I just interviewed a (Dutch) woman with a very similar story. Her first two
births were at home with a midwife in the Netherlands. Her third birth was
at a hospital in the United States - pitocin induction. When faced with the
IVs, fetal monitoring, and limitations on movement, eating, and drinking
associated with an induction in the US, she opted for an epidural. She
asked for a mirror and watched herself birth her baby. She said that she
values all of her birth experiences, but feels that she was perhaps most
"present" for the last birth. With the first two she was so concerned with
herself, just making it through each contraction, that she couldn't think
about or experience what was actually happening.
Fascinating. I think there's something going on here that's worth further
exploration ...
-Rachael
--
Rachael B. Kulick
University of Minnesota
Department of Sociology
909 Social Sciences Building
267 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
On Feb 12 2008, Robyn Maude [CCDHB] wrote:
>Hi Megan
>
>the epidural is the 'new' form of twightlight sleep. It
>removes/separates the woman from the sensations of birth and can create
>a disconnect similar to taht experienced by the women of the twightlight
>sleep era.
>However, I cared for a woman who demanded an epidural for her second
>birth at 7 cms (she had an unmedicated and normal vaginal birth the
>first time referring to it as having done the 'mother Earth' stuff that
>she definately did not want to revisit)despite my very good attempts to
>talk her out of it. She had no syntocinon infusion. The baby birthed
>itself without any conscious maternal pushing with the woman in the
>semireclined position watching the birth in a mirror held by the
>midwife. She thought it was the most beautiful thing she had seen or
>done and remarked that she felt much more bonded with this baby than the
>other. Life is strange eh?
>
>Robyn
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health
>research. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>Maralyn Foureur
>Sent: Wednesday, 13 February 2008 2:43 p.m.
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Fwd: birth in 1949
>
>Dear Megan
>
>I was born in South Australia in 1948 and my mother similarly has no
>memory of my actual birth- a mask was placed over her face and drops of
>some substance put onto it and she became unconscious waking sometime
>later to be told she had a baby girl. No forceps were used that she was
>aware of and there were no marks on my face or head suggesting forceps
>were used - physiologically speaking the fetal ejection reflex that is
>initiated when the head is low enough, should be powerful enough to
>expel the baby and the placenta without the extra pushing effort of the
>mother.
>
>regards Maralyn
>
>
>
>Martha Livingston wrote:
>> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:06:21 -0500
>> To: Megan Heatherington <[log in to unmask]>
>> From: Martha Livingston <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: birth in 1949
>> Cc:
>> Bcc:
>> X-Attachments:
>> I'm not at all sure chloroform was still being used in 1949, but it
>> could well have been 'twilight sleep,' too: scopolamine (sometimes
>> known as 'truth serum,') so that your mom has no recollection of the
>> birth but was not actually anesthetized and likely behaved in a manner
>
>> she would not have been pleased to hear about later on. Very popular
>> in my country starting in the nineteen-teens, and actually still in
>> use here at least into the 1970s in some parts. But devised in Europe
>
>> by a doc who begged the medical establishment in 1936 to stop using
>> it, as he thought by then that he had created a monster.
>>
>> Peace,
>>
>> Martha
>>
>>
>> My mother has no recollection of the birth of her first daughter - in
>> 1949 - all she could remember was that once the contractions became
>> intense she was asked to inhale presumably chloroform. She woke some
>> time later to be told she had given birth to a girl, and she could see
>
>> her later once everyone was cleaned up! She is certain that forceps
>> were not used.
>>
>> I often try to calm women who become very anxious during the second
>> stage by encouraging them that their body will do the work for them.
>> When they are fearful that pushing is too painful and they begin to
>> resist the sensation I work with them to breathe/blow the pain away
>> instead. Inevitably their body takes over and births the baby.
>>
>> Perhaps there is historical information available, with the common use
>
>> of ether and chloroform?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Megan Heatherington.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Hunter, Billie <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 4:29 AM
>>
>> Dear list members
>>
>> I have had the following query from a friend who is a trainee
>> antenatal teacher:
>>
>> Could you point me in the direction of evidence regarding the uterus'
>> ability to expel the baby without the mother pushing at all ( e.g. if
>> the woman was unconscious)?
>>
>> This is not really my field - can anyone else suggest any relevant
>> sources of information?
>>
>> many thanks
>> Billie
>>
>> Billie Hunter
>> Professor of Midwifery
>> Institute for Health Research
>> School of Health Science
>> Floor 2 Vivian Tower
>> Swansea University
>> Swansea SA2 8PP
>>
>> Phone: + 44 (0)1792 518584
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1792 295487
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Martha Livingston, Ph.D.
>> Associate Professor of Health and Society SUNY College at Old Westbury
>
>> Box 210 Old Westbury, New York 11568-0210
>> (516) 876-2748
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Martha Livingston, Ph.D.
>> Associate Professor of Health and Society SUNY College at Old Westbury
>
>> Box 210 Old Westbury, New York 11568-0210
>> (516) 876-2748
>
>
|