Talk:Natural childbirth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uh, I don't claim to be any sort of childbirth-expert, but what does this have to do with Category:Survival Skills? --LuciferBlack 09:07, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)

Good question. Maybe there should be an emergency childbirth article. AlbertCahalan 05:17, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I added emergency childbirth this morning Skrimpy 13:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

This article only describes proponents and their views of natural childbirth and does not cover any other views of opponents. Also it has opinions stated as fact such as saying that natural childbirth "empowering to women" and it is not a "technique" or a "fad" and is apparently distorted by the media. Another example of this is the phrase "A woman who is allowed to labor as she instinctively wants to is a woman who will be empowered by her birth experience." Lastly, none of the other facts concerning benefits of natural childbirth like post-partum complications, easier recovery, and affect of medications on the newborn are cited. No possible complications are discussed here either such as pre-term labor or a prolonged pregnancy.

Donald Antonini 15:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

The fact that women have been having children naturally for thousands of years is enough evidence to state that natural childbirth is not a "fad." The statement that it is not a "technique" is also a fact - having a baby naturally is not a technique, simply a normal function of the female human body. The "techniques" are the various relaxation and breathing methods taught by different schools of chilbirth education. Natural birth is not in itself a technique, but a process of the human body. It is the norm, interventions are what change natural childbirth into something else. I believe that a discussion on "prolonged pregnancy" and "preterm labor" as complications of natural birth would be inappropriate. Preterm labor is a complication of pregnancy and not natural birth. "Prologed pregnancy" is also a complication of pregnancy, if it is even a complication at all, which is disputed. This is an entry on natural childbirth, not induction of labor, though induction of labor can intefere with normal childbirth. One moment for some citations Skrimpy 18:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC

Added citations in. Added a paragraph that medical intervention is appropriate in high-risk births. Skrimpy 18:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Research 2 Successful Childbirth Experience 3 NPOV Tag 4 Criticism

[edit] Research

"Research is showing that this is usually not in the best interest of mother and baby" . Does "this" refer to any medical or operative intervention? Does this mean regardless of the situation, it is better to do nothing? Are there references regarding this research? Ekem 21:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

"This" refers to the interventions in the previous sentence. Read the paragraph directly underneath your second question - it states that there are situations where intervention is appropriate. 10 references have been given and several of them relate directly to intervention during labor, which can be seen just by reading the titles of the research. Nevertheless, I will search for yet more references to place with the article. Skrimpy 18:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I do not see any study about specifically "the best interest of mother and baby" - a complex topic in its own right - although in a larger sense, of course, they all are. I examined three references that seem relevant and find them to be quite specific, and to be accurate I suggest to say something like this:

“Medications given during labor may cross the placenta and affect the fetus, and it has been shown that pain medication can affect the feeding behavior of the newborn.(ref 10) Also epidural anesthesia can detrimentally affect the course of labor (ref 5). Natural childbirth tries to minimize such interventions in the normal course of childbirth.”

(replacing:"Despite what the media tends to portray, medications used during labor do cross to the newborn, and invasive procedures almost always alter the course of labor [10]. Research is showing that this is usually not in the best interest of mother and baby"). Would that be ok? Ekem 15:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that sounds good. I made the change, look it over and see if that's good for accuracy. I cannot figure out how to code the wiki to repeat citations again (it adds new ones), so that's why I put some in parenthesis. Skrimpy 01:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Successful Childbirth Experience

God created our bodies (as women) to deliver naturally. Medicine has it's time and place. Many more babies are successfully delivered today because of medicine. Although too many women take the easier road and medicate. They need to research before hand and look into all their options. How do you think millions of women delivered before epidurals? Naturally.

I have a 22 month old and had the best experience of my life as I delivered him naturally. I am 36 weeks pregnant with my second child and I am actually looking forward to the upcoming labor and delivery experience.

"How do you think millions of women delivered before epidurals? Naturally." They also died naturally-- and until this past century, in very large numbers. Maternal and infant death in childbirth historically was always extremly high. Take a stroll in a graveyard that is older than, say, 100 years and take a look at all the tombstones of women who died young, buried next to their unnamed infants for a reference point. I congratulate you on your good experience of course, but in your own words, medical intervention has its time and place. (I guess I resist statements about God creating our bodies to do this or that because actually human childbirth is a *great* argument against intelligent design. My opinion, of course.) 38.2.108.125 21:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Epidurals have done nothing to lower the maternal and infant mortality rates. The research is leaning towards epidurals worsening childbirth outcomes. Though it's true that maternal and infant mortality rates were high in the past, they're also high today. It's something that nobody likes to talk about and only the UK has a comprehensive reporting system and makes a valid attempt at stopping the problem. The US underreports its maternal mortality rate by a big margin. And you only have to look at the USA's ranking on the infant mortality charts to realize that epidurals and obstetrics aren't the panacea they're advertised to be.

Traditional societies with good diets produced healthy babies and the normal, easy labors that we hear about. It's when women's diets became deficient that major childbirth problems came to light. Malnutrition causes pelvic problems, leads to weakness in the mothers and reduced vitality in infants. It also results in poor quality mother's milk. Disease and sanitation problems also lead to childbed fever and infants who can't live out their first year.

And then the obstetric trend of visiting dead bodies and then rushing to catch babies accounted for quite a few of those tombstones... The popular back-lying position for delivering babies, and strapping mothers on their backs during labor (which reduces blood flow and inhibits labor) also caused problems for women.

I think that human childbirth is a *great* arguement for intelligent design - horrible refined foods, starving social classes, ignorant doctors, poor sanitation, and ridiculous ideas on childbirth positions and controlling laboring women should have the arguements against them... Skrimpy 14:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Epidurals are pain management, not medical intervention in an emergency. They're a convenience, not a necessity. I don't think any proponent of natural birth would claim that, for example, an episiotomy should not be used in a *true*, absolute emergency--just that they shouldn't be used only to hasten things along. Nothing about natural childbirth refuses to allow women medical care if they need it, it argues only that these medical techniques are used in far too many non-emergencies. And I'm certainly not aware of any time that an epidural would be needed for a medical emergency! Epidurals increase other interventions--see that article for details. The historical maternal death rate was 1 per 100, but now the rate of caesarean section in the United States is 30%. Do the math; that alone gives solid evidence that medical procedures are being used when they aren't necessary. Natural birth represents only a desire to avoid being among the large numbers of people who receive these procedures without medical necessity. 65.25.107.20 04:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I guess this is an example of one of those empowered women running around...

Yes 38.2.108.125, many mothers died in that time, but people didn't die by getting hit by cars, or because someone flew an airplane into the building they were inside, or because someone invented the atom bomb, or because they smoked too much cigarettes or any other common reason why people die today. Modernity has it's flaws too. Cuzandor 02:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV Tag

I am unable to find the reason on this page for the NPOV tag and therefore have removed it. Maustrauser 10:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

Though some have portrayed natural birth as merely a "technique," or even "martyrdom," advocates dispute this characterization. Some have also criticized natural childbirth as a fad, and point out that medical advances have significantly decreased the incidence of maternal death during childbirth and infant mortality. This last point fails to consider that maternal and child deaths in the past were caused mostly by poor nutrition and hygiene, and that the dramatic improvement in maternal and child health has not been caused by the medicalization of birth, but by improved nutrition and medicine's understanding of the germ theory of disease. In Western Countries where medicalization of birth is greatest, there has been a gradual increase in maternal and infant morbidity and mortality as interventions in birth, such as caesarean sections, have increased.

This is wholly unreferenced and must qualify as OR. I have moved it here pending sourcing. TerriersFan 15:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)