Seems to be skipping a few steps in between intercourse and childbirth...

umm.. a few weeks after pregnancy? Well doctors tell you to wait six weeks due to infection, and there is this:

ovulation was noted to have a mean reoccurrance time of 45 days following childbirth according to a major study. No one ovulated earlier than 25 days.

This may have been meant to be funny...but I gotta say I agree with them. Expectations imposed on women don't help at all. Childbirth is a trip like none other when you are aware of what's going on and not preoccupied with anything else.

>> ^persephone:BTW all the judgement in this thread about what a wus this girl is, along with all the assumptions about what kind of a person she is, based on this, is really lame.


Why? I mean, my one was tongue in cheek, but really, if you can't judge people by their actions, what do you judge them on? Yeah, this is one small clip, but I'd bet a large sum of money that most of what I say in jest is actually true. Sure you may find it hurts a lot, sure it may make you tear up, but my god she's carrying on... stop being such a drama queen (her not you)...

But yeah, as for making noise during childbirth, man, if you're not allowed to make noise while pushing a child out from between your legs, when can you? (A friend of my wife actually had the doctor tell her to be quiet because she was upsetting others... that's a disgrace)

i'm beginning to agree that women can't be funny. There's sex and childbirth, maybe shopping and gossiping and.. well, that's about all women are better than men at doing. Jeez, I never thought I'd come to see it that way.

>> ^asynchronice:
And I'm sorry it's flat out irresponsible to imply that " Doctors LOVE to use the term 'baby in distress' to force people into have a caesar or force things along with drugs, or using suction or forceps or the like... because they know that without any other knowledge, if you suggest to parent's to be that their unborn baby might be in danger, you'll leap." Great idea, let's cause everyone to second guess their doctor on the assumption they want you OUT of the hospital more than they want a safe birth. That will end great. (on that note, anyone who works at a hospital knows what happens when a nurse tries to correct a doctor)

But experience with us, and many, many other mothers that we know and have read about time and time again here in Australia and overseas bears this to be true in far, far too many cases. It's not something you can just do if you have no support... you don't have the medical training to know otherwise, and they DO prey on that, we have many friends who have been forced down the path of intervention for no good, sound, medical reason. These types of doctors may think that they are doing what's best, but they're coming from the point of view of putting intervention being preferable to nature. Midwives take take the point of view of letter nature do its best, and ONLY if necessary intervene.

Absolutely there are cases that require intervention, but the figures bear out that intervention is far, far higher than it needs to be, ESPECIALLY in the private medical sector. In Australia we have public and private hospitals, and intervention and caesar rates are FAR higher in the private sector... just as an example, vaginal birth for public patients 72.6%, in private 49.7%, both numbers are far, far lower than they should be, but this study tried to remove all factors to do with actual risk (they were low risk births) and yet, look at that whopping difference in figures. There is NO NEED for so many interventions, it's bad for the mother, it's bad for the baby, but it's what doctors schooled in a particular way want because it's predictable. Not better, just predictable, they don't like the uncertain wait, it's more effort.


However, it doesn't take a whole lot of imagination to see the options laid out in front of you. C-section is less painful; is it right ? Well, up to you, the long term effects are minimally debatable. And my wife can attest the VAST majority of women who want no drugs and to have a natural birth are SCREAMING for drugs and threatening lawsuits if they don't get them come push-time.
Ahh, but you're looking at things in the wrong way, far too much the current society is moving towards 'why have pain if you don't have to'? Well, because it's not pointless pain, it's pain which women are built for, and as much as you'll probably scoff, it's amazingly empowering for a woman to give birth with no medical assistance. The feeling of power to be able to do that, to push through the pain, to give birth ALL ON THEIR own is something which stays with women for life. Take that away from them, repeatedly offer them drugs or an operation and deprive them of that experience is such a horribly narrow/short sighted vision on childbirth. The women who start on the natural path and opt for the drugs in almost all cases have a number of things against them:
* Ill prepared for the pain: My wife and I went to natural childbirthing classes where the pain is explained in full is not shied away from, but also prepared for. You are really shown how to get through it and grow from it (I almost guarantee you're rolling your eyes at this point at the 'new ageness' of all this).
* Ill prepared for the medical system: During our first birth which wasn't in a family birth centre (who are more geared towards natural births) due to the nature of our first born's heart condition, we had a doctor who would continually pop his head in and ask if she wanted an epidural. This constant dangling of 'you want the pain to go away' is enough to wear down the most ardent of natural birth advocates if you don't have others who instead of offering the drug relief offer other ways such as walking around, hot showers, back rubs, ice... etc. etc. Yes it hurts, yes it's excruciating, but after three natural births with no drugs, my wife for one wouldn't have had it any other way.
Poor support team: If you have people around you who aren't prepared to see you in pain and support you through it and help you, but are getting more worked up than you and are suggesting you take the easy way out, it's just such a hard battle. You need people who are in it with you who are there to support the natural method.

