Showing posts with label video links. Show all posts
Showing posts with label video links. Show all posts

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Birth Story Video: Jennifer's Waterbirth

Here is the birth story and wedding/birth video of a plus-sized mama I thought readers might enjoy.  It's not a short video (about 6 minutes) but it's well worth watching!

Below is the mother's story (which includes 4 previous miscarriages) and what she wants other women of size to know about pregnancy and birth.
My name is Jennifer. I live in southern Oregon and am a midwife apprentice. I have attended many births and have caught 4 babies under supervision. Of the many births I have attended, a good handful have been to plus-size mommas. 
Two off the top of my head were between 300-400 lbs. Both mommas had very healthy uneventful pregnancies and wonderful easy labors, and both mommas delivered in water at home. Water is great for plus-size mommas because it allows you to move more easily into different positions.  
I myself am a plus size momma. I am 5'6" and started my pregnancy at 232 lbs., about size 18. I finished my pregnancy at 276. I know doctors like to tell you to only gain 15 lbs. if you're "obese" but that's one of many reasons I didn't choose a doctor! I am a firm believer that as long as you gain your weight on healthy food then you gain what you need, and restricting food can cause issues in pregnancy. Nutrition is key in pregnancy, especially protein!   
I had a wonderful very healthy pregnancy with a midwife, and gave birth to a beautiful baby at home on Christmas eve.  A baby girl,  9 lbs. 12 ounces, 20.5 inches. 
Being plus size and pregnant is a challenge but I think it's because we set up obstacles in our minds. Will I look pregnant, how much weight will I gain, will I be able to handle the physical demands of labor, will I be bullied into tests and procedures because I'm overweight? 
Remember that you are a strong, intelligent, beautiful woman who can birth a healthy baby, regardless of your weight. If you aren't comfortable being your own advocate, then hire a doula! Get educated, know your options, and don't forget to celebrate this beautiful rite of passage!

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Healthy Birth Practices: Keep Baby With You

We've been discussing the Six Lamaze Healthy Birth Practices.

This is the last in a series on the Lamaze Healthy Birth Practices, why they are important in birth, and how they are less commonly "allowed" in women of size. The previous entries have been:

1. Let Labor Begin On Its Own
2. Walk, Move Around, and Change Positions During Birth
3. Bring a Loved One, Friend, or Doula for Continuous Support
4. Avoid Unnecessary Interventions
5. Get upright and follow urges to push

And the final Healthy Birth Practice is [drumrollllllllllll] :

6. Keep baby with you

Although you'd think that this one was a no-brainer, it's surprising how many women are kept from early and frequent contact with their babies after birth, which then can impact bonding and breastfeeding. 

And because of the incredibly high rate of interventions used with "obese" women, women of size often have even less contact with their babies after birth, which strongly contributes to lower rates of breastfeeding in this group.

Why Skin-To-Skin Contact and Rooming In Is Important

You wouldn't think you would have to fight for contact with your baby after birth, but sadly, mothers and babies are separated far too often postpartum and it can have long-lasting consequences on breastfeeding and bonding.

This separation seems to happen even more in high-tech, high-intervention births, especially cesareans.  Breastfeeding initiation rates are lower in women who have had cesareans, skin-to-skin contact is often not available (even though it could be), and contact is often delayed, sometimes for hours or even longer. In the meantime, babies are often given pacifiers and bottles of formula or glucose water, which decrease the baby's desire to nurse and which often interfere with a good latch. 

Even when the baby is born vaginally, the mother often gets only a few moments with baby before it is whisked off, cleaned up, weighed and measured, examined, given eye goop, and then bundled into a blanket.  When the mother gets the baby back, no skin-to-skin contact is available anymore and critical early moments together have been missed. In addition, many mothers are discouraged from having their babies "room in" with them at night, yet frequent nursing at night is very important in establishing a good milk supply.

Research shows that early skin-to-skin contact and continuous time (rooming in) with the mother improve outcomes.  Babies sustain their temperature better when skin-to-skin with their mothers, they maintain higher and better blood sugar, and have better cardio-respiratory function.  Skin-to-skin contact decreases crying behaviors, increases maternal gestures of affection, and long-term bonding seems improved after rooming in.  In addition, both short-term and long-term breastfeeding rates are improved with skin-to-skin contact and rooming in.Yet hospital routines often get in the way of this important time.

One study in Pediatrics in 2008 looked at six "Baby-Friendly" practices to see which were associated with less cessation of breastfeeding before 6 weeks. These "baby-friendly practices" included:
  • Breastfeeding initiation within 1 hour of birth
  • Giving only breast milk
  • Rooming in
  • Breastfeeding on demand
  • No pacifiers
  • Fostering breastfeeding support groups
Sounds pretty basic, right?  Not so.  Only 8.1% of the mothers in the study experienced all 6 "Baby-Friendly" practices.  According to the study (my emphasis):
The practices most consistently associated with breastfeeding beyond 6 weeks were initiation within 1 hour of birth, giving only breast milk, and not using pacifiers. Bringing the infant to the room for feeding at night if not rooming in and not giving pain medications to the mother during delivery were also protective against early breastfeeding termination. Compared with the mothers who experienced all 6 "Baby-Friendly" practices, mothers who experienced none were approximately 13 times more likely to stop breastfeeding early.
Interventions, Women of Size, and Impact On Breastfeeding

These practices may be even more important in women of size.  Research shows that there is a lower rate of breastfeeding among "obese" mothers. Some of this may be because of legitimate supply issues from PolyCystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS), a metabolic disease that many fat women have.  Other factors that may impede breastfeeding establishment include possible subclinical hypothyroidism, subtle or overt discouragement of breastfeeding in women with large breasts, more difficult mechanics with a larger body, or postpartum anemia.  [More on this in a future post.]

However, the role of aggressive birth interventions in the lower rate of breastfeeding among obese women typically goes conveniently unexamined in the research. Breastfeeding failure is blamed solely on fatness, when in fact, the high level of interventions in obese pregnancies and births may also play a significant role.

For example, "obese" women are induced at a higher rate than women of average size, with most induced women receiving pitocin at some point in labor.  Pitocin is an anti-diuretic, and when combined with aggressive IV fluids, can cause significant edema in the mother.  This can cause greater breast engorgement and make it difficult for the baby to latch on and nurse efficiently.

A high rate of inductions usually means a high rate of pain medication use in the mother, and some research indicates that more pain meds results in impaired breastfeeding behaviors in the baby, especially with IV narcotics. In particular, some research shows that the combination of pain meds and separation of mother and baby after birth significantly inhibits initial breastfeeding behaviors, while other research shows that avoiding pain medications in labor is protective against early breastfeeding cessation.

Because the rate of cesareans in women of size is so high, it also has strong impact on breastfeeding rates. Research shows that lactogenesis (the mother's milk "coming in") can be delayed after a cesarean compared to a vaginal birth.  This may be due to some inherent hormonal differences between vaginal birth and cesareans, or it may be due to decreased immediate contact after birth. Delayed initiation of breastfeeding may also be a factor; research shows that in women delivered by cesarean, aggressive early suckling leads to better breastfeeding rates than delayed suckling. 

