Hypnobirthing and Homebirth Part II

I wanted to talk just a little bit more about hypnosis during childbirth and natural birth before I go into homebirth.

My friend, Misty, that I mentioned in the last post reminded me that using hypnosis is a good option for people even if they're planning to get an epidural or even for women having c-sections. It's a great way to help yourself feel joyful and excited about the experience rather than fear or even nervous anticipation. Our society is so backwards sometimes, it amazes me. Why on earth do we fear childbirth? It's something that's an everyday, natural occurrence and yet we get so hung up over it. It should be the most exciting time of the pregnancy...not the dreaded part.

There are so many benefits to natural childbirth. For one thing, if a mother is able to labor the way her body tells her to, it helps the labor progress on its own, without the need for pitocin (which has got to be the most over-used drug today). Every woman is different and has different needs. To put every laboring woman in bed and expect her labor to progress well is, well....pretty stupid. There are some women who labor well laying down on their side, but usually only for a short while. And I've never heard of any woman who was comfortable laboring on their back in bed. And yet what do they have you do the moment you walk into the hospital?

I have one friend who needed to walk through her contractions. Another friend needed to rock back and forth, standing up. Another loved rocking back and forth on her hands and knees. I loved laboring in the water. I was able to do whatever felt right to my body at the moment. I climbed stairs, I lay down on the bed on my side for 30 minutes and took a nap, I went for a walk down by the river with Brent and AJ, I sat in the jetted tub and the birthing tub, I was able to go to the bathroom anytime I needed to (no catheter)....ALL of this was done while in hypnosis. I was completely comfortable because I was able to do what my body wanted and needed to do.

Here is a blog post from Misty about her last birth. There is a video of her having a contraction. Notice how calm and relaxed she is. Notice her smiling and laughing. This is what labor SHOULD be like.

So why have a natural birth when "God gave us the gift of epidurals"? (Yes, I've heard those words numerous times now.)

Natural births have far less cesarian rates than medical births.

Babies born without medication are more alert and have an easier time nursing and bonding with Mom.

When there's no epidural, pushing time is lessened since Mom can actually feel what she's doing.

Without medication, a mother can feel where she's laboring most. If it's in her back, that's the first clue that her baby is posterior (face-up) and she can get into positions and do exercises to help the baby turn.

Recovery time is faster and easier without medication.

Endorphins secreted during a natural childbirth have been found in the placenta and umbilical cord. This may serve a purpose to help the baby adjust to life outside as well as make the journey more comfortable for baby.

Once a mother gets an epidural, there are sacrifices made. It requires more intervention than just the epidural itself. She then needs IV fluids and she's restricted to the bed which increases her need for pitocin. And once she has pitocin, she needs constant fetal-monitoring, restricting movement even more.

Epidurals also increase a mother's need for instruments to be used like vacuum extractors or forceps since pushing is inhibited.

Having an epidural means that the laboring woman is lying on her back (or somewhere between her back and her side) for the duration of the labor. This is the WORST position possible to get baby to descend. And also pretty much the WORST position possible to push the baby out. (The only one I can think of that might be worse is a woman standing on her head.) Lying on one's back causes the birth canal to close by up to 30%! No wonder so many babies get stuck these day.

(Horrible position for pushing)

One of the biggest reasons to have a natural birth, for me anyway, is the lower rate of cesarian sections. Every intervention used brings a mother one step closer to having a c-section. It starts with inductions. I could go on and on about inductions. I think it's ridiculous that they've become the "norm" these days. And one of the problems is they're getting earlier and earlier. It used to be that inductions weren't done until AT LEAST 41 weeks if the mother was still healthy and everything was still going well. Now more and more mothers are being induced by 38-39 weeks. Studies have shown that even these last extra days can be vitally important for the infant to remain in-utero. But women like to plan. And doctors seem ever-so-willing to help them plan because it gives them one less patient that might need to be seen "after hours." For me, this borders on malpractice. But it's so commonly practiced these days that it is rarely seen as such.

There are medical reasons for induction, but they are truly few and far between. A doctor seems to freak out if a patient's blood pressure goes up by 2 points. I believe that it's partly because of selfish doctors who want to schedule as many births as they can, and partly because this country is so sue-happy that doctors will do most anything to cover their butts. If it looks like they're "saving" the mother or baby, then the mother is less likely to sue if something goes wrong.
Doctor: "It could be dangerous to let you go much longer with your blood pressure going up by 2 points. We should induce you."
Mother: "Oh, thank you, Doctor! I don't want to endanger myself or my child."

When in reality, inductions are quite dangerous in and of themselves. It's been shown that between 50%-75% of women who are induced will end up with a cesarian section. I strongly believe that it's best to let the baby decide his or her birthday.

