feel conflicted. I do remember hearing the no bed part, and rolling my eyes thinking but you have a bed, what more do you need.

As a LLL leader, I would of love to have since bfing given more exposure, but I also know that when you try to get out too many messages, sometimes they all get up getting diluted so I'm ok with that one. Birth was their focus. And I've also tried to look at it from a mainstream point of view, that this whole idea is really new to many people anyway (that hospitals and docs don't all have your very best interest at heart, and all technology is great ), and focusing more on that without overwhelming people in the process.


For the most part, I liked it a lot, I thought they did a great job at getting their word out which is all we can hope for, letting women know there are other options out there.

There is no way to happiness, happiness is the way.
Peony is offline  
Old 03-12-2008, 09:28 PM
 
iris427's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 90
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I disagree, personally. I thought it was realistic. They presented natural birth in a good light but acknowledged that it's just not always possible.

I think since we here at MDC already know a lot about natural birth, we were expecting more from this film. It kind of just told us what we already knew, so maybe we felt underwhelmed. But I don't think it was made for us. I think it was made to be an introduction to the concept of natural birth/home birth to people who aren't familiar with it. And coming from that point of view, I think it did a great job.

Mommy to my sweet Iris, 9.13.08
iris427 is offline  
Old 03-12-2008, 10:33 PM
 
xelakann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Portland
Posts: 858
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm and glad they showed Abby's birth, it gave the film more merit. It showed that the medical side is necessary in certain situations and hers was certainly one of them, but the vast majority of births don't need any interventions. It also helped me do some healing about my own birth.

I just watched it today too... I was disappointed with the breastfeeding aspect, I wish they would have gone more into that... but overall it was a great film.

Kimberly
(Mama to West (11/07) Mabel Kelly 10/02/09)
xelakann is offline  
Old 03-13-2008, 01:37 AM
 
Ironica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would have loved for them to treat the topic of VBAC a bit more; I don't think they even mentioned it, except in passing when discussing the alarming rate of c-sections. More about how birth can influence nursing (and how important nursing is) would have been really neat, too. And and and... there are *so many* topics that could really use the sort of sensitive, gentle, introductory treatment that the Business of Being Born gave to the concept of out-of-hospital birth.

Maybe it can become a whole series. The next one can be about Abby's glorious VBAC or something. ;-) But I think that, in the end, it's good they picked a focus and stuck to it. They covered their topic well.

I didn't see anything out-of-place about Abby's birth, TBH. Maybe it would have been nice if it hadn't been right at the end, but I think they wanted to keep the chronology accurate, and didn't have time to add another family afterward.
Ironica is offline  
Old 03-14-2008, 07:27 AM - Thread Starter
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think my problem w/ the way they included Abby's birth was that it was the end, but also that it was REALLY easy to miss that her C/S really was medically necessary-- they kept talking about the breech part like that was the real reason, and I think that does a disservice to the moms who want to birth breech babies naturally. After watching the end a second and third time, I think it had very little to do with being breech-- that was maybe the icing on the cake-- the baby was not only premature, but also I got the impression had IUGR, which would I think, be more of a factor. So it wasn't the fact that her birth was IN there, so much as the WAY it was put in there.

I think the idea of a series on this stuff would be FANTASTIC! Then each one could focus on something separate but related and could be given the focus it deserves.

I really am glad the movie was made; like I said, I was just a little disappointed, I guess.

Oh-- and you're SO right about the VBAC's... I really hope they do some kind of follow-up or something.
saimeiyu is offline  
Old 03-14-2008, 11:48 AM
 
kythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 601
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There were a lot of issues that were not delved into in this film, but I think they really did well in what they emphasized. To look at it one way, how long would you want this film to be? They could have tried to make it more "complete" by addressing VBACs and other issues, but most people's attention wanes at some point with documentaries. They hit the major points.

I also noticed that breech was one of the reasons given for the C-section, but in some states midwives are not allowed to perform breech births and C-section is the standard of care. This is a nationally shown video representing midwives, so they need to portray the midwife acting within her scope of practice.

What bothered me more was that the mom mentioned the cord around his neck as a factor in the C-section. Actually, about 20% of babies are born with a cord around their neck and it isn't usually a complication. Maybe I'm getting a bit petty though, it was a great film.

I think it was wise for them to include a C-section birth that was portrayed in a positive way. It helps balance things out. It's wonderful that they never made it look like she "failed" because she didn't have a homebirth.
kythe is offline  
Old 03-14-2008, 12:42 PM
 
Chinese Pistache's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Under a shady tree, you and me
Posts: 5,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We discussed this over in Homebirth, too.