Another possible reason for breastfeeding difficulties in fat women is the excessive intervention commonly seen with big babies, which are more common in women of size. Big babies have a higher risk of low blood sugar after birth, so there is often aggressive testing and formula supplementation of these babies after they are born, but all the separation, testing, and supplements can end up further sabotaging breastfeeding.

Research shows that most of the time routine testing and supplementing is not necessary in big babies if the baby is not symptomatic and is nursing well.  Furthermore, as noted above, skin-to-skin contact has been shown to improve blood sugar rates and stability of babies after birth, so the common interruption of time between women of size and their babies is usually unnecessary.

The high rate of interventions commonly used in the births of "obese" women often leads to a "perfect storm" of conditions that inhibit neonatal adaptations to life outside the womb, and interfere with bonding and breastfeeding in babies of women of size. 

Alas, my own first birth was a good demonstration of the negative effects of such interventions on breastfeeding. 

My Experience

Breastfeeding came very close to "failing" with my first child....for all the reasons cited above.

The doctor feared a big baby, so he induced labor. Labor was long and hard, high doses of pitocin and IV fluids were pushed, and pain meds were eventually needed. The induction failed, and we ended with an extremely traumatic cesarean. 

After the cesarean itself, there was no skin-to-skin contact, and only a brief moment of bonding in the post-op recovery room, after which I was separated from my baby for EIGHT HOURS. By the time we tried nursing, she had had many bottles of formula, glucose water, and had been regularly given a pacifier.

Even after I started breastfeeding her, the nurses pushed more bottles of glucose water to "flush out the jaundice" (jaundice is a common side-effect of pitocin). Never mind that glucose water doesn't flush anything and actually prolongs or worsens jaundice.

I experienced massive fluid overload postpartum because of the anti-diuretic properties of pitocin combined with an over-zealous IV protocol. I had severe edema everywhere, including my breasts. That made it very difficult for baby to latch on, and baby was very sleepy from the jaundice caused by all the pitocin. This made breastfeeding very inefficient even when it did happen.

I had a long, stressful labor and a horrible cesarean experience. A cesarean plus a stressful labor can cause real problems with lactogenesis. My milk didn't come in for a week....and when it did come in, the baby could hardly latch on because I was so severely engorged.  Add into that her sleepiness, all the formula and glucose water, all the resultant infrequent nursing....and you have a classic recipe for delayed lactogenesis and breastfeeding issues.

So was the problem here really my fatness? Or was it all the interventions that I experienced because of the way the doctors treated my fatness, interventions that snowballed into the classic cascade of complications?

I did eventually manage to preserve the breastfeeding relationship, but mostly through sheer luck and stubborness. But it took about 2-3 months before things really started to work, and I almost gave up any number of times.

I should also note that I never had problems again with breastfeeding in my subsequent pregnancies. If fatness was really to blame, the problems with breastfeeding would have been consistent.  Instead, the difference was in the interventions used and my insistence on early and frequent nursing, rooming in, and constant contact with my babies.  For me, that made all the difference in the world.

What Can You Do To Avoid This?

While there may definitely be something to the idea of hormonal imbalances like PCOS causing breastfeeding issues, it is important not to overlook the negative influence of the aggressive interventions commonly used in women of size. These can also affect breastfeeding, but are rarely controlled for in most research.

For fat women to have the best possible chance to succeed at breastfeeding, the best approach is to:
  • promote a vaginal birth with spontaneous labor
  • not use routine birth interventions unless truly medically indicated, especially IV fluids and pitocin
  • encourage early contact and breastfeeding as soon as possible after birth
  • avoid separations between mother and baby
  • promote skin-to-skin contact as much as possible and as early as possible
  • have the baby "room in" after the birth, and especially at night
  • avoid routine neonatal testing for low blood sugar unless baby is symptomatic
  • strongly discourage formula and sugar-water supplementations unless necessary
  • encourage frequent breastfeeding (every 2 hours or more)
  • give help and information about positioning to women with very large breasts
  • provide strong encouragement for breastfeeding to women of size
Of all these recommendations, I think the most important are to breastfeed early as possible, as often as possible, and to avoid separations whenever possible.

Some women of size may still experience breastfeeding problems--even when they do everything "right"--because of the hormonal imbalances that PCOS can cause. However, that doesn't mean that breastfeeding should be discontinued or discouraged, because any amount of breastmilk a baby receives is extremely beneficial immunologically.

Instead, these women should be given information and support for increasing milk supply through the use of herbs and medications if needed, they should be given emotional support while working on breastfeeding issues, they should be given information and support for improving baby's latch (craniosacral therapy can work wonders in some babies), and they should be provided information about supplementation alternatives like Lact-Aid or the Supplemental Nursing System if the addition of formula is needed.

Of course, sometimes weaning is the only sane thing to do under certain circumstances, and it deserves to be grieved and accepted if that becomes necessary.  But too often, women are not told that breastfeeding does not have to be an all-or-nothing proposition. Many women who experience problems can breastfeed at least partially, short-term or long-term, thereby giving baby much-needed immunological protections while still providing formula supplements if necessary.

But most of the time, most women can breastfeed, and more would probably breastfeed successfully if there were fewer interventions routinely used around labor and birth, if early skin-to-skin contact were uniformly utilized, if early and frequent breastfeeding was encouraged, if better breastfeeding support were given after birth, and if rooming-in became the standard of care. 



Question: How many of the "Baby-Friendly" practices (breastfeeding initiation within 1 hour of birth, giving only breast milk, rooming in, breastfeeding on demand, no pacifiers, breastfeeding support groups) did you experience with your babies?

Friday, April 9, 2010

Healthy Birth Practices: Get Upright and Follow Urges to Push

Unfortunately, in our society we think of birthing as something done while lying down--Michel Odent

This is number 5 in a series on the Lamaze Healthy Birth Practices, why they are important in birth, and how they are less commonly "allowed" in women of size. The previous entries have been:
  1. Let Labor Begin On Its Own
  2. Walk, Move Around, and Change Positions During Birth
  3. Bring a Loved One, Friend, or Doula for Continuous Support
  4. Avoid Unnecessary Interventions
The new featured Healthy Birth Practice is:

5. Get upright and follow urges to push

You can find a care practice paper summarizing this Healthy Birth Practice, complete with research citations, here.  You can find a handout summarizing the information, here.  You can find a handout illustrating various labor positions here.

[Only one more Healthy Birth Care Practice to go!]

Alert: Be aware that this post has some graphic birth pictures in it, pictures in which ladybits are clearly visible. If that bothers you, don't look at the last section of this post. Also keep in mind that the photos are copyrighted and may NOT be reproduced elsewhere without permission.

Our Pervasive Cultural Image of Birth

Turn on any TV birth show like "A Baby Story" etc. and you will see women primarily delivering while on their backs or lying a bit propped in bed. Their legs are either in stirrups, or their knees are being pulled back and held in place by others. They are usually encouraged to curve their chests into a "C" position, chin to chest, while rounding their backs forward.

Some birth shows have women who are propped up into a semi-sitting position in bed, with their knees pulled back.  This gets them a little more upright but again they are sitting back on their behinds in bed, pushing the tailbone into the space where the baby has to come out.