It shouldn't be that hard to have a natural birth, but unfortunately you need to come so, so forearmed these days because of how against it the medical system is, and that's a sad, sad indictment on the system as it stands.


And the health care system, ya it's flawed, but that's a whole other documentary. And besides, isn't a midwife working for profit in this system as well ? Does making less than a doctor make them more noble or even better ?

The midwife is working for profit in this model, well in our model because we had an independent one, but that's only because the vast majority of the free midwives provided in the free system are far too pro drugs, pro intervention. In New Zealand for example, you can claim the cost of your independent midwife and home birth costs, and they have much, much lower intervention rates than Australia. If the system provided training with natural being the first and best option over intervention instead of the other way round, then people like us wouldn't have to pay for a good midwife.

The bottom line is that intervention rates in countries like Australia and the US are far, far above what they should be, and countries where natural birth has a higher focus bear this out to be true. If a woman can give birth with NO intervention (not drugs, not surgery, not forceps or suction) then she should be given ALL and EVERY opportunity to do so, for if she does it will make her a much, much stronger woman. To be able to know that you, alone, gave birth to your children, rather than having that taken away from you and given to the doctors is the way it should be, and sadly isn't for so many women...

I replied to this on the video post itself... but I kinda wanted to make sure you heard my side:

>> ^asynchronice:
My wife works at a hospital, and can tell stories of 'natural births' that have gone horribly wrong. While that can also happen at a hospital, at least at a hospital you have the the very best people available to step in ASAP. I can't fathom why an 'empowering experience' would be more important than the physical well-being of your child.
And I get weary of the 'business=bad' line of thinking; if you don't like capitalism, try the other games in town and see what you think. These montages of 'people in suits SIGNING things' are so cliche.


*sigh* You and your wife are so very much part of the problem:

* The use of quotations around natural births suggests that you don't think giving birth the way your body was built to give birth is natural... which, is... you know, weird and all.

* You have many, MANY misconceptions here:

1. You assume a natural birth means to give birth at home... hmmm... how about a big fat WRONG on that. While yes, many people would like to give birth at home, and many do, especially in countries which actually support it, it's in no way a necessity. Allow me to state the case for a natural birth IN HOSPITAL... Our first child was diagnosed with a collection (yep, a good 4 or so) of serious heart defects at the 20 week ultrasound (yeah, see, wanting a natural birth doesn't mean eschewing all forms of science you know). Even with this knowledge we (and especially my wife) still wanted a natural birth, and after consultation it was decided it could indeed go ahead that way... and you know what? She had a completely natural birth, and as soon as he was born he was taken care of by an enormous team of doctors, specialists and god knows who else... and now, after open heart surgery and care he's a very happy 4 year old with a funky chest scar.

2. You suggest that the doctors/nurses etc. at the hospital are the 'very best people'... not really true in many cases when it comes to child birth. What is happening SO, SO more now is doctors wanting to get births done and out of the way as quickly as possible. Close friends of ours had their birth booked in so as to fall before the DOCTOR'S HOLIDAY... heaven forbid it be let happen naturally, no, it was induced and pushed out early with many drugs, just so the doctor could go and have his hugely expensive holiday. The doctors and nurses at hospitals are so VERY MUCH NOT natural birth friendly or aware most of the time. We've had hospital midwives throw their hands up and leave the room because my wife refused to be strapped to a bed in a very uncomfortable position during childbirth because that was 'procedure'... (We've always had an independent midwife, and let me tell you they're worth their weight in gold, as they can step in when the nurses/doctors are saying 'look, the baby is distressed etc. I think we need to speed this up'... etc. etc. They can step in and say 'Um, actually, no, the baby is fine... their heart rate does that you know... they are being squished a fair bit down there...
Doctors LOVE to use the term 'baby in distress' to force people into have a caesar or force things along with drugs, or using suction or forceps or the like... because they know that without any other knowledge, if you suggest to parent's to be that their unborn baby might be in danger, you'll leap. With an knowledgeable independent midwife you can cut through the bullshit and know when it's ok to continue going naturally... that sometimes births do actually, you know, take a while... and sometimes they do hurt a lot (man they love offering you drugs), and sometimes the mother makes a lot of noise (we have friends who were told they were being too noisy), and all of this is OK. But if you're thinking they're rogue operators who love to put mothers and babies in risk, you're wrong. They also know when to say "Actually, they're right, it's best to intervene here"

3. "I can't fathom why an 'empowering experience' would be more important than the physical well-being of your child." Because it's not about putting one above the other, it's about what's best for BOTH mother AND baby. What's better for the baby do you think? A natural birth the way things nature intended, with all the GOOD body chemicals etc. being brought into play, and the baby being pushed out AS DESIGNED. OR... a birth where both mother and baby are drug addled with un-natural drugs and possibly removed from the mother either by being yanked out by metal clasps on the skull, or pulled out via the mother being cut open?

