I saw this last week at Griffith Uni. It's excellent. Reminds me why I want to become a midwife.

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.

>> ^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.

I think we are actually in agreement on many points; there are hospitals which offer natural birth / water birth, which is a wonderful compromise. My main objection is the 'Home Birth' which is what I believed this trailer was primarily depicting. However, anecdotal stories about shitty doctors and saint-like midwives are besides the point. They are both human beings that decided a course in life, however one put in considerably more time and effort; I lean to more experience, however like anyone you have to pick a good doctor based off references, etc.

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)

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.

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 ?

Note: It must be agreed it's hard to take anything Ricki Lake says seriously, unfair association or no.

>> ^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...

Q Where is the safest place for a woman to give birth?
A Where she feels safest.

Based on my experience, the safest place for me, is with a skilled midwife, using every natural method available.

Drug-induced labour, mile-long fetal monitor strips, bright lights and nurses telling you to get back on the bed, do nothing to reassure, empower or calm a nervous first-time, but otherwise healthy and normally presenting woman in labour.

I don't blame the nurses. Theirs is one of the most political jobs around. Ask any hospital midwife and they'll tell you they get the most job satisfaction between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am, when the obstetricians are all safely tucked in their beds.

"Q Where is the safest place for a woman to give birth?
A Where she feels safest."

If you can't see the problem with this, then there really is no point in a debate. If you can, I think it sums up the whole arguement.

>> ^asynchronice:
"Q Where is the safest place for a woman to give birth?
A Where she feels safest."
If you can't see the problem with this, then there really is no point in a debate. If you can, I think it sums up the whole arguement.


I'm afraid I can't see a problem with this, care to enlighten us?

You're possibly trying to suggest one of two things:
a) That a woman's feeling of safety should have no baring on where she gives birth because she has no idea of the 'awesomely huge' dangers that might befall her at any moment.
OR
b) That women who feel safe in a hospital attached to machines and being forced to lie on a bed in an uncomfortable position while having drugs to remove the pain cause in part by the uncomfortable position.

Either of these views does nothing to strengthen any case you feel you have for the medical profession to continue drugging and slicing women for no good reason.

as someone who has given birth naturally in a hospital and had three c-secs let me tell you: c-secs SUCK. There is no comparison. Do not even begin to suggest that because of the meds having a baby by c-sec is "more comfortable" that is LUDICROUS. the aftermath of being sliced open is horrendous and I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.

and here's a thought; if you're okay with the notion of health care being for profit then you ought to also be okay with the notion of the customer calling the shots. If I'm paying a doctor and a hospital and all the attendant personnel the scads of money I am paying then I do believe it is my right as a consumer to be able to decide certain things.

Oh, but you say that because its health care I am supposed to be subserviant to my doctor? It's different when its health care?

Well then...

and belonging to quite a lot of birth groups I could match your wife's stories "natural birth gone horribly wrong" with "births with horrible unnecessary interventions" at least one-for-one