Are these really the best positions for birth? Do they have the best outcomes? Why is every woman shown in these positions for birth?  Women are so different; isn't there any variety in how they choose to give birth?  Left to their own devices, are these the positions most women would give birth in, or are these positions an artifact of outdated medical and cultural norms?

And do we really need to have everyone yelling at the mother to hold her breath and puuuuusssh while they count to ten, then to take a quick breath and do it again? Is it really necessary to "purple push" in order to get a baby out?

The Healthy Birth Care Practice Paper #5 describes the results of a recent national survey, Listening to Mothers II.  They found that 57% of women surveyed gave birth lying on their backs, and 35% more gave birth in a semisitting position. They reported, "Only 21% of women in the survey followed their own urge to push. The rest of the women reported that nurses or other health-care providers told them to push a certain way."
 
Although this type of birth is obviously a very common scenario, the answer is no, women absolutely do not need to push this way in order to get the baby out.  And in fact, most outcomes tend to be just as good or better for women who don't follow the current media norms about what birth "should" look like or how support personnel "should" coach women during pushing.

Types of Pushing Positions

There are other positions women can use to push out their babies. 

For example, many women find they like kneeling positions for both laboring and pushing.  In this type of position, a woman might kneel on the bed, facing backwards and leaning on the raised head of the bed.  Or she might kneel while leaning on a birth ball, chair, or support person.  Leaning over keeps her hips mobile, tends to be less painful than laboring while on the back, and lets her support people apply counter-pressure if needed. It also utilizes gravity to help bring the baby down with less force from the mother.

Many women like to give birth on all-fours (another kind of kneeling position) because it gets the weight of the baby off their backs and tends to lessen pain. It also creates more room by allowing the sacrum and tailbone to move freely up and out of the pelvic outlet (the space between the pelvic bones where the baby comes out). Counter-presure is also easily applied in this position, which many women find helpful.

Some women prefer a squatting or semi-squatting position for giving birth.  Because this can be a tiring position, it's helpful to use it intermittently and have a resting position you can return to as needed.

In a hospital, women can use a squat bar to help them with squatting.  Most hospital birthing beds break down into various positions for pushing, and although it's not used that often, most include a squat bar that can be set up and utilized. 

Another option for squatting is for a woman to labor in water so that supporting a semi-squatting position is easier and can be maintained longer.

Another alternative is for a partner or support person to support women from behind while they dangle in a squat, as in this picture.  Although this position looks very tiring for the partner, if done right it is actually very practical.  Dr. Michel Odent (author of Birth Reborn and many other books) often used this position to support birthing women in his clinic in France.  It can elongate the trunk of the body and create more space for the baby to move as needed.

Birth stools often promote a kind of modified squat.  It may look like a semi-sitting position, but the angle of the mother's legs and pelvis is often closer to a squat, the mother has more freedom of movement (she can get up and go forward to deepen the squat and then sit back down to rest), and she is much more upright than most women in hospital positions get.

You can find many illustrations of birth stools in history in the Western artwork, from the Middle Ages on.  Since it was so commonly used, it obviously was a position that worked well for many birthing women.

This scene from a pioneer-era birth shows a human birth stool.  The mother sits on or between the father's spread legs (with her own legs also open).  Assistants help her by holding on to her arms/hands and giving her something to "pull" against during a pushing contraction, while the midwife catches the baby below. 

Many women like to tug against something to help them bear down during pushing.  In many traditional societies, women squat while holding on to a rope or a bar, or play "tug of war" with labor assistants (via hands or a rope or sheet).  Pulling with the hands while pushing with the lower body can be incredibly helpful because it gives you more leverage and force for pushing.

Sidelying is a great position for when the mother has limited mobility, has a strong epidural, or is very tired and needs a rest.  It gets the weight of the baby off the mother's back, opens up her pelvis, and can be maintained for long periods if the mother has help supporting her upper leg. 
A vastly underused set of positions for pushing are the asymmetric positions.  An example of this might be one knee up and the other knee down, one knee on a chair while you stand straight on the other leg, or leaning into an exaggerated lunge.  These are all great because they create more space in the pelvis, especially to one side, which often helps facilitate rotation of malpositioned babies. 

You can also adapt an asymmetric position when semi-sitting, as in this illustration.  This could easily be done on the side of a bed, on a couch, or a couple of chairs.  They key is to try a number of asymmetric positions; your body will tell you which one will be best for your particular needs.

Illustrations of all these pushing positions can be found in this great handout, which shows how these positions can be done in the hospital as well as at home.  Sometimes people think that these positions are something you can do only out-of-hospital, but with a little creativity (and flexibility from the staff), these positions are usually do-able in the hospital as well. 

Disadvantages of the Semi-Sitting or Lying Down Positions

There is a fair amount of research that shows that the traditional semi-sitting or almost lying-down positions usually used in the hospital actually have significant disadvantages.

Damage to Perineal Tissues

Pushing in the semi-sitting position, especially when pulling the knees back sharply, places a great deal of stretch and pressure on the perineum, the tissues "down there" around the vagina. It often is associated with a greater rate of vaginal tearing and damage, especially when accompanied by an episiotomy (deliberate cutting of the perineum to "widen" the vagina). 

One study found that women had significantly less tearing and swelling "down there" when in non-supine positions (sitting, squatting, or kneeling/hands-and-knees). A larger study found that the semi-sitting position was associated with a greater need for perineal suturing, whereas the all-fours position was associated with a reduced need for it. Another study found a lower rate of episiotomies, perineal repair, and instrumental delivery (forceps, vacuum) in women who used a side-lying position instead of a sitting position for birth.

Shoulder Dystocia

Although research is limited, semi-sitting positions may be implicated in some cases of shoulder dystocia -- what some midwives call "bed" dystocia.  Being in a semi-sitting position for pushing means that the woman's weight is pushing her tailbone into the pelvic outlet, making the space the baby needs to get through smaller and causing a tighter fit.  In addition, the baby must negotiate a sharp curve under the pubic arch and back up again, which is more difficult to negotiate.  In essence, you are pushing "uphill" in these types of positions.

Some research suggests that non semi-sitting positions may help prevent some cases of shoulder dystocia.  One study of macrosomic (big) babies attended by nurse-midwives in the hospital found a trend towards less shoulder dystocia if the mother was side-lying for pushing.  The number of women using that position was not high enough for the results to reach statistical significance but the trend was clearly there.  Yet few subsequent studies have been performed to confirm or disprove this relationship, because such a position is outside the realm of most hospital "culture" and therefore rarely researched. 

Pain Levels

Many women find that the pain of labor is less intense and easier to endure if they are able to move with their labors instead of staying in one position.  One study found that women reported less pain during labor and afterwards when they used a kneeling position instead of a sitting position for pushing.

When given full, free mobility, many women prefer to stand, lean over a chair, sway, get on all fours, or push with one foot up and one foot down.  Some do choose to lie on their back but often will arch their back instead of round it forward. 