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=860197
Chinese Pistache is offline  
Old 03-14-2008, 11:28 PM
 
AnalogWife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It doesn't bother me that there wasn't a lot of BFing content b/c the movie focused on birth. I think that it was intended to open the eyes to mainstreamers or nervous DH's. I think that was a good point about how they didn't make Abby's baby's IUGR abundantly clear, but as someone who has had a c-section, I was DEEPLY moved by Ricki's birth and the decisions of the other moms, but ultimately I did feel less alienated since there was a c-section. I don't think Abby was ever that intent on having a homebirth, I think she was just trying to fit-in with the subject matter but in the end was fine with a NY hospital birth.

As for having a place for the baby to sleep, and not promoting co-sleeping....I myself had NO IDEA we were going to have (and ENJOY ) a family bed until after DS was born. I didn't even know what co-sleeping was until it just came naturally. I noticed that she said she didn't have a bassinette, but didn't find fault with it in the movie since it was about birth, not AP.
AnalogWife is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 05:57 PM
 
2girlsand2boys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I thought I was the only person who felt this way! I thought that the movie was veryinformitive and well done until we got to Abby's birth at the end.

I had been hoping to show the movie to my mother, (in hopes of her finally understanding why I chose a homebirth) but I felt that the c/s at the end would have left a sour taste in her mouth ("see, her baby would have DIED if she didn't go to the hospital" and other stuff like that...)

I liked the movie for the most part and still recommended it to many friends.
2girlsand2boys is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 06:18 PM
 
gwerydd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 1,341
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i was so happy there was a medically necessary c section birth in the film. it allowed me to feel included. i find it hurtful that you don't think it should be included in the film. like my birth and the births of many women don't deserve to be included.

Mummy to dd (Jan 13, '07) born by emergency c-section at 35 weeks due to severe pre-e  :ribboncesarean.gif and ds (Jan 30 '09) :hbac.gif and stork-suprise.gif    (06/11)
gwerydd is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 06:32 PM - Thread Starter
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwerydd View Post
i was so happy there was a medically necessary c section birth in the film. it allowed me to feel included. i find it hurtful that you don't think it should be included in the film. like my birth and the births of many women don't deserve to be included.
Hon, I don't think anyone is saying that the birth doesn't belong in the film at all. It's just that the WAY that it was included could have been MUCH better. I don't think it should have ended that way, and I do think that it should have been better explained. Most people who see the film won't have a good idea of why she had a C/S. In fact, I had to watch the ending several times to figure it out myself. The midwife should have taken 2 minutes to explain that there was never a chance for Abby to have a homebirth with a baby coming that early. I can guarantee that most people probably came away with the impression that she tried and failed to have a home birth, when that was never really an option. She just went into labor TOO EARLY. She was like, what? 31-32, MAYBE 33 weeks? She still had like 5 weeks to go the day before she went into labor. Most people won't know that midwives generally aren't allowed, and most wouldn't attend a homebirth for a baby born that early. They'd get that woman to the hospital... and they never explained that. They also never explained all the other reasons on top of that that would have made a vag. delivery too dangerous for the baby.

That's the problem that some of us have with Abby's birth, NOT that it was a medically necessary C/S
saimeiyu is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 06:47 PM
 
gwerydd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 1,341
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
please don't patronise me. i agree that they could have gone into it a bit more as to the reasons why. i was responding to Peony's post that she wished it had not been included.

Mummy to dd (Jan 13, '07) born by emergency c-section at 35 weeks due to severe pre-e  :ribboncesarean.gif and ds (Jan 30 '09) :hbac.gif and stork-suprise.gif    (06/11)
gwerydd is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 07:12 PM
 
bellymama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: humboldt california
Posts: 2,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by iris427 View Post
I disagree, personally. I thought it was realistic. They presented natural birth in a good light but acknowledged that it's just not always possible.

