Posted by My OB said WHAT?!?.
Posted by My OB said WHAT?!?.
“Natural Births Are For Women Who Have Short Labors.”
“Natural births are for women who have short labors.” – OB to mother during her labor.
My mother birthed me without drugs, and apparently it was 48 hours.
Unmedicated births are for any woman who chooses that option, unless and until there is a compelling reason to change that decision (maternal choice, or medical emergency).
I know it’s hard to see a woman working hard in labor and not wanting to be “rescued” by pharmaceutical intervention in the natural process. But really, all it takes is “Wow, you are so strong, you are doing amazing. Let me know if you need anything.”
In 90+% of births, the MOTHER is the hero, not the anesthesiologist, nor the OB.
[Reply]
A 24+ hour labour here and all natural. Not even an IV, becuause it’s amazing how you can hydrate these days just by drinking water out of a cup. Who knew?
[Reply]
True. They’re also for women who have long labors, and women who have medium-length labors. Really, they’re for anyone who WANTS a natural birth!
[Reply]
Robyn Reply:
October 4th, 2011 at 4:19 am (Quote)
I do have to say this, though. If it weren’t for my short labor with my son, where I didn’t have time to get anything (even if they hadn’t sent me home), I wouldn’t have had an unmedicated birth with him. And without learning what my could do, I guarantee I wouldn’t have had my home birth with my daughter 4 months ago.
[Reply]
Julie Reply:
October 4th, 2011 at 4:32 am (Quote)
Funnily enough, if it weren’t for my long induced labor with failed epidural with my son, I wouldn’t have had my natural birth with my daughter (or be trying for one with this one).
[Reply]
Yes– of course. Those are the only ones you see, because unless a woman comes into the hospital crowning or really close to it, you pit her, epi her, etc., etc., etc. The ones with short labors are the only ones whom you *can’t* push a ton of interventions on.
Or, alternatively…
In some respects, women who insist upon relatively few interventions are probably somewhat less likely to have extra-long labors. (The ones whose births end vaginally, anyway.) I guess I’m thinking particularly of the huge number of women who are induced for no compelling reason, and how it’s not surprising that many of them have long “unproductive” labors, a good chunk of which end in C/S. But I’m not certain of the stats on this one.
[Reply]
Jane Reply:
October 4th, 2011 at 3:28 am (Quote)
This is a good point. I’ll bring up another point: a woman who decides prior to birth that she likes all the interventions and definitely wants an epidural is going to show up very early in labor and get all that stuff started.
A woman who has decided she definitely doesn’t want all those interventions is more likely to stay home until labor is well-established and she’s having trouble coping with contractions.
Therefore from the doctor’s point of view, even if nothing else changes between those two labors, the woman who’s laboring naturally is going to have a shorter labor because the non-interventive not-in-the-hospital laboring woman isn’t THERE for the doctor to observe.
So the doctor can see the mom on her back with the epidural, laboring for fifteen hours, and can see the one who comes in and delivers in five hours, and thinks, “Natural labors are for women who go fast” without accounting for the time the second mom spent laboring at home.
[Reply]
Yeah, my OB was a real gem. Definitely supportive of the natural birth. Haha
The most frustrating thing about it was that I wasn’t screaming or laboring poorly…just doing my thang and moving around, walking, standing in the shower, etc etc etc. I guess it just wasn’t working with his time frame, and so he was trying to get me to move things along. Grrrr
I had a pretty large support crew and everyone shot daggers at him with that comment. For Pete’s sake, just be supportive!
[Reply]
I had 25 hours of labor, which is by no means short. I thank goodness I decided on home birth because I’m pretty sure if I’d been at the hospital, they would have pushed me to get pit since I was stuck at a 3 for about 15 hours of my labor.
[Reply]
BeckyJ Reply:
October 4th, 2011 at 6:41 am (Quote)
For alot of women, they would have ruled your cervix as “incompetent” and you would have been sectioned.
[Reply]
What I find funny about this comment is that generally (obviously there are exceptions, but *generally*) shorter labors are more intense, more painful. A lot more is happening in a shorter amount of time. Longer labors generally unfold gradually, slowly, and women tend to report them as being less painful than short labors. So this doc is talking out his/her ass on several levels (one being what you all have mentioned – not taking into account how long the woman labored before arriving at the hospital, the other being that shorter labors are, by and large, more painful, so one would think a woman would be *more* likely to request pain meds during a “short” labor). What a moron.
[Reply]
Mary Reply:
October 4th, 2011 at 7:03 am (Quote)
This is what I experienced. My second labor was 3 hours and 4 minutes from start to finish. Labor ramped up FAST, got intense FAST and stayed intense.
With my 3rd at 27 hours and my 4th at 32 hours, labor unfolded very gradually and I had no trouble whatsoever until transition with my last 2. Fortunately I go from 7 to pushing in about 15 minutes, but those were an intense 15 minutes with my last 2. Otherwise everything up to that point was a breeze and very enjoyable.
[Reply]
Dreamy Reply:
October 4th, 2011 at 7:39 am (Quote)
Another good point– and one that gives more credibility to our assumption that the doc is measuring length of labor by the length *he* witnesses, and not the entire length of the labor. As well as that “going natural” is more what you do when you have “no choice” as opposed to a choice you can legitimately make. As in precipitous births that are probably more painful/intense, but are less likely to “allow” for intervention, per se. Not articulating this super-well, but it’s a matter of the doctor framing who natural births “are for” based on his own experiences, needs and ability to intervene, and not the mothers’ (or babies’) experiences or needs.
[Reply]
Kara Reply:
October 4th, 2011 at 10:29 am (Quote)
I agree. One of my best labors (though rough delivery ending in c/s) was almost 2 days of natural labor that just gradually built up. My scariest labor was my 2.5hr one that started out fast and hard and I arrived at the hospital pushing with no time for an epidural, it was so intense and I felt out of control.
[Reply]
I know this is late, but, with my second I labored and delivered in a free standing birth center. For both of my children I couldn’t keep ANYTHING down. I stalled at 7cm because I was so dehydrated my uterus couldn’t contract properly. I needed an iv and thank god I wasn’t in a hospital because my labor was just over 12 hours long, the baby was posterior, over 9 lbs, and had a nuchal hand. Women’s bodies know what to do. These doctors just don’t have the patience or the right knowledge about labor and birth. The mother needs strength in herself as well.
[Reply]
« “I’m Dying To Get My Fingers In There…” Next Post
“…There’s No Way You’re Going To Push A Baby Out Of There.” »


I was in labor for 44 hours, 100% natural. Suck that, OB!
[Reply]