If allowed to move their bodies in response to their pain cues, most women find they are able to tolerate the pain of spontaneous labor without drugs.  Having labor-strengthening drugs and being stuck on your back in bed with a fetal monitor that doesn't allow you to move means that most women "need" some kind of drugs or epidural to get through the pain of labor, which present their own risks to mother and baby.

Having more access to warm water and full mobility during labor and pushing could probably significantly lessen the number of women who need pain relief drugs, and therefore the associated complications that go with them.

Malpositions

If a mother is laboring in the usual hospital position with a baby that is in a poorer position for birth (for example, back of the head against mother's back, or occiput posterior), it is very difficult for that baby to turn and get into an easier position for birth. Getting up and moving freely can often open up the pelvic dimensions and help the baby turn. 

Studies on the use of alternative positions to help a posterior baby turn are generally small, underpowered, and contradictory, but some research does show that being on all fours during labor with a posterior baby may result in a higher rate of babies turn into the easier anterior position for birth, although the trend in that study did not quite reach statistical significance.  It did significantly lessen back pain for the mothers involved, however, which is very useful in and of itself.

Being on all fours may or may not help before labor, but may be more effective if done during labor in women with a suspected posterior baby, and especially if done for longer periods of time and more consistently than currently studied.

Even side-lying positions, properly done, may result in a higher rate of posterior babies turning to anterior during labor and possibly a lower cesarean rate

More (and better-designed) research is needed to determine just how effective maternal positioning really is, but anecdotally, many midwives find that if a baby is still posterior during the pushing phase, turning the mother and getting her more mobile can actually help turn the baby, at which point the baby is often more quickly and easily born. An old midwives' credo is "If you can't turn the baby, turn the mother."  At the very least, it may help lessen the mother's pain and help her labor longer without drugs or other risky interventions.

Positioning with Epidurals

What about women who get an epidural during labor? Do they have to give birth in stirrups or with their knees pulled back to their ears because of less control of their legs from the epidural?

Most women who have epidurals are not given a choice, but side-lying is still a position compatible with an epidural.  One small study found that women with epidurals had less chance of getting an episiotomy and a better chance of a spontaneous vaginal birth if they were in a side-lying position for birth rather than a sitting position. The small size of this study was a limitation, but another larger study also found that women with an epidural needed less perineal suturing if they assumed a side-lying position for pushing.

Is Semi-Sitting Really So Bad?

This is not to say that women shouldn't ever be in the semi-sitting position.  Some women want to be in this position because it's the position that feels best to them---and if so, it's perfectly fine to use it!  It's a good position for resting between contractions, and certainly, many women have successfully given birth just fine in this position over the years. 

It's not that women should not give birth in the semi-sitting (or even the lying down) position, if that's the position their bodies tell them to be in.  It's that women should not be forced into this position whether they want it or not, and that care providers should be actively offering the use of other positions because outcomes are improved for baby and mother

So Why Aren't Alternative Positions Used More Often?

Question: So why is lying down or semi-sitting used almost exclusively in most hospitals?  If outcomes improve, why aren't more women encouraged to squat, use all-fours, kneel, use asymmetric positions, or be side-lying for pushing?

Answer: Because it's not part of routine hospital culture, because doctors are more comfortable attending birth in the traditional position, because doctors are not trained to catch babies any other way, and because other birth positions are not part of most birthing women's cultural expectations. 

Hospitals historically promoted lying down for birth because for many years, women were heavily drugged during labor and couldn't be trusted to move around safely.  Even today women are confined to bed because of the heavy use of epidurals or narcotics in most births; it's still seen as "safer" regardless of whether or not the mother is actually drugged.

In addition, lying down gave the doctor easy access to the mother's perineum to do the episiotomy that was mandatory in hospital birth for many years, and he could sit down in comfort for the birth and the perineal repair afterwards.  Furthermore, this position promoted the hierarchy typical of hospitals.....the patient as dependent and subordinate, the hospital staff as in control and making the decisions. Basically, traditional positions are more comfortable for the staff, both physically and emotionally, and sadly, the staff's comfort is a higher priority than the mother's comfort.

Over time, this position became the "culture" of the hospital as the "right" way to give birth, and other positions were seen as bizarre or unscientific. 

Doctors are trained in catching babies from the lying-down or semi-sitting position, and often have difficulty understanding how to catch babies in other positions.  When a woman is in the all-fours position, up is down and down is up to the doctor; the orientation for fixing any problems is upside down and many doctors are not comfortable with that re-orientation.

Many doctors simply don't know how to attend women in any other position because they most likely have not seen women in any other position than semi-sitting or lying-down during their training, and many resist any changes from the way things were done during their training.

When prodded, some doctors will tell women that they can push in any position they want, "upside down if you want to".....but that when the baby is actually coming out, the mother has to be in bed with her knees pulled back or in stirrups.  Unfortunately, this is the time when the most room in the pelvic outlet is actually needed and when the alternative position is most important.  Letting a woman have freedom of mobility during the pushing phase for everything but the last bit is not the same as true freedom of mobility. 

Women's cultural expectations also play a role in the positions they assume for birth.  If the only images you ever see of birth are of women in the stranded beetle position, you have a cultural template for expecting to be in that position during labor, even when offered alternatives. 

Another unconscious expectation some women have is that birth will take place in the "missionary" position, much like sex may often have been for them, and like gynecological exams always are done.  And to some, birthing in other positions may not seem ladylike or "right."  Cultural expectations and experiences assimilate women into a certain view of how birth is done, and this can be difficult to break out of.

A hospital's physical layout also has an influence.  Having a bed in the middle of the birthing room as its dominating feature means that most women head there at some point in labor, because their cultural expectations tell them that's where they should be.  But if you give a woman a birthing room with the bed de-emphasized, more women will utilize alternate positions and avoid the semi-sitting position so common in Western culture. 

Women in other parts of the world who give birth outside the hospital usually give birth in "alternative" positions.  When women in Western culture are given access to non-traditional birthing suites that de-emphasize the bed and have other equipment (like water tubs, ropes, birthing balls, squat bars, etc.) available, they give birth less often in the bed and more often in the "alternative" positions.

Women can overcome a lifetime of cultural conditioning and be willing to try other birthing positions if they have supportive staff who are flexible and open, but it takes active education during pregnancy and proactive reminder of position choices during labor for many women to overcome that cultural norm.  If the attending staff is not on board, it most likely won't happen.  And that's how these harmful practices get passed on.

Pushing and Women of Size

"Obese" women in the hospital are "allowed" to push in truly upright positions or according to their own urges even less often than women of average size.  Many report they are required to indulge in purple pushing  while curled into a "C" and straining to bear down. This stresses the baby, makes the mother more likely to tear, and makes it harder for the baby to get out safely.

Some providers automatically assume that all fat women are "poor pushers" because they "must" be out of shape and will therefore have less efficient pushing strength. Therefore these providers may be quicker to augment labor contractions or to move to a cesarean without an adequate trial of labor first.  However, research shows that "obese" women push with just as much force as average-sized women, yet interventions based on anticipation of "poor pushing" is another reason why the cesarean rate in fat women is so high.

Some providers keep "obese" women in bed and in the traditional semi-sitting position out of the mistaken belief that fat women are too unsteady, too weak, or too unfit to push in alternative positions. Others keep fat women immobilized out of the belief that they are all about to stroke out, or because they are worried about injuries to nurses trying to support fat women in alternative positions. 

