You'd be amazed how little some medical techniques used in birth were studies before they were introduced and how poorly they performed once they were actually exposed to scientific scrutiny. Epistotomy was introduced routinely into many maternity hospitals with no scientific study of it's value. Once it was exposed to scientific scrutiny it was found that it's actually harmful in all but a small proportion of emergency situations. The majority of the time if a woman as allowed to tear naturally the tear will heal more quickly and better than a epistotomy would. Even after this has been shown, women are still being cut by their obstetricians for no good reason.
I'm not interested in low intervention birth because I'm some hippy who trusts homeopathy and snake oil rather than science. I'm interested in low intervention birth because scientific studies have shown that the methods being used by a lot of obstetricians are not the methods most likely to lead to good outcomes for mother and child. Here is a statement by the Royal College
( ... )
I dunno. It seems to me that if OBGYNs were capable of performing home maternity care, then they could make a lot more money for themselves doing that, while still ending up charging women less (because of a lack of hospital fees). Why aren't they doing this? It'd keep them busy and keep them with a source of income.
Even more interestingly they do not bother to site any scientific studies to support their opposition in their statement instead relying upon what appear to be quite crude scare tactics.If, "You should do it in a hospital to have easy access to emergency care in case you need it" is a scare tactic then so be it. But it seems to me a pretty salient reason to have it done in a hospital. I do not agree with hospitals forcing procedures down a patients' throat simply because it garners more money (I'm assuming an epistotomy is a Caesarian, I can't find a definition anywhere offhand), but as far as I know that's sort of illegal in the United States if the doctor cannot properly assess the risk of alternate procedures for a
( ... )
i trust a woman's choice when it comes to both abortions and birthing. only she knows what is best for her situation or pregnancy. i've seen both home births and hospital ones on the show "A Baby Story" and both have their pros and cons. i would much rather leave it up the woman involved.
Women who are pro-choice and into 'natural' birth seem to see the issues as connected through women's control of our bodies. Women who are pro-life and into 'natural' birth seem to connect the two through a the belief that pregnancy and birth are normal parts of life and seeing abortion as part of the pathologisation and medicalisation of the two.
I can see that connection. Personally I prefer natural birth and am pro-choice for a slightly different reason. On top of seeing my right to give birth on my own with a midwife and/or doula as integral to my right to bodily autonomy, I also recognize abortion as part of the natural human social process surrounding birth and parenthood. Human culture, for time immemorial, has had abortion techniques. Not all of them were as safe as the techniques we have now, but they existed and worked to help keep populations to a sustainable level.
What are your views on infanticide? I don't ask that to be inflammatory. A few days ago I was faffing on the internet and came across the wiki page on infanticide and saw how common and accepted infanticide as a form of population control has been in many cultures throughout history.
I not surprised you asked about that, considering the point I made. honestly? each group and the members of it do what they have to to survive. That being said, I don't think that we currently live in a world where there should be any reason for that to happen. Its a morally sticky issue, to be honest, and I don't like or advocate the practice, but I can see how it may have been necessary in certain situations. I also think that as long as there is a way to end a pregnancy before viability then there are fewer justifiable situations of infanticide. Something like that in the contexts that you are referring to tends to be so complex as far as reasoning goes that I hesitate to make judgments on it.
I am super pro-choice and I definitely want to try a natural birth when me and my partner do decide to have a baby. Several reasons really. 1.Yes I believe in being in control of my body, and being very in tuned with it so I also do not use birthcontrol pills er anything like that(I do the rhythm method/pulling out cuz im very regular). 2. Hospital is stupid in the sense that they make you lie down and so you are fighting gravity and that is why we have such unnecessarily LONG and painful birthing processes. I want to be vertical please! 3. Its a very significant time in ur life and maybe a once in a life time moment for you, so I believe in fully experiencing it, so yes bring on the pain-worse come too worse it ISSS as painful as I feared and can bitch n' brag bout it later...
Only in the very shallow sense that I /do not/ want to ever endure giving birth, and hence am pro-choice.
My mom, btw, is pro-choice but (as far as I know) wouldn't have an abortion herself. She had home births for both us kids on account of being a back-to-nature person all around and not a huge fan of western medicine except for stuff like surgeries. She says having me was a wonderful experience. She was almost 9 years older when she had my brother, and she screamed all night long. No wonder I don't want kids of my own!
Comments 28
Reply
I'm not interested in low intervention birth because I'm some hippy who trusts homeopathy and snake oil rather than science. I'm interested in low intervention birth because scientific studies have shown that the methods being used by a lot of obstetricians are not the methods most likely to lead to good outcomes for mother and child. Here is a statement by the Royal College ( ... )
Reply
Even more interestingly they do not bother to site any scientific studies to support their opposition in their statement instead relying upon what appear to be quite crude scare tactics.If, "You should do it in a hospital to have easy access to emergency care in case you need it" is a scare tactic then so be it. But it seems to me a pretty salient reason to have it done in a hospital. I do not agree with hospitals forcing procedures down a patients' throat simply because it garners more money (I'm assuming an epistotomy is a Caesarian, I can't find a definition anywhere offhand), but as far as I know that's sort of illegal in the United States if the doctor cannot properly assess the risk of alternate procedures for a ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
I can see that connection. Personally I prefer natural birth and am pro-choice for a slightly different reason. On top of seeing my right to give birth on my own with a midwife and/or doula as integral to my right to bodily autonomy, I also recognize abortion as part of the natural human social process surrounding birth and parenthood. Human culture, for time immemorial, has had abortion techniques. Not all of them were as safe as the techniques we have now, but they existed and worked to help keep populations to a sustainable level.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
they don't make you lie down.
Reply
My mom, btw, is pro-choice but (as far as I know) wouldn't have an abortion herself. She had home births for both us kids on account of being a back-to-nature person all around and not a huge fan of western medicine except for stuff like surgeries. She says having me was a wonderful experience. She was almost 9 years older when she had my brother, and she screamed all night long. No wonder I don't want kids of my own!
Reply
Leave a comment