childbirth education

There are many variations on the only thesis available to opponents of home birth: What do the statistics say? Despite the enticement of a warm, peaceful and private birth that a home birth offers, the perceived importance of missing technology lingers like impending doom. In America, less than 1% of births takes place in homes. It is difficult for the other 99% of Americans to make the transition from technology as the benchmark for establishing worldwide leadership to the reality that the human body is designed to give birth and it has evolved to make many variations in labor and birth look so easy.

The Stockholm Birth Center Study followed one birth center’s outcomes over a ten-year period culminating in 2000 and comparing the outcomes to the associated hospital’s birth outcomes. The one strong observation in this study is the truism that many women will choose a birth center because of the perceived safety in having a hospital nearby. However, it is a mistake to conclude the birth center is free of institutional intervention. The study’s results are negated because of the influence of the obstetrical backup. Every woman who chose the birth center for her birth location was still subjected to the institutional care package. This is the most influential determinant in whether or not a woman is “risked out” of laboring and ultimately delivering in the birth center.

A birth center so closely associated with a hospital is not autonomous and must operate under strict supervision by institutional birth practitioners. The authors themselves state they did not study the effect of individual labor and delivery protocols, but rather the care documented in each case as a “package.” In addition, they have correctly remarked standards of maternity care do not exist, but they have again missed the mark on the importance of this statement. This is critical to interpreting the outcomes, because one solitary intervention can turn out to be the predictor of a birth outcome. For example, every care provider practices according to their comfort level; although every care provider will monitor a baby’s heart tones in labor, how the monitoring is done varies by care provider. Continuous electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) can range in definition from ten minutes hooked up to a monitor every hour on the hour to a handheld doppler check through a contraction every few hours to a telemetry unit (a girdlelike band outfitted to wirelessly transmit fetal monitoring data) that allows the mother walk more freely.

The ability to walk freely even under continuous monitoring allows the mother greater mobility for finding a position that increases her ability to cope with her contractions. Setting aside the U.S. Preventative Service’s Task Force’s findings and stance that continuous fetal monitoring provides no benefit at all – and the data showing that continuous EFM results in more cesareans – it can be argued that fetal monitoring that limits a mother’s mobility is therefore more likely to result in more intervention as the mother shows signs of distress and therefore the baby does as well.

The authors of the Stockholm Birth Center study argue that many other studies have reached conclusions similar to theirs. In the same publication we are offered a Cochrane Systematic Review of Home-Like versus Conventional Institutional Settings for Birth. Here the reviewers concluded births in home-like settings compared to purely hospital settings “provided only modest benefits including reduced medical interventions and increased maternal satisfaction.”

A hasty read of this data by institutional birth practitioners correctly supports their ingrained training that routine intervention is acceptable and “safe.” However, the paper actually clearly demonstrates that all births taking place in a hospital are going to meet up with interventions at some point during labor, and it is the overuse of technology that needs to be analyzed. Indeed that message is there somewhat cryptically as the authors instead hinder the possibility of improving on the scope of research by advising “caregivers and clients should be vigilant for signs of complications.” It is difficult for any woman who has given birth or who respects her body to hear such little value placed on the differences the studies do reveal, such as the “modest benefits” of “reduced medical interventions” and “increased maternal satisfaction.” Surely even one avoided episiotomy would be appreciated by the woman whose perineum would have been cut and would find several women healing from receiving an unnecessary episiotomy envious.

In 1998, a study of infant mortality in planned home births was conducted in Australia. Author Hilda Bastion reviewed these outcomes as neither hospital nor home births have defined what constitutes standard care. She reviewed both midwives and medical practitioners, registered and unregistered, minimal experience and heavy case load. Also included in the study were births that would be deemed risky by virtue of poor health in the mothers or other underlying health conditions. This is crucial to understanding the bias of many hospital birth proponents: It is not the intent of home birth advocates to claim home birth is best for everyone, but rather a viable option for low-risk and otherwise healthy women. The author goes so far as to note it is a disturbing trend that midwives may be encouraging and willing to take high-risk births because of the high number of low birth-weight infants counted in the statistics. In fact, it is quite possible that a woman who cannot afford good nutrition may also not be able to afford hospital birth care, and perhaps a midwife is her better choice than no care at all.

