Birth, Controlled

[Rootsie]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/magazine/326wwln_essay.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Earlier this year, a pregnant Pittsburgh Steelers fan told local reporters that she had asked her doctor to induce labor early so she could watch the Super Bowl. Once her obstetrician determined that the procedure would be safe, and that the Steelers were in fact headed to the big game, he consented. (Ultimately, the woman went into spontaneous labor and gave birth naturally.)

While her request may be unusual for its frivolity, American obstetricians are inducing labor more and more often, sometimes for no other reason than that the mother wants it. As of last count, in 2003, one out of every five American births was induced — double the figure for 1990. It is a surprisingly high rate given induction's increased risk of fetal distress or a ruptured uterus. Inductions also make more likely a Caesarean birth — major abdominal surgery, with a long recovery period.

Of course, many induced labors are entirely appropriate. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' guidelines recommend induced labor if, for example, there is maternal high blood pressure, a placenta problem or early rupture of the amniotic sac that protects the fetus. Another legitimate reason is if a mother's pregnancy has lasted beyond her 40-week "due date." Due dates are notoriously fungible; the official medical term for them is an E.D.D., or estimated due date. Still, being "postdate" — regardless of whether that date is accurate — is far and away the most common reason for induction in the United States. "Elective" inductions, at the mother's request, appear to be the second most common.

It is difficult to criticize a woman who walks into her doctor's office and ask to be induced early. Her last few weeks of pregnancy are often the worst: her toes are like sausages, her stomach and squished bladder may fail to be operational and sleep is elusive.

Yet for thousands of years, pregnant women faced the final weeks before birth with little more than patience. Induction — by ingesting a fungus called ergot or other substances — was usually to save the life of the mother or child. But the practice became more common after World War II, when doctors first learned to drip a synthetic version of the hormone oxytocin, known as Pitocin, through an intravenous line to stimulate the uterus. The drug's use skyrocketed as obstetricians tried to avoid working the overnight shift. Now many women as well wish to schedule their deliveries. "Elective" inductions represent 30 percent or more of all inductions at certain hospitals, doctors estimate. We like to exercise control over every aspect of our lives; why not a child's birthday?

And yet resistance may be developing. Doctors and mothers may find induced births handy, but hospitals do not. An induced labor, which requires regular monitoring of the patient in bed, can take anywhere from 24 to 36 hours, using up a hospital's precious staff time and money. Meanwhile, the national Caesarean rate has also hit a record: 29 percent in 2004. Though only 3 percent of those Caesareans were elective, that portion is rising quickly. The National Institutes of Health is sponsoring a conference this week to discuss the issue. The N.I.H. may well follow Britain's lead and conclude that if a mother wants the operation, she should have it. The planned Caesarean is usually a smooth, 30-minute procedure.

But trouble is nonetheless brewing on maternity floors. Women recovering from a Caesarean typically spend four days in the hospital. Add to the mix women undergoing inductions, and it is clear that hospitals are using more resources on fewer patients. New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center has begun tracking inductions — they accounted for 34.4 percent of all births in 2005 — in order to find a way to reduce them. Massachusetts General Hospital is already cracking down on elective inductions, claims Dr. Laura Riley, the director of labor and delivery.

"It is fair to say that many hospitals are evaluating how best to control elective inductions, and some are requiring that specific guidelines be met before starting elective inductions," says Dr. Sarah Kilpatrick, head of the OB/GYN department at the University of Illinois and vice chairwoman of the OB practice committee at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Kilpatrick says that the college is not, at this moment, trying to limit elective induction. The organization may not need to. In today's medical world, it is increasingly accountants, not doctors, who call the shots. And the accountants, it seems, are not pleased.

[three_sixty]

women in control, but who controls the women?

[Tracey]

My son, born third out of 5 births was induced. I'll never forget it. The obstetrician at that time was a male. I remember him coming in half way through the birth all dressed up like he had somewhere to go. He peeped in to check on the progress only minimally and then encouraged me to be induced with the rational that we could get this over with sooner than later. I now think it was so that he could get back to whatever it was he was doing before he got called in, suggesting induction for "his" own convenience rather than mine.

 I was young and in the midst of full blown labor and thought who wouldn't want to be done with all this pain and discomfort sooner than later, so I was induced. The contractions came one right after another w/ no relief and indeed sooner than later my son was born. Though I was relieved to have gotten through the birthing process in less than 3 hours as opposed to maybe 10 hours I always felt that I had gone against my body's own intuitive natural instincts in favor of rushing through the birth process just to get it over with. I think my body would have handled it better listening and utilizing it's own sense of timing.

After that experience I switched to using only female OBGYNs and the subsequent 2 births after were never even offered induction as a means to speed up the process of natural delivery. Both births were longer...but went very well.

Yes...I was not in control of that birth w/ my son. It was the hormone pitocin and the male OBGYN who controlled that one.