And of course, the movement to mandate placement of epidurals early in labor in fat women "just in case" means that most of these women are then relatively immobilized for the pushing phase.  This is yet another way that the rules and beliefs around attending "obese" women inhibit freedom of movement for them. 

Sometimes the lack of willingness to try new positions comes from the mother.  Inhibition about size and weight may keep some fat women from trying out some of these alternate birthing positions, even when they are "allowed" to try them.  They may be too self-conscious about their weight or what's considered "feminine" to try some of these positions in front of others, especially those who may be judgmental about their fatness.

[I understand this because I felt it too.  Personally, the thought of getting on all fours and waving my big naked behind in other people's faces was a little off-putting, and I've heard other fat women express similar thoughts. And yet the all-fours position is one of the best positions for women of size.]

Ideally, birth attendants who attend women of size will encourage them to be extremely mobile in labor. The mother will have a good sense of what kind of positions she is physically able to assume, and her body will instinctively tell her how she needs to move in order to get the baby out.

Waterbirth is particularly ideal for women of size, because the buoyancy of the water makes it easier to shift position, especially if the woman has any physical limitations (like knee problems) or difficulty moving around.  Yet many women of size are denied access to water for labor and birth. 

The issue of mobility in labor is a crucial one for "obese" women.  While important for all women, full mobility during pushing may be especially important for women of size for a number of different reasons. 

First, fat women tend to have larger babies as a group, and thus may need the maximum amount of space in the pelvis to get the baby out efficiently.  Making fat women birth on their backs or behinds means that the available space is being compressed instead of maximized, exactly the opposite of what may be needed.

Second, some research suggests that fat women have more malpositioned babies, and this can result in longer, harder labors and more cesareans.  Being immobilized during pushing makes it very difficult for a malpositioned baby to correct its position, while being able to move more freely might help create more room for the baby to move.

Third, some providers believe in the idea of "soft tissue dystocia"....the idea that extra fat pads the pelvic outlet and may prevent the baby from being able to fit through easily. Some fat women have actually been told that their "fat vaginas" (actual phrase) caused their cesareans. However, very little research exists to support the idea of soft tissue dystocia. Mostly, it's a concept that gets taught in medical school as if it is a reality and no one questions whether or not it is true. [More on that in a future post.]

However, if soft tissue dystocia were real, then how much more important would it be for women of size to be using positions that maximize pelvic space most efficiently and use gravity to help the baby be born.

Care providers who attend "obese" women often worry about the fit of the baby into the mother's pelvis because of the generally bigger fetal sizes, possible malpositions, and soft tissue worries. But if they are truly concerned, they should be using more alternative positions with women of size, not less. 

Nancy Wainer, a midwife from Massachussetts, often gives the demonstration of putting on a too-small shoe as a metaphor for getting a hard-to-fit baby through the pelvis.  When Nancy rams her foot straight-on into the shoe, she cannot get her foot to fit (the baby would not be able to fit through the pelvis).  But when Nancy starts wiggling her foot all around, turning sideways and wiggling this way and that, the foot begins to squeeeeeeze into the shoe. Given enough time and wiggling, she shows that she is able to get her foot into the shoe (the baby can fit through the pelvis).  She acknolwedges that this is not always true for every baby and pelvis, but if there is any doubt about the fit of the baby, she stresses the importance of free, unlimited movement during pushing in order to give that baby the best chance of getting out naturally. 

And yet, it is women of size that are most often prevented from having access to full, free mobility during labor and pushing.

My Pushing Stories

I have had four births, and I have pushed in all different positions for them, with varying results.  Only in the last one did I truly have unlimited mobility and freedom to use any pushing position I wanted.

In my first birth (induced at 40 weeks, epidural for the pain), I pushed mostly in the semi-sitting position common to hospitals.  My legs were in stirrups and my chin was to my chest.  My epidural was not working very well and I had enough feeling in my legs to try the squat bar at one point, but we didn't try for very long.  Because the baby was positioned poorly, pushing in any position was incredibly painful and after 2 hours I consented to a cesarean. 

In my second birth (membranes stripped at 39+ weeks, water broke shortly after, natural labor), I labored mostly in the all-fours position in the tub at the hospital; that was the only tolerable position for me and the midwives were very supportive of me laboring there.  However, when I was ready to push, I was required to go back to the bed in my room.  I tried several pushing positions on the hospital bed, but spent most of my time in the side-lying position.  Alas, baby was big and posterior and nothing budged him; we ended with a cesarean after 5 hours of pushing.  I wish I had been allowed to stay on all-fours in the water, or been encouraged to get up and move around and try some of the asymmetric positions, but despite supportive nurse-midwives, none of these options were tried. 

In my third birth, I finally had an anterior baby after seeing a chiropractor near the end of pregnancy.  What a difference!!  However, baby still had an arm up by his head.  This birth was induced (to get a smaller baby--augh!) and the combo of his arm by his head and the induction made labor very painful.  I opted for an epidural eventually and was scooting my butt across the bed when my "cheek crawling" helped him get his arm out of the way and suddenly I was pushing.  I pushed him out in 12 minutes, sans epidural. 

I would have pushed him out even faster except that the nurses made me push in the "curled forward C" position.  In this position, he just kept hitting my pubic bone and couldn't get out.  I kept trying to lift my butt off the bed to arch my back---what my body was screaming for me to do----but they kept telling me I was doing it wrong and had to curl my chin to chest.  Finally the midwife with me lowered the bed to flat so I could lie back; I lifted my butt and arched my back over my fists, and baby was born lickety-split after that.  This is a good illustration of the fact that sometimes a lying-down position can be useful, especially when the mom wants to arch her back. The arching created enough extra room for the baby to get out, and I had my first VBAC. 

In my fourth birth, I gave birth at home in the water.  I loved that because I was able to shift positions as desired.  I labored in all kinds of positions, especially all-fours, asymmetric positions on the stairs, and leaning back on the birth ball.  I pushed mostly in a semi-squatting or forward-leaning kneeling position in the water, then leaned back and arched my back in the water at the end.  Again the baby's arm gave us some problems, but after the midwife fixed her arm position, she shot out quickly.  I pushed for a total of 24 minutes with that VBAC. 

For me, I think I may have a narrow-ish pubic arch that makes pushing in the traditional "rounded C" position in the hospital a big mistake.  I think my pelvis has plenty of room, but has the most room further back, which gets closed off in the semi-sitting position.  Arching my back creates more room where it's needed, and being off my back makes sure there is optimal room all around.

For me, birthing vaginally is a combo of making sure my babies are well-positioned (chiropractic care was tremendously valuable for that) and making sure I had full freedom of mobility during labor ---especially being able to arch my back. 

Pushing Photos of Women of Size in Non-Traditional Positions

Here are some photos of real women of size birthing their babies in positions other than the traditional lithotomy or semi-sitting/knees-pulled-back-in-a-hospital-bed you see on TV.  

Mind, I don't have a lot of these photos, because while women are willing to share their pregnancy and labor photos with me, most don't want to share the really intimate shots for all the internet to see.  And who can blame them for that?