In general, birth care is divided into either purely institutional care or modified institutional care. No research exists on pure, spontaneous vaginal birth over an intact perineum without induction agents, drugs, surgery and instruments. What is available is mounds of research on what a mother or baby can “tolerate” in labor and what interventions have achieved an acceptable degree of risk. The acceptable degree of risk is not defined by an independent counsel but often influenced by the strongest or loudest lobbying effort, as witnessed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ (ACOG) August 2007 statement on the advance of midwifery options for consumers. ACOG’s bottom line is midwifery options must be controlled and home birth as an option must be eliminated. The average consumer misses the bias and conflict of interest: A rise in home births means a decrease in income for a field already plagued by the reality that there is no money to be made in natural childbirth.

In addition to a lack of studies of organic birth as defined above, there are no long-term, randomized longitudinal studies to confirm or deny the correlation of many interventions. For example, the impact of a mother’s drug use in labor on emotional bonding, breast-feeding, postpartum depression, later drug abuse (baby as a young adult), etc. In the 1970s, Doris Haire, the President of the American Foundation for Maternal and Child Health, said, “No drug has been proven safe and effective for use during pregnancy or childbirth.” Considering that 25% of drugs introduced in the market today are recalled or pulled off the market in 1 to 5 years, this statement has never been more true. Until such time that midwifery care can be studied with a critical but appreciative eye, we will find only the weakest of studies boxed in by outdated beliefs that American women cannot afford to birth outside of a medical institution. In fact, it is our country that cannot afford to NOT offer free standing birth centers as a birth care option for American women.

Works Cited
Bastian, Hilda, “Perinatal Death Associated with Planned Home Birth in Australia Population Based Study”: BMJ 1998; 317: 384-8

Hodnett, E.D and S. Downe and N. Edwards and D. Walsh, “Selected Cochrane Systematic Reviews: Home-like versus Conventional Institutional Settings for Birth”; BIRTH Issue 32:2; June 2005

Waldenstrom, Ulla and Charlotta Grunewald, “The Safety of Birth Centers Responses to a
Critique of the Stockholm Birth Center Study”; BIRTH Issue 32:2; June 2005

Just a quick look at the birth outcomes for Independent Childbirth educator led birth classes led by Sheridan Ripley, Gretchen Vetter, Olivia Sporinsky, Molly Remer, Aimee Crane, Joni Nichols, Ruth Trode, Dale Bernucca, Brandy Segin, Helen Loucado, Sara Wallbaum and Dorene Vaughn.


Free Standing Birth Center = 45; Planned Home Birth = 55; Planned Unassisted Birth = 4; Unplanned Unassisted Birth = 3; Transfers = 25

Combined Spontaneous, Unmedicated, Unmanaged Vaginal Births = 107

Combined Transfer Medicated, Vaginal Births = 8

Combined Transfer Medicated, Cesarean Births = 2

Combined Transfer Unmedicated then OR for Cesarean = 13

Combined Transfer Unmedicated, Vaginal Births = 2

  C/S Rate for all OOH Births:  11.36%

  Transfer Rate for all OOH Births :  19%

  C/S Rate for Transfers of OOH Births:  60%



OB Attended = 75; Family Physician Attended = 6; CNM Attended = 19; Other = 1

Combined Spontaneous, Unmedicated, Unmanaged Vaginal Births = 57

Combined Managed, Unmedicated, Vaginal births (i.e. AROM) = 6

Combined Managed (includes pitocin/induction only) Vaginal Births = 25**

Combined Managed Resulting in Cesarean Births = 11**

Combined Spontaneous, Unmedicated, Unmanaged Resulting in C/S = 2

   C/S Rate for all Planned Hospital Births: 12.88%

   C/S Rate for all Managed Hospital Births**:  26.19%

   Percentage of Hospital Births Managed**:  41.58%


We did not penalize hospitals by including cesareans from homebirth transfers in their statistics.  We did however include c/s for breech in their statistics because medical training trends have forced those cesareans by no longer training medical practitioners to catch breech babies.

Amber Marlowe anticipated an easy delivery when she went into labor on January 14, 2004. But after a routine ultrasound, doctors at Wilkes-Barre General Hospital, in Pennsylvania, decided that the baby–at what looked like 13 pounds–was too big to deliver vaginally and told her that she needed to have a cesarean. The mom-to-be, however, wasn’t convinced: After all, she’d given birth to her six previous kids the natural way, including other large babies. And monitoring showed that the fetus was in no apparent distress.