[Rootsie]

The pathologizing of childbirth is just one more sign of our collective disease. Every female I know who had a hospital birth has some crazy story to tell. The caesarian rate is a scandal, and now we can pick the date of our birth?

[starshyne]

Greetings all,
     Childbirth definitely presents itself as a possible point of transformation and awaking for a woman. It is all about giving up control, and if there is another person a women should be relinquishing control to, it is the baby, the principles of creation. Giving up control in this way is highly spiritual. Giving up control of your everyday body processes can be a frightening and overwhelming vibe that is why it is considered painful or feeling like a near death experience as one sublimates with and through. Only a woman knows what it feels like to have no control over ones body in this way.  It is out of place in my opinion for men to joke about or make statements about women in control or who’s controlling them. When in actuality this is another symptom of the dominate white patriarchal design. Is it about the ball game or is it about a woman trying to assert control in a world where she feels controlled or is it about her trying to attain what is considered success/demands by western standards (juggling job and youth)? I feel that the scheduling around a ball game (while it happens) is a bit sensational.  I feel that a majority of these women that schedule births do so for scheduling around a job, significant other, or other children. Does it make it right or acceptable, no. But it does indicate where western feminism has arrived. Not only will women be the corporation exec’s that exploit other women world wide, they will exploit their own selves.
Yes the pathologizing of childbirth is yet another symptom of our collective disease.
But not all of us pathologize childbirth. I feel for as many “schedulers” of child birth there is many that are trying to go with the natural flow, realizing that indeed it is safer with better outcomes and that childbirth is not a disease.  There has been a growing demand for doulas and midwifes. 12 years ago I never heard of a doula, I never heard of midwifes in the hospital. Nowadays there are efforts to make hospitals more home-like in attempts to embrace the idea that indeed childbirth is a normal and natural process(not saying hospitals are the ultimate best route either)….digging our way out of where the sterile white patriarchal model of the last hundred years or so left us…nurses I worked with would tell me stories of how commonplace and standard procedure it was for birth (around the 1950’s) to be an assembly line, where women would be strapped up on gurneys and put into “twilight sleep” to give birth.
This article highlights women choosing birth dates, as having worked in labor and delivery at hospital for a couple of years…. the majority of scheduled inductions/cesarean sections were scheduled by white male doctors.
As well, by observation a large number of doctor- attended- labors would turn into inductions/caesarean, quite literally every other one, and I know that a lot of that would have to do with the dr’s scheduling. I worked night shift so they would want to get these women “out of the way” to make way for the scheduled inductions/caesareans forthcoming in the daytime. As far as when dr’s are in control, this is so common place and ordinary! Still I am not advocating for women to make choices that are counter-natural either…and it is a matter of privilege that some women are even given the option.
As a mother of four (all hospital births) one with a dr. and three with midwife, I feel that one of the four births had a crazy story attached to it, of course it was the birth the dr. attended (my 1st child). A lot of that had to do with my choices and ignorance about birthing at that point. I had a male nurse attending me a majority of my labor, new to childbirth and not knowing what to expect, I was shocked by the sensations I was feeling. I wanted to go with no interventions/medicine….well every time I would have a contraction and said how I was feeling, I would be prodded by this male nurse, telling me well you don’t have to go through this you can have pain medicine, after so long…I gave in to his sale pitch of a little pain medicine and not an epidural….I really didn’t know what it was, although it did go into my back. Subsequent years later after working in the hospital I learned it was a partial epidural and although you still feel the actual birth and thus have more control with pushing, it still has associated risks. I had a female dr. that did show up for support at the very last minute…I was let known I was interrupting her meeting. I was pushing by the time she came in, which worked well for her as later on I felt that she abnormally rushed the delivery of the placenta.
 Now my middle two births in the hospital were great with no intervention/pain medicine with midwifes attending. My last birthing was also with a midwife and she was wonderfully supportive. I wouldn’t say that one was crazy, it was different. Not because of the hospital or the midwife, but because of something interpersonally had I to face and accept. I was going through the labor with no interventions/medicine and with the baby nearly crowned my contractions all out stopped. We tried all different types of measures to get them going again, to no avail. In retrospect, I know the cause of them stopping was an issue within me that had to be worked through. Being at the point of a nearly crowning baby and no contractions, I ran the risk of bleeding to death, the intervention of “induction”, a shot pitocin is what got the labor going again, and shortly after the baby was born. Midwifes and doulas are learning more about the role ones frame of mind and personal situation plays in ones birthing, and I feel there are ways to work through those issues to alleviate the need for interventions, but it takes the woman to have trust and confidence in her midwife to fully express where she’s at. I feel that is also at the root of the women who want to schedule the birth for whatever reason, unresolved issues.
There is such a great need for race/culture specific caregivers, so that women can feel comfortable and at ease with their healthcare providers.
Like many other issues in working at dismantling this white patriarchal system we have to learn from the wholistic ancient and indigenous ways of life. A saying I have been hearing a lot lately that I like….”we have to naturally care for our bodies, it is where we live”.

