What is normal birth?

[carolinaw]

I’ve just read an article in the latest issue of ‘British Journal of Midwifery’ discussing women’s ideas about what is a ‘normal birth’ and whether these are the same as health professionals.

The WHO defines normal birth as “Spontaneous in onset, low risk at the start of labour and remaining so throughout labour and delivery. The infant is born spontaneously in the vertex position [i.e., head first, not breech], between 37 and 42 completed weeks of pregnancy. After birth, mother and infant are in good condition.”

The study only included 4 women, so I don’t really think any meaningful conclusions can be drawn about what they said, but what I found interesting was that it made me think about MY opinions about what is normal and what isn’t. What I think a ‘normal delivery’ means that the baby was born vaginally, without forceps or ventouse.
Any different ideas?

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

One a hospital doesn't want you to have. (Says the cynical and jaded freebirther-to-be.)

[PumpkinZulu]

*MY* idea of a normal, natural birth is spontaneous labour, zero interventions during the labour (no drugs, no strapped on monitors, no internals), no forceps or assisted delivery, no episiotomy, delayed cord clamping and physiological third stage. That's *MY* standard and I get everyone has a different idea on what they consider normal or natural. By my views, I did not have a natural birth; I had a penthrox stick in the ambulance, one internal upon arrival at the hospital and dd's cord was clamped soon after her birth due to mec in her lungs, all with my permission/at my request.

[Tegam]

Hmmm will need to ponder this for awhile first me thinks. ....

[Cherished]

My idea of natural birth is no internals, no intervention need to turn baby, no intervention to induce labour, no equipment used to get bub out, no c-section, mother able to birth freely/move as she pleases so no monitering that would get in the way of that. Also delayed cord clamping (yet Lotus birth practices are way more natural again) . No drugs for mum to birth the palcenta, and absolutely no drugs/vaccination for bub even vit K. In my mind bub should go straight into mums arms for skin on skin and breastfeeding. And I'm very happy to say that I had all of the above and in the water to boot Oh and home birth is also way up there on the 'natural' list too. I was in a beautiful private hospital with amazing midwives and ob's who respected all of our decisions including letting us go to nearly 42 weeks (and beyond if I had of chosen that). Funny that you started this thread as just yesterday I commented on the 'natural' birth of that lady who gave birth to a very large baby. I wanted to know what their idea of natural was, I have a suspicion it was a vaginal birth not a natural birth.

[Lenny]

carolinaw - if you are wishing to conduct research, there is a forum especially for this.

[Cherished]

carolinaw - if you are wishing to conduct research, there is a forum especially for this.

Yep and as you will see most bb members will be happy to give you their opinion while you are here you may also find that bb is a great community and if you have an interest in birthing etc you may find some great friends here along the way if you join in.

[HotI]

there are differences between normal and natural birth. what has become normal in our society is not natural.

[HotI]

Here is Abstract to the Article

Do women's ideas of 'normal' birth match those held by professionals? (439kb)
Alison Edwards, Jacky Conduit
British Journal of Midwifery 19(11): 720 - 728 (Nov 2011)

Aim: To explore the definitions of normal birth held by women who have not given birth, what influences that perspective, and compare it with those of health professionals. Background: Available evidence provides conflicting definitions of normal childbirth. The majority of available evidence encapsulates the views of the health professionals themselves or women who have experienced childbirth. Little evidence exists that reflects the views of women yet to experience childbirth.

Method: Six participants were identified via purposive sampling to undertake a small exploratory qualitative study utilizing semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis. Ethical approval was obtained.

Results: The definition of normal birth is individual and complex. The absence of complications and use of interventions influenced this definition, which in part agrees with health professionals' current definitions. Birth was perceived as a scary prospect; a view largely constructed from negative stories from friends and family.

Conclusions: The findings suggest that working within the confines of a definition of 'normal' childbirth is far from straightforward. It highlights a need to encourage women to view birth more positively. Expanding this research further would explore these issues in more detail, providing more conclusive evidence to support practice.