After she said no to surgery, doctors spent hours trying to change her mind. When that didn’t work, the hospital went to court, seeking an order to become her unborn baby’s legal guardian. A judge ruled that the doctors could perform a “medically necessary” c-section against the mom’s will, if she returned to that hospital. Meanwhile, she and her husband checked out against the doctors’ advice and went to another hospital, where she later gave birth vaginally to a healthy 11-pound girl. “When I found out about the court order, I couldn’t believe the hospital would do something like that. It was scary and very shocking,” says Marlowe. “All this just because I didn’t want a c-section.” ~ Could You Be Forced To Have A C-Section?, Lisa Collier Cool, Baby Talk Magazine

Although the c-section rate for planned out of hospital births appears to be the same as that for planned hospital births here is the difference:  the c-section rate for planned hospital births doubles when the labors are managed (ANY intervention is used).

The possibility of a cesarean section should be discussed with every patient as part of the patient’s birth plan, with contingent consent for a cesarean section obtained early in the woman’s pregnancy. The woman must sign the consent form herself; her husband should not be asked to sign it. At the time the cesarean section becomes necessary, the woman should be asked to resign the original consent form, indicating that the conditions for needing a cesarean section have now occurred. The fact that the mother may have had some pain-relieving drugs does not render her legally incompetent to acknowledge the need for the procedure. Her husband has no authority to sign the consent to her surgery unless she has given him this right in a power of attorney. If the mother is medically unable to consent because she is psychotic or comatose, the surgery may go forward based on the consent signed as part of the birth plan. – Excerpted from LSU’s Law Center Medical and Public Health Law Site

Practitioners presenting the information for acquiring a mother’s informed consent are not always comfortable with how to explain the procedure they want to do and why they want to do said procedure.

It isn’t always easy for birth practitioners to call their colleagues’ errors to public attention and in the process perhaps admit that they themselves crave a better quality of training.  

It is necessary to call attention to and demand spontaneous, normal, unmedicated, vaginal birth over an intact perineum be the gold standard for birth care.  We do so for the greater benefit to global maternity care.  Independent Childbirth educator members are at the forefront of making a difference.  When women are educated as to all of their birth care choices including planned out of hospital birth our combined c-section rate is 12.02%. The World Health Organization declares no region in the world should have a c-section rate greater than 10% to 15%; based on the cesarean rate for managed births we know our combined cesarean rate could be improved dramatically with increased use of better birth care practices by medically trained personnel.

*In our statistics there were 7 successful VBACs and 2 successful VBA2C; 2 VBACs became repeat CS for a successful VBAC rate of 81.82%.  There were 29 waterbirths.  There was one vaginal breech birth while 5 other breech presentations were automatic cesareans.  All 7 unassisted births were successful, healthy outcomes.  There were four sets of twin births, two with both vaginal but very managed labor, one scheduled c/s for breech at 31 weeks, one singleton born vaginally at term with sibling stillborn vaginally and it was known sibling had died inutero but mother chose to continue pregnancy for her other daughter’s health.  Learn more about gentle stillbirths and remembrance at Now I Lay Me Down To Sleep.

Professor Steer, BJOG editor in chief recommends …”doctors and midwives monitor how much water women drink during labor.” (Drinking Water During Labor Carries Risk)

Either the author of the above article or Professor Steer overlooked a couple of important nuances from Dr Vibeke Moen at the Sweden’s Karolinska Institute where the study he references was conducted.  He states hyponatraemia, an imbalance of electrolytes, is not uncommon following labor.  Not during labor, following labor.  That means something occurred during labor whose resultant effects are found in the immediate postpartum.

Let’s not allow the medical folks to obfuscate the hydration in labor issue.  Some real scenarios involving extreme labor:

“Scientific studies have looked at the best ways or most appropriate ways of replenishing the body with fluids under the extreme of conditions of heat and dehydration (Castellani et al, 1997, Marish et al, 2001, Kenefick et al, 2000). Castellani et al (1997) investigated athletes who were not acclimatised to temperatures of above 35oC, and submitted them to 2 bouts of exercise, which would be similar to that of a footballer in the midfield. In between they were rehydrated only once with either IV, oral ingestion or no fluid replacement after being dehydrated by 4% of body weight. It was found that there was no difference in performance between those that were rehydrated orally or by IV. They also found that oral and IV were equally effective as rehydration treatments. There was no difference between the treatments in regards to the way in which the bodies handled body temperature and fluid losses.

