[darsmama]

I'm pregnant again and decided to go with my MW and midwife in training from last time.

My reasons for not having an unassisted birth are pretty dull.

I liked the mw's both so much that I really thought they added to the birth environment. I felt really cared for in that environment. But, I also felt like it was pretty unassisted in its own ways. I asked for their help when I wanted it, but the rest of the time we were left to our own devices.

Another reason I wouldn't have an unassisted birth is that I'm too lazy to figure out how to do the birth cert. filing and crap like that.

Okay, those are my lame reasons. If the next time (IF) we go to have a baby the MW isn't around I think I'd be completely open/leaning to an unassisted. Especially when I listen to some women's mw horror stories.

What keeps you from having an unassisted birth?

 

[crunchymamatobe]

We're a whole year away from even TTC, but I am very drawn to the idea of UC. I believe we could do it, I *know* I could do it, and DP is even hip on the idea of catching his own baby. But, he's not comfortable with the idea of being completely separate from medical know-how. So we'll probably have future babes at home with a midwife - with specific instructions to be as hands-off as possible. Unless I don't get hands-off vibes or just don't get good vibes from the midwives in the area - then I will put my proverbial foot down and insist on UC.

 

[starlite]

I am not here to give home births a bad wrap - I actually really like the idea of them but wouldn't chooses this option myself.

For one reason, I am in a 'high risk' category of pregnancy and need to take anti depressants that are kind of experimental in pregnant/nursing mothers but the only one that works for me. I have a chance (however slight) that my baby will need resussitation shortly after birth although I certainly pray that this is not the case and that my labor progress essentially unassisted in an environment (hospital) where assistance would be immediate should it be warrented. Does this make sense???

Maybe I have too much faith in the role of modern medicine and doctor's training - even though many mamma's percieve them to be cold, clinical and steely I tendto find them kind of reassuring. The doctor who delivered my son left me to labor largely unassisted (just gasfor pain) as she believes that mother nature knows what she's doing and that her role is to step in if mother nature needs help. I liked that so I have no reason not to go back to a hospital for the birth of our second baby. I am 9 weeks pregnant right now.

starlite

 

[Pam_and_Abigail]

I couldn't quite convince myself enough to convince dh, though my mw's are agreed to take a back seat role. I don't habdle emergencies well, so I would probably freak out if I thought something was wrong, and I don't quite feel in tune with my body enough to listen to my intuition.

But I want an UC so bad! If we have a #3, that would be my main reason (not the best reason to have another child, maybe). This can be sorta like a practice run...

 

[mclisa]

I've had very positive experiences with my doctor and with the hospital that I will be delivering at again. They encourage bf, baby is in the nursery minimally, etc. They listen to what you want. They have beautiful rooms and treat you well. The nurses are fantastic at helping you labor (breathing, tub time, birth ball, alternative labor/pushing posititons.)

I'm a worry wort and couldn't handle the guilt if something went wrong at home. I also don't want to have to clean or have my husband clean up after the delivery. This way I can come home to a beautiful clean home and just enjoy my baby.

 

[mehndi mama]

When we had our first homebirths, we had a midwife "in case of an emergency". I was still in that mindset when I got pregnant with my youngest, and actually TOLD the midwife that I was confident that all would be well, and that I wanted her there only for emergency (as all of our babies had had some breathing difficulty of some sort at the start, from moderate to severe), and that I'd like her to stay in another room unless I felt I needed her. She didn't like that at all. All these years that we had known her, and all this time she'd been *professing* to be hands-of, and that her presence was totally in the hands of the birthing couple....when it came down to actually committing herself to syaing "yes, I can do that", she couldn't.
Other factors coupled with that led me to drop her as my care provider, and DH pushed me to research UC. Turns out that our main fear - breathing difficulty - was most likely iatrogenic in all but one of our assisted births....and in the one critical situation where the baby did not make it, we lost precious non-critical minutes with our little boy because the midwife cut the cord when it would have been better to leave him hooked up.

We do UC now, and had our first perfect-outcome birth with our 5th baby

 

[wednesday]

I delivered my first son in a birth center, but I would not go back there for a multitude of reasons. It ended up being a more mainstream medical experience than I had anticipated. We want to have our next baby at home, but I would want someone with some medical training around in the event of breathing problems, prolapsed cord, etc. Also, after 4 hours of pushing my son was having a hard time getting out, and the midwife attending was able to rotate his head a bit and do some stuff to help.