[If any of you want to share your pushing photos with me, I'd be happy to have some more!]

Other big moms have labor photos but may not have had photos taken of the actual emergence of the baby because they were too self-conscious.  If some of us can hardly bear to have our pictures taken in full clothing and normal circumstances, imagine the inhibitions some may have for taking photos at one of the most intimate times of our life. 

So I don't have as many pushing photos as I would like.....but I do have shots of a few positions, and hopefully that will be enough to inspire other women of size to experiment a little too.


My profound thanks to the women who were willing to share their stories and their photos with the world. 

You will never know how many lives you touch, now and in the future.  Bless you for being willing to share and inspire others.

You will probably notice that all of the photos here so far are of women of size giving birth in the water.  That's partly because that's just what's been sent to me, at least for the pushing phase.
But it's also because water is one of the best places for women of size to labor and give birth, because the buoyancy from the water helps us change positions and hold them more easily (like this semi-squat position). It helps us be more mobile and flexible, which is often just what we need most to get our babies out.

Many women of size who have had waterbirths swear by water for the pushing phase as well as for the laboring phase. It's truly heaven-sent.

Be aware that if you are a newbie to birth, your inital reaction to some of these positions may be to be taken aback. Our cultural conditioning around birth is so strong that our reaction to seeing a woman give birth in alternative positions (or in the water!) can be strong because it just doesn't seem right or even ladylike.
 
And sometimes those feelings may be even stronger towards a woman of size using alternative positions.

Some care providers who are perfectly fine with using alternative positions and/or water for women of average size shy away from doing them with women of size.  It's part of that cultural conditioning of fear around "obesity." 

And even sometimes the women themselves secretly believe themselves to be "too high-risk" to try anything a little out of the ordinary. 

So seeing these images may make some viewers squirm a bit.  It may make some providers squirm even a bit more. 

Yet these are some of the best positions for women of size, and the fact that so many of the vaginal birth pictures I have of women of size involve water or the hands-and-knees position speaks volumes about its efficacy and comfort for us.  Providers, take note.

But just as making love does not need to take place in the missionary flat-on-the-back-and-legs-spread position, neither does birth need to take place in that position.  Any position you can use to get the baby in is a position you can use to get the baby out. Be as creative in birthing as you are in lovemaking....maybe even more so!

In particular, close-ups of a woman giving birth on all fours may be seem strange to some readers because, let's be frank, you get a close-up shot of her behind. 

Our society prefers to ignore the fact that that part of our anatomy is quite close to where we give birth. It seems very strange to some people to see a baby's head coming out right by your behind, yet they forget that it comes out that close to "there" whether you are facing up or down. 

Either way, the proximity is the same, but when a woman is on all-fours, we are forced to emotionally recognize that same proximity, and some people are grossed out by that fact.

But look closely.  Some of these photos illustrate the very advantages we've been talking about.  When a woman is birthing on all fours, oftentimes witnesses will exclaim later about how the shape of her behind changed.  [One husband described it memorably....."Your butt got really square!"]  That strange shape is the mother's bones moving out of the way to create more space for the baby.  Ask yourself....would that have happened if the mother had been sitting on her behind instead?





Although it's an unfamiliar and even strange sight for newbie observers, the truth is that the all-fours position is an awesome position for women of size.
So challenge yourself and your perceptions. If you have a negative reaction, remember that this is because of cultural conditioning, and all you need to overcome this cultural conditioning is exposure to different images and ideas.

Consider the possibilities.....all of them. 

Conclusion

As the healthy care birth practice paper on pushing notes:
Throughout history, images depicted in art show that women have used many positions to give birth to their babies, including standing, sitting, hands-and-knees, and side-lying. Until doctors began using forceps in the 17th century, women rarely were shown giving birth lying on their back. With the support and encouragement of family members and community midwives, laboring women used objects such as posts and ropes to gain leverage during pushing. They often used birthing supports or stools to help them squat, crouch, or kneel.
Historically, women usually used a wide variety of positions for birthing.  In traditional societies, you still see many women using these positions for birth, but in medicalized birth, they are rarely used.  Instead, women in Western hospitals most often birth on their backs or propped up a bit, with knees pulled back or their feet in stirrups.

This kind of birth is a recent cultural artifact, not a medical necessity.  In fact, a reasonable amount of research suggests that outcomes are usually just as good or better with alternative positions. 

No, there's nothing wrong with birthing on your back or in a semi-sitting position if that's what feels best to you at the time.

However, there is something wrong with birthing that way because that's what most comfortable or convenient for your doctor, that's the only way he/she was trained to deliver babies, because a nurse tells you to stop moving a different way, or because you are too inhibited to follow your body's cues and get up and move.

Women should not be forced to birth in any particular position but should be able to move at will

The important thing is to move freely while birthing and to respect and follow your body's internal "knowing" about how best to move to get your baby out.

Alas, this kind of mobility is not promoted in many hospitals, and especially not for women of size.  That's why it's particularly important for fat women to find size-friendly providers who understand and actively promote freedom of mobility during all of labor and pushing, whatever the mother's size.

Sunday, January 31, 2010

Healthy Birth Practices: Avoid Unnecessary Interventions

We've been doing an ongoing series about the Six Lamaze Healthy Birth Practices, why they are helpful, why they tend to be used less with women of size, and how that negatively affects births in this group in particular.

The previous Health Birth Practices we've already discussed were:
  1. Let Labor Begin On Its Own
  2. Walk, Move Around, and Change Positions During Birth
  3. Bring a Loved One, Friend, or Doula for Continuous Support
The Healthy Birth Practice to be discussed this time is:

4. Avoid unnecessary interventions

As one study puts it:
In the last 50 years, a rapid increase in the use of technology to start, augment, accelerate, regulate and monitor the process of birth has frequently led to the adoption of inadequate, unnecessary and sometimes dangerous interventions.
"Pushed Births" Are The Norm Now

The typical hospital birth in the USA (and many other Western countries) involves a great deal of intervention. In fact, it is an extremely rare hospital birth these days that does not involve any intervention at all. But is all this intervention a good idea?

Jennifer Block calls overly interventive births "Pushed Births" in her book, Pushed. (If you are thinking about having a baby, you should definitely read this book!)

Here's her summary of what a "pushed birth" is:
A pushed birth is one that is induced, sped up, and/or heavily medicated for no good reason, and all too often concludes with surgery, invasive instruments, an episiotomy, or a bad vaginal tear---outcomes you don't want. Decades of research show that the healthiest birth for you and your baby...is a normal, vaginal birth with minimal intervention and maximum support.
How often are these interventions "pushed"? Merging a quote from the publisher's blurb on Jennifer's book with one from her website:
In the United States, more than half the women who give birth are given drugs to induce or speed up labor; for nearly a third of mothers, childbirth is major surgery---the cesarean section.

1 in 3 vaginal birthers get an episiotomy — surgical scissors cutting your vagina. And most women will put their pelvic floors at risk by lying in a bed throughout labor and pushing the baby out while while flat on their back.