Marish et al (2001) found that oral hydration rather than IV rehydration resulted in athletes reporting less thirsty, feeling cooler and not as physically tired. Kenefick et al (2000), also found no added benefit of rehydrating the body using IV as opposed to oral hydration in mildly dehydrated individuals (persons had lost 4.5% of body weight as fluid loss) prior to competition. This group investigated the ability of the body to maintain body temperature and handle fluid losses. Casa et al (2000) found similar results to Castellani et al (1997), however also showed that the body and skin temperature was lower in those that orally rehydrated themselves as opposed to the use of IV.

In summary, all the studies reviewed showed no added benefit of using IV rehydration methods, as opposed to oral hydration in mildly dehydrated individuals before and during a match. There was no benefit in regards to sporting performance, body temperature and fluid control. In fact the benefits of oral hydration included persons feeling not as thirst [sic] and more comfortable in regards to feeling less exercise and heat stress (feeling tired and hot). Oral hydration if consumed in the required amounts is adequate to meet the needs of all footballers. IV rehydration should only be used under medical supervision and advice at times of severe dehydration, heat and exercise stress.” ~ Jeanette Fiedling, BSc, MHN; Oral vs. Intravenous (IV) Hydration

We admit a labor cannot be determined from the onset that it is going to last a specific amount of time, have a specific intensity, etc. is unlike a football match (American or otherwise) having set periods and a clock that winds down (or up).   Well, scratch that last comparison on the clock.  Another nuance here, dehydration is caused when the rate of fluid loss is greater than its intake of fluid.  Too much fluid intake can also cause the same symptoms of dehydration because either situation causes an imbalance of electrolytes, minerals as well as causing a change in body temperature.

As medical practitioners it is vital that they be well trained to know the clinical definition of dehydration.  As someone licensed to enact medical procedures upon our bodies it is vital to the consumer that the practitioner be attentive and act only when necessary.  It is very easy to alleviate mild dehydration, drink water.  Obstetricians are making a really huge leap here equating dehydration with hyponatraemia and it’s no surprise that they are doing so.

“One problem would seem to be that some clinicians experience difficulties in investigating the causes of hyponatraemia. It is here where the clinical biochemistry laboratory and chemical pathologist can play an important role in facilitating optimal patient care. Interestingly, Saeed and colleagues showed that rarely did patients with severe hyponatraemia have their urine osmolality or sodium checked.1 In such cases, it is difficult to see how the cause of the hyponatraemia could be clearly established. This of course is of fundamental importance, because the management of hyponatraemia should differ according to its aetiology.2–4 ”  ~ The Investigation and Management of Hyponatraemia; Journal of Clinical Pathology

Here’s another nuance from the study Professor Steer:

 “Women should not be encouraged to drink excessively during labour. Oral fluids, when permitted, should be recorded, and intravenous administration of hypotonic fluids should be avoided. When abundant drinking is unrecognised or intravenous fluid administration liberal, life-threatening hyponatraemia may develop. The possibility that hyponatraemia may influence uterine contractility merits further investigation.” (emphasis by Independent Childbirth)

Why the brouhaha over IVs in labor, really, docs?  Is it really that critical to you to win the argument over whether or not a woman consents to an IV?  Serious psychological turf issues here.  Think about it, what are the two first protocols a woman will need to make a decision about when arriving at the hospital in labor?  The vaginal exam and the IV.

Consenting to both, declining both or consenting to one and not the other, each scenario is the beginning of a scoreboard.  If she is allowed to ‘get her way’ from the start, all the other items an individual practitioner will decide are important may face a “no” from mom, too.  The latex gloves are off.  

“At one time, a myth became prevalent that drinking lots of water each day was a healthy habit.” ~ Professor Philip Steer

I had no idea that the belief in drinking lots of water each day is healthy is actually a myth.  How much is “lots?”  There are ounces, liters, but lots?  Okay, but when you have an IV in place Professor Steer, how can you tell if you really are thirsty?  You go on to cloud the issue for your colleagues,

“However, recent research shows clearly that in general, one can trust one’s natural body messages, and that we only need to drink more when we feel thirsty.”

According to you, are we laboring women capable of taking care of ourselves by laboring naturally and spontaneously so as to recognize thirst all by ourselves or aren’t we?