I may misunderstand about this, but even in UC isn't it often the case that the mama's partner is "assisting" in some way? Catching or cutting the cord or more? My husband does not want to have that role.

 

[cholderby]

His name is Leo, I married him a year ago yesterday...

He's the reason we aren't having a homebirth this time. He said he just couldn't handle it. And I can certainly see where he's coming from (this is our first). Next time will be an assisted homebirth. Then UC. Assuming all goes well with numbers 1 and 2. I'm 29 weeks now and have had no issues so far so we'll see. I'll be over 35 by the time number 3 rolls around, but I don't think that's a big factor, right?

Anyway, the idea really appeals to me. I like the ABC we are going to now, but I would much rather be a home.

 

[HelloKitty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mclisa I've had very positive experiences with my doctor and with the hospital that I will be delivering at again. They encourage bf, baby is in the nursery minimally, etc. They listen to what you want. They have beautiful rooms and treat you well. The nurses are fantastic at helping you labor. I'm a worry wort and couldn't handle the guilt if something went wrong at home. I also don't want to have to clean or have my husband clean up after the delivery. This way I can come home to a beautiful clean home and just enjoy my baby.

I'm cheating and copying this post because it's EXACTLY what I was going to say! :LOL

 

[alegna]

Well we had a midwife here for our first. It was nice since neither of us had done this before. She was really VERY hands off though, so it wasn't a problem there. She had all of her babes UC so she has no problem with that idea

We will probably have her again- an extra support person is nice and like you said- I'm way lazy and that way she takes care of the birth cert and all that

PP said:
" I'm a worry wort and couldn't handle the guilt if something went wrong at home. I also don't want to have to clean or have my husband clean up after the delivery. This way I can come home to a beautiful clean home and just enjoy my baby."

I'm a worry wart and couldn't stand the guilt if something went wrong in the hospital

much higher chance of it there. I would have nearly certainly ended up with a section if I'd been at a hospital for this one- for no reason other than they have a mind set of how fast things HAVE to happen. Mine was slow for a reason.

If I couldn't find a hands- off midwife, we would definitely go UC.

-Angela

 

[FreeRangeMama]

Quote:

I may misunderstand about this, but even in UC isn't it often the case that the mama's partner is "assisting" in some way? Catching or cutting the cord or more? My husband does not want to have that role.

No way!! Not for us anyway. I labored alone, and birthed pretty much alone (dh and ds were standing in the doorway as spectators, but they certainly weren't "assisting" in any way). I caught ds2 myself. Dh did clean up afterward, but that was his choice. I would have done it if necessary as I was not going to let that detail stand in the way of my birth

He also helped my out of the tub, he does that all the time anyway. We didn't cut the cord for about 3 hours, and I would have done that too, but I just wanted to snuggle with my boys, so I had dh do it. Again, I was going to do that myself if necessary, but dh felt at that point like he wanted to do "something" for his precious new babe.

Husbands aren't stand-in midwives in UCs, they may or may not be there to support the birthing woman and they may or may not be involved in the birth. It depends on the birth, the couple, and the desires of all involved.

 

[Mama Lori]

I am having my 2nd homebirth. I wouldn't have an unassisted birth because complications can and do happen, and I want a skilled professional there to handle it if it does.

 

[Celtain]

Quote:

Originally Posted by alegna I'm a worry wart and couldn't stand the guilt if something went wrong in the hospital much higher chance of it there. I would have nearly certainly ended up with a section if I'd been at a hospital for this one- for no reason other than they have a mind set of how fast things HAVE to happen. Mine was slow for a reason. -Angela

How do you figure there is a much higher chance of something going wrong in the hospital? If something is going to go wrong, it is going to go wrong no matter where you are.

 

[alegna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by embens How do you figure there is a much higher chance of something going wrong in the hospital? If something is going to go wrong, it is going to go wrong no matter where you are.

Statistically no. The problem with hospitals is that they interfere. It's what they do. It's what you pay them big bucks to do. They wouldn't be in business if they just stood in the doorway and let women labor and have babies

Their "help" causes more problems than it solves.

-Angela

 

[ramlita]

I don't want to have to think!