YES, sometimes things go wrong that require intervention, but MOST, by FAR most times it is NOT required. Check out the world facts, check out the stats on countries that encourage midwives and natural births, and you'll find FAR fewer interventions with NO increase in complications. This leaping to intervene crap is PURELY the doctors et al not liking being out of control, preferring (for THEIR sakes, not the mother/baby) to be able to control things with a scalpel.

4. "And I get weary of the 'business=bad' line of thinking; if you don't like capitalism, try the other games in town and see what you think." You think that's the way to run HEALTH CARE? You do know that in the VAST majority of countries this sort of thing is free? Provided by the government, as it should be? Not for profit? No, you think that giving birth should be for profit do you? I'm sorry, but that's pretty twisted.

>> ^asynchronice:
My wife works at a hospital, and can tell stories of 'natural births' that have gone horribly wrong. While that can also happen at a hospital, at least at a hospital you have the the very best people available to step in ASAP. I can't fathom why an 'empowering experience' would be more important than the physical well-being of your child.
And I get weary of the 'business=bad' line of thinking; if you don't like capitalism, try the other games in town and see what you think. These montages of 'people in suits SIGNING things' are so cliche.


*sigh* You and your wife are so very much part of the problem:

* The use of quotations around natural births suggests that you don't think giving birth the way your body was built to give birth is natural... which, is... you know, weird and all.

* You have many, MANY misconceptions here:

1. You assume a natural birth means to give birth at home... hmmm... how about a big fat WRONG on that. While yes, many people would like to give birth at home, and many do, especially in countries which actually support it, it's in no way a necessity. Allow me to state the case for a natural birth IN HOSPITAL... Our first child was diagnosed with a collection (yep, a good 4 or so) of serious heart defects at the 20 week ultrasound (yeah, see, wanting a natural birth doesn't mean eschewing all forms of science you know). Even with this knowledge we (and especially my wife) still wanted a natural birth, and after consultation it was decided it could indeed go ahead that way... and you know what? She had a completely natural birth, and as soon as he was born he was taken care of by an enormous team of doctors, specialists and god knows who else... and now, after open heart surgery and care he's a very happy 4 year old with a funky chest scar.

2. You suggest that the doctors/nurses etc. at the hospital are the 'very best people'... not really true in many cases when it comes to child birth. What is happening SO, SO more now is doctors wanting to get births done and out of the way as quickly as possible. Close friends of ours had their birth booked in so as to fall before the DOCTOR'S HOLIDAY... heaven forbid it be let happen naturally, no, it was induced and pushed out early with many drugs, just so the doctor could go and have his hugely expensive holiday. The doctors and nurses at hospitals are so VERY MUCH NOT natural birth friendly or aware most of the time. We've had hospital midwives throw their hands up and leave the room because my wife refused to be strapped to a bed in a very uncomfortable position during childbirth because that was 'procedure'... (We've always had an independent midwife, and let me tell you they're worth their weight in gold, as they can step in when the nurses/doctors are saying 'look, the baby is distressed etc. I think we need to speed this up'... etc. etc. They can step in and say 'Um, actually, no, the baby is fine... their heart rate does that you know... they are being squished a fair bit down there...
Doctors LOVE to use the term 'baby in distress' to force people into have a caesar or force things along with drugs, or using suction or forceps or the like... because they know that without any other knowledge, if you suggest to parent's to be that their unborn baby might be in danger, you'll leap. With an knowledgeable independent midwife you can cut through the bullshit and know when it's ok to continue going naturally... that sometimes births do actually, you know, take a while... and sometimes they do hurt a lot (man they love offering you drugs), and sometimes the mother makes a lot of noise (we have friends who were told they were being too noisy), and all of this is OK. But if you're thinking they're rogue operators who love to put mothers and babies in risk, you're wrong. They also know when to say "Actually, they're right, it's best to intervene here"

3. "I can't fathom why an 'empowering experience' would be more important than the physical well-being of your child." Because it's not about putting one above the other, it's about what's best for BOTH mother AND baby. What's better for the baby do you think? A natural birth the way things nature intended, with all the GOOD body chemicals etc. being brought into play, and the baby being pushed out AS DESIGNED. OR... a birth where both mother and baby are drug addled with un-natural drugs and possibly removed from the mother either by being yanked out by metal clasps on the skull, or pulled out via the mother being cut open?