A word of wisdom for birth practitioners, the same one for mothers: don’t say no to everything.  Say no only when you mean no.  That way when it’s really important the “no” will truly stand for something and capture our attention.

One thing we loved about the documentary Orgasmic Birth, is how it complements Business of Being Born’s consumerism awareness and vice versa because the woman herself was the focus.  Her power.  Her ability to birth.  No focus on who is catching the baby.  AND…the births take place in America in the mother’s own time and her space.  A Disney film attempted to show waterbirth with dolphins and took place in scenery meant to be exotic and far away, but took a toll on both the dolphins and the women and families birthing in the name of cinematography in the process instead.  Disney, we don’t need to sell birth in an infomercial, but birth is of global interest.

Practitioners are selling fear of birth.  The truth is birth is simple and we do more harm just by using words to put a fear of the unknown in place rather than the empowerment of experiencing the new.  Birth is not an unknown UNLESS you throw interventions into the mix.  Then you’re on a whole ‘nother flowchart.

I think we, natural childbirth educators and advocates, are accused of “selling” natural childbirth by careproviders annoyed that they’ve lost another customer. 

When birth is allowed to just happen it is not only an experience of wonderment for all in its presence it is also an experience in appreciation for a woman to be “a” woman, one not one of many.  For a baby to be the individual human welcomed, not one of many.

I loved “Kerstin’s Birth Story” which is the birth story of our own Olivia Sporinsky now living in Texas with her husband and family on his military base.  Olivia tells us of her birth experience in Germany where the careproviders believed something definite about American women.  Still, they were open to allowing Olivia to birth her way even though it differed from what they believed to be true about American women and how they birthed.

I recalled Henci Goer during the NIH conference on elective cesarean.  The panel was quick to say “more research is needed”, the typical wishy-washy answer so as not raise the ire of an industry that has a heavy interest in the public perception of cesareans.  However, Henci, in her usual to the point manner, asked, “What are careproviders telling women about labor, birth?”  Her viewpoint being if we only look at “elective” cesarean as a “whatever you’d like” versus talking to women about labor as a healthy and safe process; VBAC labor as one where we support natural labor as the healthiest route even more so; talking to women about how normal it is to have trepidation about natural birth and recommend resources for them to learn more about the birth process, well then, of course you breed more fear of birth.  Careproviders themselves are actually talking themselves into being afraid of the laboring woman as pure risk.

Here’s to you Olivia and Kerstin.  May the international birth community and women around the world know that technology is good to have but do not attach technology as a necessity for American women, for any woman.  America’s maternity care has misplaced faith in technology and other countries need not follow.  There are American women who are not afraid of birth and every day these women are a hands-on lesson for society and practitioners every day.  Humble and wiser is the practitioner who gives the mother her due for a most satisfying labor only she can do.