When I labor, I don't want to have any responsibility beyond figuring out what works for my body and my baby. The more rational thoughts I have while in labor, the less effective my labor seems to be. I want someone else there who will bring me food, remind me to pee, and listen to the baby's heart. Even better when that person has skilled, experienced hands that can help with shoulder dystocia (rare, I know...) and knows how much PP blood loss is reasonable, and is skilled in newborn resuscitation.

My first labor followed a rather strange timeline, and without someone there who'd seen a zillion births who could tell me everything was okay, I would have been very worried. And for me, that worry would have been a pretty tough condition to add to the already tough labor.

Labor is an emotional family event, and I don't want my husband or myself to have to spend much energy on logistics, once the time comes. And after my first birth, I decided that I want a TEAM of people helping: keep my birth tub full of warm water, keep the food coming, rub my back, play with our DD, support my squats, etc etc etc... I'm lucky that I have had no trouble finding midwives who are willing to keep whatever distance I wish for, providing only the support we plan for/I ask for at the time.

I do completely understand the reasons people have for doing UC!
I find it very appealing, on some levels.
It's just not for us.

 

[Star]

I have bad luck - nothing ever goes right. I wanted even just a homebirth with DD but I was rushed in for an emergency c-section. If I were to have an unassisted homebirth with my next baby, my luck would end up that my c-section incision would tear open or something else horrible.

 

[HelloKitty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by alegna Statistically no. The problem with hospitals is that they interfere. It's what they do. It's what you pay them big bucks to do. They wouldn't be in business if they just stood in the doorway and let women labor and have babies Their "help" causes more problems than it solves. -Angela

I've had 3 hospital births so far and this has absolutely NOT been my experience. I am left to labor as I wish without interference. I don't know about your hospital but mine offers a lot more then a maternity ward so they are certainly in business for other reasons...

 

[alegna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HelloKitty I've had 3 hospital births so far and this has absolutely NOT been my experience. I am left to labor as I wish without interference. I don't know about your hospital but mine offers a lot more then a maternity ward so they are certainly in business for other reasons...

You're lucky if that's the case

By not interfere I mean- they did only periodic, hand-held monitoring. No iv (or hep lock). No internal checks. No telling you when to push. Mom can catch baby. Delayed cutting of the cord. NO separation of mom and baby. Immediate nursing encouranged. Wait for placenta with no time-table. If that was the case, count your blessings! Definitely not the norm.

-Angela

 

[Celtain]

Quote:

Originally Posted by alegna Statistically no. The problem with hospitals is that they interfere. It's what they do. It's what you pay them big bucks to do. They wouldn't be in business if they just stood in the doorway and let women labor and have babies Their "help" causes more problems than it solves. -Angela

Just wondering, where did you get your statistic's from? I would be interested in reading them.

 

[HelloKitty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by alegna By not interfere I mean- they did only periodic, hand-held monitoring. No iv (or hep lock). No internal checks. No telling you when to push. Mom can catch baby. Delayed cutting of the cord. NO separation of mom and baby. Immediate nursing encouranged. Wait for placenta with no time-table. If that was the case, count your blessings! Definitely not the norm.

I think hospital births have changed A LOT over the years - and while I'm sure there are some bad hospitals out there, don't assume they all do the same things. My first birth - which was almost 15 years ago was much different from my most recent birth, hospital policies and procedures have really changed a lot in recent years.

The only seperation I experienced was when they took my son over to the corner of the room to weigh him and measure him as well as clean him up a little - but that was AFTER I had held him and already attempted nursing (greatly encouraged to bond and to help push the placenta out). I did not have an IV - no need to. I did have occasional internal checks, but I didn't have a problem with this so... wouldn't call it interference as it's something I wanted. Periodic monitoring - yep. Hard to do anything else when you are moving around for your labor. Also my OBs position on birth is to let the baby "fall out" - he does not encourage pushing until the woman can't help it. Yes my doctor DID catch my babies - but then I wanted him too so I wouldn't call that interference.

I can understand someone not wanting a hospital birth, and I do understand the attraction of a home birth - but what is troubling me is your statements about interference making hospital births more risky - which of the "interferences" that you mentioned are you considering risky to the baby?

I have never had a home birth so I wouldn't condemn them, you have never had a hospital birth so you probably shouldn't be so quick to condemn them.