I think since we here at MDC already know a lot about natural birth, we were expecting more from this film. It kind of just told us what we already knew, so maybe we felt underwhelmed. But I don't think it was made for us. I think it was made to be an introduction to the concept of natural birth/home birth to people who aren't familiar with it. And coming from that point of view, I think it did a great job.
word. i thought it was a fantastic movie.
and it showed homebirths, birth center births, and a section...it showed the variety of ways that baby's are born
and i think that the fact that Abby said "there is no place for the baby to sleep" was more a joke in the fact that the baby was super early. give her a break.
it showed more homebirths than anything else. it was realistic. shit happens.
and not all c-sections = birthrape.
bellymama is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 07:15 PM
 
bellymama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: humboldt california
Posts: 2,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwerydd View Post
i was so happy there was a medically necessary c section birth in the film. it allowed me to feel included. i find it hurtful that you don't think it should be included in the film. like my birth and the births of many women don't deserve to be included.
word.
bellymama is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 01:37 AM
 
ErinBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,637
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwerydd View Post
i was so happy there was a medically necessary c section birth in the film. it allowed me to feel included. i find it hurtful that you don't think it should be included in the film. like my birth and the births of many women don't deserve to be included.
Its a movie advocating natural birth and options beyond birthing in a hospital setting. IMO, there is no place for a surgical birth in that film presented as it was and I was disappointed when I saw it. I'm sorry if that makes you feel left out.

Mama to Raina (9/06) and Peter (8/09)!
ErinBird is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 02:46 AM
 
gwerydd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 1,341
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErinBird View Post
Its a movie advocating natural birth and options beyond birthing in a hospital setting. IMO, there is no place for a surgical birth in that film presented as it was and I was disappointed when I saw it. I'm sorry if that makes you feel left out.
however, there is a place for surgical birth and it should be included to show the wide experiences for birth and that even the most natural minded can end up with complications and that is not a failure. also Abbie's pregnancy was followed through the film so viewers would naturally want to know how it turned out.

Mummy to dd (Jan 13, '07) born by emergency c-section at 35 weeks due to severe pre-e  :ribboncesarean.gif and ds (Jan 30 '09) :hbac.gif and stork-suprise.gif    (06/11)
gwerydd is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 02:46 AM
 
septbabymama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 163
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErinBird View Post
Its a movie advocating natural birth and options beyond birthing in a hospital setting. IMO, there is no place for a surgical birth in that film presented as it was and I was disappointed when I saw it. I'm sorry if that makes you feel left out.
I really enjoyed this movie and am glad that it's out there educating women and men about natural births, but I thought it was also good to include a c section. C sections are necessary in some situations so to exclude it altogether is not telling a realistic story.

I watched a video about Dr Odent, a French Ob/Gyn, who used to do c-sections and medicated births until he realized how unnecessary in most cases they were and pioneered natural births in France. While they showed many natural births, they also showed a breech birth that was done naturally with feet coming out first (eek!) and the same mom who was carrying twins ended up having to get a c-section for the 2nd baby because she wasn't coming out after 2+ hours after the 1st one was born and she wasn't getting any contractions. If a woman prepares for a natural birth, but ends up having a c-section because it's medically necessary then that's probably the best outcome in her situation and there is no reason to discount that...it's still a beautiful birth IMO.
septbabymama is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 03:00 AM
 
ErinBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,637
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The issues I had with including Abbie's birth were how it was done. I would have much preferred a HBAC mom being shown, or a greater inclusion of discussion around Abby's birth. What I saw was 'OMG, breech! (and a little early) BUT BREEECH!!!!!', lots of panicking, then a cut to Abby justifying her C-section as necessary (maybe it was, but honestly- from my perspective, most moms who end up with an unexpected surgical birth justify it as one of the rare necessary ones) and her issues breastfeeding without a lot of followup on anything.

I'm not necessarily opposed to a surgical birth being included, but it ought to have been done in a much better way and not as the ending note of the film.

Mama to Raina (9/06) and Peter (8/09)!
ErinBird is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 03:03 AM
 
ErinBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,637
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwerydd View Post
however, there is a place for surgical birth and it should be included to show the wide experiences for birth and that even the most natural minded can end up with complications and that is not a failure. also Abbie's pregnancy was followed through the film so viewers would naturally want to know how it turned out.
I didn't get that impression from the movie. What left a bad taste in my mouth was the final interview with Abby and her baby where she seems to just shrug and write the experience off as 'necessary'. Maybe it was in her case, but I can't help but feel like that is the prevalent attitude about surgical and highly medicalized births today- in each and every case it is 'necessary.'

Maybe following the HBAC of a mom who was run through the typical American birth machine with previous pregnancies and labors, or similar would have sat better with me.