In January 2005 I found out that I was expecting my 3rd child.  Being stationed in Germany with my husband I was excited about giving birth outside of the US.  I was assigned a German OB and also sought out a midwife.  Home birth was finally an option with my insurance.  The funny thing was that the insurance insisted that I continue to see the OB even though I was seeing a midwife.  I eventually stopped seeing the OB because it was a waste of my time to go to 2 appointments for the exact same thing. 
In my 8th month the midwife informed me that due to some legal technicalities she could not attend my birth on the Army base.  It is considered US soil, and there was some question about whether she could lose her license if she attended a birth there.  I would have been the first home birth on the base.  I then returned to the OB who sent me to register at my choice of hospitals.  I chose St Hildegardis-Krankenhaus I would be attended by midwives at the hospital and an OB would only be called in if there were a problem.
On September 8th I drove a friend home, about 20 minutes from my home.  On the way back I had a strong contraction.  I thought to myself, “if I have many more like this before I get home I won’t be able to drive”.  I returned home, climbed the 3 flights to my apartment and sat down on the couch.  A couple minutes later I had another contraction that made me jump off of the couch.  I said to my husband that that was the 2nd strong contraction like that I had had.  It was now about 9:45 in the evening.  He asked if we should call the neighbor to come take our other 2 for the night and I said no, it will probably be a while yet.  The first 2 contractions were about 20 minutes apart and the next few were strong, not painful and about 10 minutes apart.  I spent my time sitting on the toilet, the most comfortable position for me, but also a good position since it opened the pelvis.  I prayed that this labor, which felt so different from my 2 previous, would go quickly.  God granted my prayer request.  Around 10:20 or so I said he needed to call the neighbors and let them know he would be bringing the kids over.  When he asked for the number, and wanted me to call, I couldn’t form a complete thought.  I pointed him to the list of emergency numbers to call.  After he carried our second child over, I realized I could not wait for him to come back upstairs to get me.  I gathered my bag, his wallet and the keys and was waiting in the parking lot for him.  He looked at me as if I’d lost my mind, but I knew we needed to leave then.  The normally 26 minute drive took 45 minutes that night, and the car ride through the country to the “big city” was painful.  Every bump in the road hurt. 
We arrived at the hospital, around 11:20, and he dropped me at the door and then went to park the car.  I rang the bell for the night watchman (not all German hospitals have “emergency” rooms, we went to a private hospital that handled scheduled procedures and birth), told him in my very broken German that I was in labor.  As he went to get a wheelchair I waved him off and said I couldn’t sit anymore.  We made our way slowly upstairs, pausing every 2 minutes or so for a contraction.  When we arrived in the labor area, I rang the bell and told the midwife I was American.  She returned with an English speaking midwife who watched me through one contraction and said we needed to be in the birth room.  The next words she said shocked me.  She said, “we should call the anesthesiologist, yes?”  I responded with “No, please don’t”  She then said, “you are American, yes?”.  I said that I was but I really preferred to do this without any drugs.  It wasn’t until later that I realized the full implication of what she had asked me.  She asked if they could check to see how far I was dilated, and I agreed, again, curiosity getting the better of me.  I think I was 6 or 7.  I requested that they break my waters, my other 2 had come so quickly after the release.  She grudgingly agreed and did it the German way–no amniohook, just pinched the bag during a contraction and popped it–never again will I request that!  They wanted to get a good read on the baby, so I allowed them to hook up the EFM.  The room (at the hospital) was wonderful.  I had all the tools at my fingertips that I needed.  The midwives then left me to labor quietly, peacefully.  I spent most of my time swaying, doing the belly dance, and chanting “baby out, baby out”.  My husband wonderful as he is, is not a great labor companion.  He kept saying that he wished he could get the baby out.  I didn’t want him to do anything, I just needed to say it.  Suddenly there was a flurry of activity in the room and I realized that they were pulling out the internal monitor.  I couldn’t verbalize that I knew where the baby was, that all was ok with her/him.  There was no way that I was letting them screw that electrode into my baby’s head.  I knew it meant that my 4 hour recovery stay would turn into 24.  All I could say was that I would have 1 more contraction and push.  I climbed on the bed on all fours, had one contraction, rolled over and in a half-sitting position pushed before the midwife knew what was happening.  My husband was frantically ringing for the other midwife to come in.  She ran in just as my baby’s head was born.  They all stood there and stared at me.  After a short time, 2 minutes, she that I needed to push again to birth the body.  I’m not sure if she was concerned that the shoulders were stuck, or what, but when I felt the urge, I birthed the body.  They allowed me to reach down and pick up the baby, who was a girl.  She was born at 12:28 am.  They nestled us skin to skin and covered us with warm blankets.  Then came the next crazy (in my opinion) question:  “did you remember to bring your own formula?”  I pointed at my breasts and said “I have 2 of these and they work great!”  The lights were turned up a bit when they took baby Kerstin across the room to weigh her and do her exams.  They dressed her and brought her back where she happily nursed away.  They continued to bring us warm blankets until about 5:30 when they took me to my room, holding the baby in my bed.  I then had the option to take her to the nursery while I showered.  I shared a room with 2 other women, neither of whom had her baby in the room and both were sleeping.  I showered, got my baby, and ate breakfast.  While I waited for  my husband to come pick us up, I noticed that there were several nurses who kept pausing at our door.  I started listening to their conversations (oh, the joy of understanding a foreign language) and realized they were all talking about me–the American who didn’t have drugs and was breastfeeding.  I also insisted on leaving that morning, 9 hours after her birth, we left for home.  The Germans typically stay for a week until the birth certificate is ready, they leave rested, and prepared to care for a baby. 
I finally understood understood why the midwives were so surprised that I refused the drugs.  Most of the American spouses who deliver there demand drugs, the German women don’t.  I started asking all the Germans I knew, they all had home births, or non-medicated hospital births.  It also made me so sad that American women are seen as weak, not able to handle labor.  The Germans don’t see it as painful, just a necessary process to have a baby.  So what if it hurts a little?  They accomplished it.  I’ve often said if I were to have another baby I would hop a flight across the Atlantic if I could not have a home birth. 