[three_sixty]

It is out of place in my opinion for men to joke about or make statements about women in control or who’s controlling them. When in actuality this is another symptom of the dominate white patriarchal design. It is out of place in my opinion for men to joke about or make statements about women in control or who’s controlling them. When in actuality this is another symptom of the dominate white patriarchal design.

I am assuming you are speaking to what I posted. To make it clear, my statement was a residual from ideas that were related to women via the Willie Lynch letter.  This is about none other than the dominate white patriarchal design. You must get to and control the women if you are to control a society as the women are the backbone.

"Now the breaking process is the same for both the horse and the n-word, only slightly varying in degrees. But as we said before, there is an art in long range economic planning. YOU MUST KEEP YOUR EYE AND THOUGHTS ON THE FEMALE and the OFFSPRING of the horse and the n-word. A brief discourse in offspring development will shed light on the key to sound economic principles. Pay little attention to the generation of original breaking, but CONCENTRATE ON FUTURE GENERATION. Therefore, if you break the FEMALE mother, she will BREAK the offspring in its early years of development and when the offspring is old enough to work, she will deliver it up to you, for her normal female protective tendencies will have been lost in the original breaking process. For example take the case of the wild stud horse, a female horse and an already infant horse and compare the breaking process with two captured n-word males in their natural state, a pregnant n-word woman with her infant offspring. Take the stud horse, break him for limited containment. Completely break the female horse until she becomes very gentle, where as you or anybody can ride her in her comfort. Breed the mare and the stud until you have the desired offspring. Then you can turn the stud to freedom until you need him again. Train the female horse where by she will eat out of your hand, and she will in turn train the infant horse to eat out of your hand also."

[starshyne]

     Thank you for the clarification of what you were meaning here. As a women, reading this article made me feel that these women are out of control, out of accord with the natural web,flow, and beauty of life, birthing. And that you as a man were saying well now who will control them? Women given an option and run amok….so who will control them?
      I agree with you that this is the idea of by controlling women one can gain control over the whole family. I don’t feel though that this is an issue of the residual effects of willie lynchism. We are talking about “elite women”, a majority white women. The degree of control and inoculation with this pathology is different for white women. The history of the field of obgyn is laden with practice of experimenting on non-white women to learn about these practices that these “elite women” are now using as a means of controlling their birthing. To make blanket statements attributing this to now the effects of willie lynchism is not accurate.
     When attempting to address the ingrained thinking of the white patriarchal structure in my thoughts I find it is important to be clear in the statements I make because so easily, by a next persons experiences and perspective, general statements can be taken to be loaded and reaffirming of the very white patriarchal structure I would like to claim I am working at dismantling.

[Rootsie]

White women have also been experimented on. Female circumcision was practiced on elite white women in the American South as a cure for 'hysteria' ('hyster' means uterus in Greek), a 'mental disease' invented just for females who were 'out of control' in the eyes of males. The most common 'therapy' was hysterectomy, surgical removal of the uterus. I imagine I would have gone half-mad myself, realizing my husband was a rapist, and called upon to attend the births of slave women my husband had violated. It is interesting how entwined the experiences of white women and slaves in the South were.

[starshyne]

     Thank you sis for adding to this reasoning. Indeed white women were also experimented on and the history of slaves and white women is intertwined. I wonder though and have a hunch that this experimentation on women also predates the time of US slavery? It has definitely been ongoing experimentation with the development of such drugs as pitocin/twilight sleep in the 1950’s. With the ongoing racial disparities in healthcare, it would not be a stretch to say that there was/is mistreatment/experimentation on a higher rate of non-white women; still I have yet to find information to support this.
      I am just beginning to learn about the history of obgyn.  I had recently read an article about one of the most common tools used nowadays by OBs and midwifes, the speculum. The pap smear that a lot of women have yearly done could only be performed with this tool. The story of its history is considered “controversial” but its development has been attributed to the experimentation on poor and enslaved women.
http://nathanielturner.com/anarchas_story.htm

[starshyne]

http://nathanielturner.com/jmarionsims.htm

[three_sixty]

Sometimes when I post I do not take full consideration of the exact and specific topics of what I am posting to. I sometimes read something and I quickly respond based on a vibe and idea that comes to my mind, even when it is not specifically addressing the topic verbatim. I apologize if my off the cuff remark was not sufficiently grounded in engaging the specific issues being addressed.

[Rootsie]

I think your post was interesting because it points to behind-the scenes manipulation and psychological warfare against both males and females in service of a social-engineering project of long duration targeted against both whites and blacks. My assumption was that you are suggesting that words like the ones you posted served as a blueprint for this project and reveal the magnitude of the elites' war against the rest of the human race. The points Starshyne made were valid ones, though. She always urges us to remember who inevitably suffers most in white supremacist patriarchy.