Mama to Raina (9/06) and Peter (8/09)!
ErinBird is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 03:04 AM
 
gwerydd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 1,341
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErinBird View Post
The issues I had with including Abbie's birth were how it was done. I would have much preferred a HBAC mom being shown, or a greater inclusion of discussion around Abby's birth. What I saw was 'OMG, breech! (and a little early) BUT BREEECH!!!!!', lots of panicking, then a cut to Abby justifying her C-section as necessary (maybe it was, but honestly- from my perspective, most moms who end up with an unexpected surgical birth justify it as one of the rare necessary ones) and her issues breastfeeding without a lot of followup on anything.

I'm not necessarily opposed to a surgical birth being included, but it ought to have been done in a much better way and not as the ending note of the film.

i'm sorry but a 33 week preemie with IUGR IS a necessary cesarean, as is bp of 212/121 as was my case. if you have never been in a situation of having a c-section than you really don't know whether it was necessary or not.

Mummy to dd (Jan 13, '07) born by emergency c-section at 35 weeks due to severe pre-e  :ribboncesarean.gif and ds (Jan 30 '09) :hbac.gif and stork-suprise.gif    (06/11)
gwerydd is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 04:22 AM
 
Ironica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwerydd View Post
i'm sorry but a 33 week preemie with IUGR IS a necessary cesarean,
Abby was 35 weeks, not 33. And the IUGR was not diagnosed until after the birth, from what I could tell. The reason for the transfer was that she was early and breech; the reason for the section was that she was breech. Since they did not tell us what type of breech, we don't know whether it was truly the ONLY way for the baby to be born (big difference between transverse and frank)... but, once the IUGR issue was identified, it was clear that the c-section *was* the best way for THIS baby to be born, and had they attempted a vaginal breech delivery without that information, things could have gone a lot worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwerydd View Post
if you have never been in a situation of having a c-section than you really don't know whether it was necessary or not.
This statement excludes most obstetricians from ever being in a position to determine if a c-section is medically necessary. I find that assertion troubling. True, many (most) of them do seem to exercise poor judgement about the issue, but they SHOULD have the training and expertise to make the determination even without having had the experience of the surgery themselves.

Also, most women who have had a c-section are *not* really able to determine if a particular situation requires a surgical birth. Unfortunately, most women are fairly uneducated about the birth process, even after they've been through it. So, while a woman might know that in *her* case it was necessary (and plenty of women "know" this even when it's NOT true, because highly-trained people they trust have told them so), she's not necessarily in a position to judge if someone else's situation requires surgery.
Ironica is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 08:32 PM - Thread Starter
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Was she 35 weeks? I don't know why I thought she was like 33 or something... She said she had "at least" 5 weeks to go so I guess I assumed that she was counting to 38 weeks. In any case, all the focusing and the panicking about the breech is what really got to me. It was like, the breech was the real problem, nevermind all this other stuff, it was BREECH!
saimeiyu is offline  
Old 03-19-2008, 02:48 AM
 
gwerydd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 1,341
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i thought she was 33 weeks because 3lbs whatever is small even for 33 weeks (my sister was 3lbs 11 oz at 33 weeks and she had IUGR) if she was 35 weeks and the baby was only 3 lbs something, that's even more serious (my dd was 35 weeks and 4lbs 15oz). and i believe that breech presentation can be more dangerous in premature births. i agree that they could have made the circumstances surrounding Abbie's birth more clear, but i do not think that it should not have been included. and as a c-section mom it is important for me to know that my cesarean was medically necessary to save my life and the life of my dd. it was very hard for me to deal with at first but knowing that it was necessary it has been easier to accept and understand. i can understand where Abby is coming from.

Mummy to dd (Jan 13, '07) born by emergency c-section at 35 weeks due to severe pre-e  :ribboncesarean.gif and ds (Jan 30 '09) :hbac.gif and stork-suprise.gif    (06/11)
gwerydd is offline  
Old 03-20-2008, 06:55 PM
 
almadianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: *clicks heels* There is no place like Stockholm
Posts: 5,872
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
there is only so much that you can put into a 90 minute-2 hour film... and i think they did a great job considering.

earth.gif trottin', pole dancing, Norway and Sweden lovin' , hippie.gif,WOHM Kiddos born waterbirth.jpg 12/11/06 and 08/09/08 
belly.gif with #3 puke.gif EDD:01/2013 yikes2.gif So in love loveeyes.gif with my sweet Swede 2twins.gif and my bonus-son 10/25/98 carrot.gif

 
 

almadianna is offline  
Old 03-20-2008, 07:00 PM - Thread Starter
 
saimeiyu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Makakilo, HI
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
well, the baby did have IUGR, so small would be expected.
saimeiyu is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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