Once induction is started, it so easily leads to other interventions and it becomes a snowball effect. Pitocin is a powerful drug. It causes contractions MUCH stronger than a woman's body normally produces. So women almost always end up with an epidural. Then they get the IV, and the continual fetal monitoring (which, by the way, hasn't been shown to add any benefit or raise the survival rates of infants), and the catheter, and they're pretty much chained to the hospital bed. (Again, NOT the best place to labor.) Being induced also means that the woman is in the hospital for her entire labor, meaning she can't eat or drink for however long her labor lasts. (This has got to be one of the stupidest rules ever concocted. A woman in labor NEEDS nourishment and fluids to give her the energy to get that baby out. There's also no medical reason to restrict it. They say it's so that if a woman ends up needing a c-section, she won't have any food in her belly to aspirate if she's unconscious. Guess what....this scenario has never happened. Another example of covering rear ends.)

Once a woman has been started on pitocin, it's as though someone sets a timer and if she hasn't progressed this far by this time, up the pitocin. WHY? Why do all labors need to be over in a set amount of time? All women labor differently and have different lengths of labor-time. It's NORMAL! But if, heaven forbid, a woman is in labor for longer than about 8-12 hours, it somehow becomes an emergency and they need to GET THAT BABY OUT as if something bad will happen if a woman labors for longer than that. My sister-in-law gave birth in April. She labored (naturally) for 30 hours! That's actually pretty normal for a lot of women. And guess what, her baby came out healthy and happy. No cause for alarm.

One reason for the rush could be that pitocin is notoriously bad for the baby. It causes contractions so strong that the baby goes into distress. This then leads to the doctor playing the "dead baby card." (ie: "If we don't get that baby out now, it could die.") Every good mother is then going to do whatever the doctor says because no one wants to risk a child dying. But in reality, it was the doctor who put the baby into this situation. I don't know how many times I've heard, "I could've never had a homebirth. My baby almost died. I had to have an emergency c-section." This always makes me sad. Mostly because a lot of times it could've been prevented.

(C-section = Surgery)

Don't get me wrong, there are definitely times when a c-section is needed and it's a huge blessing that it's an option these days. But the c-section rates in this country have sky-rocketed. People see it as a normal, everyday thing. But it's SURGERY! Surgery is a serious thing! The c-section rate is currently around 30%. That means that 1 in 3 women can't deliver their own babies. Has something happened to the modern-woman's body that she's now somehow unable to birth the babies she creates? I seriously doubt it. But modern medicine would have us believe such. They'd have us believe that they're "saving" all of these babies, when in reality the current medical establishment is the driving force behind putting these babies and mothers in a position to need a c-section in the first place.

Another horrible trend is repeat c-sections. It has come to be accepted as truth (because so many doctors push it) that once you have a c-section, it's safest to continue having c-sections thereafter. This is false. It is thought that having a VBAC (vaginal birth after c-section) raises the odds of a woman's uterus rupturing. It does, in fact, raise the odds, but not by the amount doctors would have you believe. And statistics show that maternal death rates are higher when VBAC rates are lower (which is the current trend). So really, repeat c-sections are what's killing mothers, not VBACs.

Again, doctors come into play with all of the covering-of-their-butts that they have to do. There are even doctors who refuse to accept patients who wish to have a VBAC. I have to wonder what the reasoning is behind this. Since statistics show that VBACs are safe, why continue to push c-sections? Could it possibly be for the money? Could this also possibly be why the c-section rate is so high? C-sections cost a heck of a lot more than vaginal births. And they take up a LOT less of the doctors' time. Sounds like a win-win for the doctors to me.

The risks of having a VBAC are that the mother's uterus could rupture, putting the mother and baby at risk of death. There is less than 1% risk of something serious happening during a VBAC. What doctors usually don't tell their patients is that there are risks to repeat c-sections also. These risks include:
-thinning of the uterus
-possible uterine rupture prior to labor
-scarring
-pain
-potential risk of increased blood loss
-damage to the bladder
-bowel obstruction
-placenta growing into the uterine wall, causing the need for a possible hysterectomy at the time of the c-section

If you've had a cesarian section and are interested in having a VBAC in the future, this is a great website to check out.

I guess my biggest frustration with childbirth today is that it has been taken out of the hands of the mothers. Women no longer "own" their pregnancies and births. We've just handed it over the the medical community and really bad things have come out of it. The horror stories are real. And unfortunately, they're expected. What would happen if women reclaimed their right and responsibility to take charge of their pregnancies and births? What if all women were educated about normal pregnancy and childbirth? What if women helped each other and supported each other instead of propagating the fear and horror stories?

I think we'd see a huge decrease in maternal and infant morbidity and mortality.

More to come about homebirth in Part III.