I've often wondered whether women are less intuitive of their bodies' reproductive functions compared to previous generations where medical intervention was less prolific, or whether there was an element of not worrying about the unknowable involved.

I do agree that once you automate a process less attention is paid to it - look at the number of people today who rely on spell checks and calculators. And I also know from my dad's experience as an ambo that he could accurately diagnose a broken bone where a doctor would be reliant on an X-ray - they no longer have to use their senses in the same way that they did before that technology existed (which in many ways, is all that intuition and instinct is: paying attention to one's senses). So it stands to reason that we in general have become dependent upon things like ultrasound technology as a replacement of our own knowledge, and pay less attention to the physical signs of things that can be picked up on scans etc.

But I also think that perhaps there is a romanticised view of the instinctual birthing in previous generations. I don't necessarily think that women had any inherent advantage of body awareness beyond what I've mentioned above - they just didn't worry about it as much because there was no point. Birthing was something that happened in its own way and time, and compared to today, there were few interventions that could change the outcome of pregnancy or birth. I think people may have been more relaxed about it - why worry about things like LMPs and EDDs when there's no real way of controlling when it happens.

I think that when medical professionals treat it as a symbiotic relationship - in that they use their technology to confirm what a woman's senses are telling her, the best outcome can be had by all.

Tan - I'm really sorry you were treated condescendingly by your sonographer - that kind of attitude does nothing to improve trust between medical professionals and birthing women.