[PumpkinZulu]

there are differences between normal and natural birth. what has become normal in our society is not natural.

So very true!

[Cherished]

oh to true! my brain must have gone straight to natural as that is what should be normal to me normal is actually the very opposite. The birth of ds was actually abnormal! Normal today is monitoring, internals, induction and loads of intervention to 'get bub to do what they want' even induction to fit into time schedules. c-sections are normal, breach etc is normal, pumping newborn babies full of drugs and mothers for that matter for unnecessary things like birthing the placenta and vit K and Hep B, wtf?? Normal is everything that mainstream medicine does in their hospital system! Yeah.... Goodluck with that research carolinaw

[Miss E]

This is an interesting topic. Personally I would define a 'normal' birth as one that didn't require intervention. I know many will disagree with me, but I also don't necessarily consider internals to be intervention, or even gas and maybe even pethidine This is because these are options the woman can take that don't necessarily impact negatively on her ability to birth her baby. An epidural is different, it renders her bedridden which does impact on her ability to birth.

In my book, a natural birth is one that involves no intervention and no drugs.

But on a side note I was chatting with a friend the other day who had her bub a few months ago. She was saying, that aside from herself, she only knew one other person who had had an unassisted birth. I found that staggering. But then when I started to think about it, I can actually say that she and the person she was referring to are the only people I know (IRL) that have had an unassisted birth (among our peers, not necessarily parents generation). So out of about 20 (30 tops) that 2 women. Now that is scary!

[HotI]

Some days i consider leaving home (a safe place) to go to hospital to birth your baby to be the first intervention that prevents the birth being 'natural'.

(but i also realise that some days i am incredibly jaded and cynical as a result of my experience fighting to attempt even a semi-natural birth in a hospital)

[carolinaw]

Honestly...I am not a mom. so sad...because of my heart disease. I don't know if i could be a mommy. I am consulting my doctor. Maybe there is some of danger. Soo...every mom, please prey for me.

I consider a "normal" birth, as the normal variations within a vaginal birth. I don't consider Sections "normal". I mean, usually it's an emergent situation that arises that causes you to need a C Section. But, I don't mean that if you have a CSection, you are abnormal. I just mean, that I consider normal to be what the body is intended to do, and the range of things that happen along with it.

[Tegam]

Some days i consider leaving home (a safe place) to go to hospital to birth your baby to be the first intervention that prevents the birth being 'natural'.

(but i also realise that some days i am incredibly jaded and cynical as a result of my experience fighting to attempt even a semi-natural birth in a hospital)

Couldn't have said it better myself!

[SunnyRain]

I distinguish between natural and normal...

I say normal is anything that gets the baby out safe and sound and the mum isn't traumatised by the experience.

I personally think it's unhelpful to constantly talk down about any birth experience that doesn't occur in the comfort of your own home. For the millions of women who choose a hospital birth, it's a perfectly acceptable and desired birthing experience. Why judge other women's choices? This I can assure you, there are equally millions of women who would love to have the luxury of access to medical assistance for birthing that we do, it's nothing to be scoffed at.

Birth where and how it works for you to have peace of mind and a successful outcome. That's only normal.

--'--,--'--<@
Jude 07/10/08 | Lilac 16/06/11

[Maruschke]

I liked internals while in labour, it was an encouragement to know what was going on. It doesn't intervene in the natural process of the body, so why does it automatically render a birth unnatural?

I also think you can have perfectly natural breach births, why is head down a determining factor? Hmm?

Natural is by definition not allowing any interventions.

A normal delivery is one that results in a healthy mum and bub at the end of it all...

[Floweryfields]

I liked internals while in labour, it was an encouragement to know what was going on. It doesn't intervene in the natural process of the body, so why does it automatically render a birth unnatural?

I also think you can have perfectly natural breach births, why is head down a determining factor? Hmm?

Natural is by definition not allowing any interventions.



A normal delivery is one that results in a healthy mum and bub at the end of it all...

Very well said.
Birth is different for everyone and I find the blanket statements often made to what 'is and isn't' really unhelpful to mother and their choices.