Why? Because most L&D wards aren’t following best practices.
Women's bodies have developed to birth optimally over thousands of years. There is a process of labor that is meant to happen biologically, and when undisturbed, usually happens very well.

Of course, nature isn't perfect and "natural" isn't always better; sometimes things do go wrong, and thank goodness for intervention when that does happen. No one is arguing for no intervention.

But routinely intervening in a natural process often causes unforseen consequences. Sometimes you pay an unexpected price...and most doctors are greatly underestimating the price of the routine interventions they use.

About 1 in 3 women in the USA today have their babies surgically. Some cesareans are medically necessary, but a 30%+ rate is causing far more harm than good. In some states (see page 14), the cesarean rate is near 40%; in some cities and in Puerto Rico, the rate is nearer to 50%. In a few hospitals, the cesarean rate is nearer an astounding 70%.

Even when women have a vaginal birth, about a third will have an episiotomy, according to Block's book; the numbers are far higher in some third-world countries. Episiotomy (plus its repair) is yet another form of surgery. It can have huge effects on women's quality of life too.

Inductions, augmentations, breaking the waters, continuous electronic fetal monitoring, epidurals, IV drips, and urinary catheters are other commonly-used interventions. Again, each has a place and can be useful at times, but routinely used in most women, the cumulative harm can be significant as well.

A Human Rights and Women's Rights Issue Too

"Pushed" births are not just a medical issue, they are also a women's rights and a human rights issue.

Ideally, women are given informed consent about interventions, and their choices are honored. Sometimes that does happen; some hospitals and care providers do well in honoring women's decisions. And some women do choose interventions, which is completely their right.

However, far too often women's decisions are not honored, and their choices are taken from them. Sometimes women are literally bulled into interventions with threats; more often they are seduced into them with misleading information or scare tactics.

Talking people into potentially harmful interventions without fully informed consent and the freedom to refuse the intervention is a human rights violation. Everyone has the right to bodily integrity and to informed decision-making. No one should be able to take that right from you.

The fact that strong-arm interventions are so common in the obstetrics field on childbearing women makes it a women's rights issue as well.

Violence and intimidation against women does not just occur via domestic violence or rape. Unfortunately, it also happens during childbearing, but our society does not view it as an abuse of rights.

It's time to see unnecessary and coercive interventions as the human rights and women's rights violation that they are.

How Common Are Interventions?

It is a rare woman who births in a hospital and is not subject to at least one or more of the following interventions. Some interventions are more risky than others, of course, but all carry some risk of complications.

It is difficult to know exactly how often these interventions are used across the U.S.A.; the CDC collects data only on select interventions. The following figures represent intervention rates from the Listening To Mothers II survey from the Childbirth Connection.

[Remember that rates of interventions vary significantly from area to area, from doctor to doctor, and from facility to facility. The rate of interventions in your area may be higher or lower than these, but this is a good way to get a "snapshot" idea of intervention rates happening today.]

Induction

More and more women today have their labors induced artificially instead of being allowed to start labor on their own. In the LTMII study, 41% of mothers reported induction attempts by a caregiver. That's nearly half of mothers being subjected to the risks of induction.

Labor Augmentation

Even when they go into labor on their own, many women's labors are strengthened or speeded up artificially ("augmented") with synthetic pitocin. In the LTMII study, 47% of women received pitocin to speed up labor.

Many hospitals routinely augment virtually all women, across the board, as their standard of care. They find that this speeds up labor and gets the doctors home faster, but such convenience for the providers comes at a price for the mother, because induced and augmented labors are much more painful and mothers request pain meds at higher rates. They can also cause fetal distress and necessitate a cesarean.

Artificial Rupture of Membranes

Most women also have their water broken artificially at some point. Ostensibly this can speed up labor slightly, but it can also have risks (see the next section). In the LTMII survey, 47% of mothers had their waters broken artificially after labor began.

Epidural or Spinal Analgesia

Many women choose to have an epidural for pain relief during labor. This is their right and no one should be made to feel guilty for choosing it.

However, many women who do not want to have an epidural are strongly pressured by staff to have one during labor so that they are quieter and less demanding as patients.

Other women would like to go natural but find that they cannot handle the pain of induced or augmented labor without help. As is so common, one intervention often leads to another, each with accumulating risks.

In the LTMII study, 76% of women had epidural or spinal analgesia.

Urinary Catheters, IV Drips

In the LTMII survey, 56% had a urinary catheter at some point, and 83% had an IV drip. This makes it difficult to move around freely and basically tethers most women into bed, flat on their backs or sides. This makes it difficult to cope with the pain of labor and makes it difficult for women to maneuver to get the baby out most efficiently.

Electronic Fetal Monitoring

In the LTMII survey, 94% of mothers had Electronic Fetal Monitoring (EFM). This is alarming because EFM is a classic case of an intervention that has little benefit in normal labor, and clear evidence of significant harm.

As Dr. Christiane Northrup, OB-GYN, says in her recent Huffington Post article, Reclaim Your Right To Birth Right:


Data indicates that the only thing EFM has done reliably is increase the rate of Cesarean section (C-section) births.
Episiotomies

For years, episiotomies were used routinely on nearly all birthing women. Doctors did them to get babies out faster (in the days when all birthing women were heavily drugged and tied down) and because they thought that a straight surgical cut would heal better than a jagged tear.

However, research has since shown that routine episiotomies in fact cause great harm. In most cases, women tear far more seriously after an episiotomy, sometimes all the way from the vagina into the rectum. Most of the time, women fare better if an episiotomy is not done, because any tears that do occur are usually small and heal better than a surgical cut.

Yet in the LTMII study, 25% of women who birthed vaginally still experienced an episiotomy.

Cesarean Sections

In the LTMII survey, 1 in 3 women experienced a cesarean section, in line with the U.S. national cesarean rate.

More than three-quarters of c-section mothers in the survey reported pain at the site of the incision 2 months after birth, and 33% cited this pain as a major problem. 18% had ongoing pain at the scar at least 6 months after giving birth.

For many women, a cesarean section is hardly the routine and easy operation that it is usually portrayed to be.

The Road to Hell is Paved With Good Intentions

Most doctors think they are doing well by women when they employ their interventions.

Used when truly needed, they probably are helping. However, time after time, research has shown that routine use of interventions tends to worsen outcome, not improve it.

It's time to trust women's bodies to work well. It's time to trust the birth process that has evolved over thousands of years to work well.

It's okay to have interventions available, on reserve, so that in the small percentage of cases where something does go wrong, outcomes can be improved. But it's time to stop utilizing them routinely, across the board, for most women.

As the Healthy Birth Practices Care Practice Paper notes:
In many hospitals, obstetric interventions such as restrictions on eating and/or drinking, intravenous lines, electronic fetal monitoring, augmentation (speeding up labor), and epidural analgesia are used routinely on all women, even without a specific medical reason, "just in case"....

These interventions, when used routinely, have unintended consequences that ultimately increase risk for mothers and babies. The routine use of these interventions does not make birth safer for women and babies. In fact, unless there is a clear medical reason for the use of technology or other interventions, interfering with the natural process of labor and birth is not likely to be beneficial and actually may be harmful.