YES, sometimes things go wrong that require intervention, but MOST, by FAR most times it is NOT required. Check out the world facts, check out the stats on countries that encourage midwives and natural births, and you'll find FAR fewer interventions with NO increase in complications. This leaping to intervene crap is PURELY the doctors et al not liking being out of control, preferring (for THEIR sakes, not the mother/baby) to be able to control things with a scalpel.

4. "And I get weary of the 'business=bad' line of thinking; if you don't like capitalism, try the other games in town and see what you think." You think that's the way to run HEALTH CARE? You do know that in the VAST majority of countries this sort of thing is free? Provided by the government, as it should be? Not for profit? No, you think that giving birth should be for profit do you? I'm sorry, but that's pretty twisted.

Licenses for childbirth.
Most parents in the US are unfit to "raise" a child, though there are currently no guidelines for stupid motherfuckers who can't keep from fucking even though they know they are unfit to raise another human being (not simply food, clothes, and shelter either.....most animals are instinctually capable)

The more young adults I encounter, the worse this phenomenon seems to be playing itself out. Ever see Idiocracy??? That's the choggie vision of a future left to idyllically click along, like most folks seem to think the world will continue......

abortion???
a goddamn symptom of a greater psychic ill we suffer from as humans-addiction to Babylon, and this world's contrived, and fubar'd paradigm......

wow...

I've had three c-secs now and may I say I hated every one of them. Two were done under general anesthesia and the last (lil Miss) was done with a spinal block. Believe me, the spinal block c-sec was BY FAR the better choice by a MILLION MILES. Waking up after major surgery was traumatic and awful. Getting off the anesthesia alone was horrible. Frankly, I don't remember a thing for about a week after each one. But with the spinal block I remember Lil Miss' birth. I got to hear her cry (well more like an indignant bleat) and see her right away. The down side was that I also had to listen to my doctor describe the whole operation while he was doing it. Thus, when he was having some difficulties with all the scar tissue and profuse bleeding, I became somewhat alarmed. I was given the option to look at and hold my baby as soon as they popped her out but I declined. As nice and natural as it sounds, frankly I wasn't that interested in having a bloody mess lying across me while the doctor was busy trying to keep me alive and put my inards back together. I said I wanted her cleaned and wrapped first and I don't feel the slightest guilt about that: we've had plenty of time oto bond and get close, I didn't need alll that gook on me to know my baby. If that new "natural cesarian" helps mothers feel a little better about having to have a c-sec I say hallelujah and more power to it! Anything that cuts down on the intervention is a good thing. But I hope it doesn'tbecome like natural childbirth has become: the standard of comparison. Its depressing enough for any woman to be told ad nauseum that there's a certain way to have your baby and then not be able to do it at the last minute. Women who end up having a c-sec already have to deal with a certain amount of disappointment and sadness... adding shame or any kind of "tsk tsk you shoulda done it THIS way" just makes it worse.

And having a healthy baby should not be made "worse" in any way.

sure looks cool tho

I agree -- we humans seem to have developed some pretty crazy ideas about childbirth. It's no wonder so many women have trouble giving birth when the moment their water breaks, everybody panics and rushes them to a hospital where they are surrounded by impersonal doctors, technology and sterilility.

People seem to have forgotten that the entire animal kingdom, not to mention humanity in the past, have managed just fine giving birth out in nature with no medical assistance. I have a lot of respect for women who do home birthing; and happily it seems to be a growing trend.

I saw a lot of outties like that when I lived in Africa -- not sure why. Maybe less-than-sterile conditions at childbirth?

this woman goes on about a load of bollocks nonsense. the video itself is pretty cool though, i just wish she'd shut up. if you want to recommend rotating your hips or kissing during childbirth just say that, don't go on about brain imprinting which you know nothing about.

I think you'd get thrown outa the gym doing the towel exercise there, westy. I'd like to endorse what this vid is saying: Kegel exercises work! We learnt to do them in preparation for childbirth. The best way to remember to do them is train yourself to do them every time you come to a red light, when you're driving around, or every time there's a commercial break, if you're watching t.v. (the tightening, then relaxing exercise that is, not the towel part, obviously) That way, you easily achieve the 200 or so stretches she recommends.

The video doesn't mention all the other benefits of having strengthened kegels, which for women includes better bladder control, which if you've had a baby, will know that this can be a big post-partum issue. The other benefit, is having stronger vaginal muscles, which can make things pretty good for the guy too.

don't belittle the whole issue by throwing a general sweeping statement like that. Of course an aborted fetus won't have a chance to act like a child, and a child born male instead of female will never experience childbirth. Deal with questions asked instead sidestepping the issue.