Our thanks to Laura Shanley for catching Birth Love re-open on the web!

For many women, both birth advocates and just your every day mothers (not!), Birth Love was the top, up-to-date birth support site.  It has returned and we recommend you visit Birth Love for great info and great birth choices support.   

Since your tea is likely to get a little cool after spending time zoomng around Birth Love, why not warm it up and return to read some Positive Birth Stories next?

Preconceived notions are… interesting. I’m in the middle of watching the wonderful A&E version of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice and the theme is, of course, Darcy’s and Elizabeth’s mistaken first impressions about each other, and working through the negative prejudice each had about the other, to get to the truth about themselves and each other. Sometimes first impressions can be very accurate; but sometimes they can be completely wrong.

When it comes to choosing a care provider, it is important not to blindly accept anyone’s recommendation, nor to follow merely a “first impression,” but to closely examine the person who is to be caring for you during pregnancy, labor, and birth. Just as Elizabeth learned that Wickham was not the kind, honest, and honorable person he appeared to be at first, so you may find that your midwife or obstetrician may not be exactly what she appears to be.

A friend recently mentioned that she was going to be trying a “natural” induction method (castor oil), and I didn’t say anything about the negative observations I had just recently heard about it; and I’m afraid it may have negatively affected the baby. At one point, it was “touch and go” for the baby. I said, “never again” — regardless of how much I think the mother may resist my input.

A fellow childbirth educator had an experience some years ago when a friend of hers mentioned that she hadn’t felt her baby move much lately. Not wanting to make her unnecessarily worried, she did not suggest that she go get checked out, although she herself had had a necessary preterm C-section for just the same thing. The friend’s baby was stillborn a few days later. “Never again.”

You read here about a birth educator who attended a vaginal twin birth as a doula, and both she and the pregnant woman were so glad to find a doctor willing to allow a vaginal birth, instead of insisting on a C-section, that neither one questioned whether the doctor had the experience necessary to attend a twin birth. As happens with some frequency, the second-born baby was breech, and the birth of the baby was quite traumatic, with the doctor showing his or her inexperience, and ultimately, fear. But the doctor told the mother afterwards — and perhaps the doctor believed it as well — that the trauma the baby endured was better than being brain damaged or dead; so the mother believed that the doctor ultimately saved the baby, and is content with what happened, although it was very unnecessary. “Never again.”

We do hear from time to time that we, as natural childbirth advocates, are extreme.  We’ve heard many a commentary that compares natural childbirth to a throwback to living like a pioneer.  We’ve all had the experience of having women who know we are natural childbirth and birth rights advocates walk away from us quickly or politely (sometimes not) shut us down.

We wonder sometimes if it’s worth risking having people try to paint us in that radical light to keep doing what we do: quelling preventable mother and/or newborn injury ~ physically, mentally and emotionally ~ including death.

Never again.

It’s that time of year where many of us look out the window, see snow and wildlife footprints (even the city has its “wild” life).  Some of us can stir the embers and place another split log on.  Others have the banging and clinking of radiator pipes to give us familiarity.  Still others watch the heating bill and wrap up in a blanket and a hot cup of tea.

What we all have is a winter project such as a book we’ve been meaning to read, are reading or wish for one.  The AAMI Reading Rooms on Yahoo are once again ready for a new year of books and their suggestions are wonderful.  The Childbirth Reading Room features “A Wise Birth: Bringing Together the Best of Natural Childbirth and Modern Medicine” by Penny Armstrong and Sheryl Feldman and is open to everyone!  The Unassisted Childbirth Reading Room features “Magical Beginnings: A Holistic Guide to Pregnancy by Deepak Chopra, also invites everyone!  The Midwifery Reading Room, intended for midwives and birth professionals, features Giving Birth: A Journey Into the World of Midwives and Mothers.

One book we’ve heard much about and some of our group members have LOVED is Lady’s Hands, Lion’s Heart, A Midwife’s Saga by Carol Leonard available from Bad Beaver Farm.  Let us know if you’ve read it!

I have chai, a crochet hook and a huge bowl of yarns next to my pile of books to read.  There are only so many hours in a day!

« Previous PageNext Page »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.