It is safer and healthier to allow labor to unfold and not to interfere in any way with the natural process, unless there is a clear medical indication to do so.
Common Interventions in Women of Size

Women of size are often subjected to an even higher rate of interventions than women of average size.

Sometimes these interventions are necessary but often they spring from the belief that the bodies of women of size are defective and cannot/will not labor and birth "properly."

Even many birth attendants who otherwise belive in natural birth do not believe that a fat woman's body can birth properly. Therefore, it can be difficult for women of size to find a truly non-interventive birth attendant, even in the "alternative" birth community. Even there, a number of care providers utilize or promote interventions like these for women of size.

Inductions

We've already
discussed how labor is artifically started (induced) in women of size more often than in women of average size, and how induction raises the cesarean rate compared to spontaneous labor.

A high induction rate is probably one of the most significant factors in the extremely high cesarean rate seen in "obese" women in modern obstetrics.

It also probably leads to many problems with their babies after birth. One Welsh study found that induction was the beginning of many problems in the babies of "obese" women. The logical conclusion to this (but one ignored by the study) is
maybe we shouldn't be inducing this group so frequently!

Aggressive Augmentation of Labor for "Dystocia"

Even when labor starts on its own, many women of size in the hospital have their contractions augmented with artificial labor drugs and their bag of waters broken early. They often have these interventions at
increased rates compared to women of average size.

This is because "obese" women are generally seen as having slower, more ineffective labors, so the need for labor augmentation is anticipated in this group and often initiated extra early.

Of course,
some research does show that women of size do have slower labors on average, but usually, all that's needed for this is a liberal tincture of patience, not an automatic initiation of early labor augmentation. Immersion in water can also be effective at helping speed up labor without use of automatic interventions like augmentation or breaking the waters.

Furthermore, the rate of malpositions like occiput posterior may be
higher in women of size, and malpositions are known to slow the progress of labor. Instead of automatically breaking the waters or augmenting labor, it may be more effective to investigate proactive repositioning of the baby instead. One recent study on manually turning posterior babies showed that proative repositioning of the baby lowered the cesarean rate from 34% to 2%.

Being more proactive about fetal position might help avoid the unnecessary use of interventions in women of size, and lower the cesarean rate to boot.

Internal Monitors

Because electronic fetal monitoring can be more difficult in "obese" women, a
higher rate of internal monitors are used with women of size. Some hospitals even encourage early placement of internal fetal monitors in women of size.

But while this may help monitor the baby more easily than an external monitor, it also has drawbacks. Placing an internal monitor necessitates breaking the mother's bag of waters and that brings its own risks with it (see below). Prolonged use of internal monitors is also
associated with a higher risk for infection.

Breaking The Waters

Breaking the mother's waters (a.k.a. amniotomy or AROM), especially early in labor, places her at greater risk for
infection. Furthermore, breaking the water early in labor may also increase the risk of cesarean section and/or a diagnosis of fetal distress.

Yet the routine use of early amniotomy is often found in the labors of "obese" women.

Early Placement of Epidurals

Many hospitals encourage "obese" women to get early epidurals because of the difficulty placing them in women of size.

To be fair, epidurals are harder to place in women of size because they have more back fat and it can be difficult to predict just how far in the needle must go in order to get to the right space in the spine. Multiple tries are often needed to place epidurals properly in women of size.

Furthermore, women of size have a higher rate of cesareans as well, and many doctors see fat women as a cesarean waiting to happen --- or at least a case of fetal distress waiting to happen. Therefore, they often
recommend that obese women have an epidural placed early, before the hardest part of labor and before any emergencies occur.

If an emergency were to occur and they had to use general anesthesia, this presents a higher risk for complications, and especially so in the presence of obesity. So to avoid even the smallest possibility of needing to use general anesthesia in a fat person, they recommend drugging ALL fat women very early in labor, just as a precaution.

The problem is that placing an epidural early in women of size automatically starts restricting their movement and
may encourage a malpositioned baby. It may increase the risk for slow or non-progressive labors (labor dystocia). It definitely increases the risk for instrumental delivery (forceps or vacuum extraction), probably because of the malposition issue. And with forceps comes an increased rate of episiotomy, which increases the risk for severe perineal damage.

So the recommendation for routine across-the-board early epidural placement in "obese" women---while well-intentioned to prevent emergency general anesthesia (which is riskier in people of size)---may actually cause more harm than good.

Again, it subjects ALL "obese" women to a significant level of risk and further problems in order to try to avoid a rare complication that might occur only in a few.

An Alternative Approach To Preventing Labor Dystocia in Women of Size

Shields et al (
2007, Am Fam Physician), discussing women of all sizes, suggests that although augmentation of labor and other interventions have their place, prevention of operative delivery due to slow or obstructed labor may also need to be proactive:
Prevention of dystocia includes encouraging the use of trained labor support companions, deferring hospital admission until the active phase of labor when possible, avoiding elective labor induction before 41 weeks' gestation, and using epidural analgesia judiciously.
Unfortunately, most of these (avoiding induction, judicious instead of routine use of epidurals, and deferring hospital admission until the woman is well-established in labor) tend to be actively discouraged in management of women of size.

In women of size, many midwives find better results by:
  • Encouraging spontaneous labor
  • Encouraging laboring at home for as long as possible
  • Encouraging women of size to utilize water, upright positions, and mobility during labor
  • Leaving the waters intact whenever possible
  • Avoiding routine use of internal monitors or early epidurals
  • Applying a tincture of patience for longer labors
  • Being vigilant and proactive about fetal malpositions in labor
Research is urgently needed to prove which care protocols improve outcome in women of size and which harm it, but until that happens, the above model (which honors the innate wisdom of women's bodies----including fat women's bodes) should be the norm.

Following the physiologic model of birth, the one developed over thousands of years to be the most efficient for the most people, should be the norm for ALL women, including women of size. It is the intervention that should have to be proved to be of benefit and free from harm, not the physiologic model.


Women of size should not be automatically subjected to increased levels of interventions merely on the basis of their size. Many women of size have discovered that the natural process works for them too----if they are given a realistic chance at it.

Conclusion

Many interventions in childbirth can be life-saving. No one is saying that interventions should never be used. Clearly, in some situations, it is completely medically appropriate to use interventions, and at times, they can lower the cesarean rate or even save lives.

This is true for women of all sizes.

But just as clearly, some interventions are overused and present more risk than benefit. Sometimes they even cause great harm.

This is particularly true for women of size.

Today, more and more women are experiencing "pushed births" because such births are more convenient for care providers, provide more billable services (and profits) for hospitals, and are perceived as good "defensive" medicine to protect from legal liability. And women of size experience "pushed births" even more often.

"Pushed births" are better for hospitals and doctors and their bottom lines, but are they really better for mothers and babies?

As Maureen Corry, executive director of Childbirth Connection says:
The typical childbirth experience has been transformed into a morass of wires, tubes, machines and medications that leave healthy women immobilized, vulnerable to high levels of surgery and burdened with physical and emotional health concerns while caring for their newborns.
Here is the Lamaze/Injoy video about Avoiding Unnecessary Intervention. You can see birth practice papers (with research citations supporting their conclusions) here and videos discussing each of the Healthy Birth Practices here.