Predibirth- Creepy?

Alright, you knew a post about THIS mess was coming, right?

To summarize, some doctors in France coupled new computer programming and MRI of the fetus and scored a sample set of women (24) on the predicted outcome of their individual births. An apparent success at predicting birth outcomes, the new software, Predibirth, is being cited by various doctors as a GOOD thing because it will lessen a woman's chances of undergoing an emergency C-section. The idea here is that anyone who scores in a 'less than ideal' range on the prediction software will choose to undergo an elective C-section, rather than risk an emergency C-section thereby decreasing many of the risk factors associated with emergency C-sections on both mother and child.

....

Am I the only one incredibly freaked out by this news?!

...
Yes, it's only been compared against 24 births, yes, it's going to be years before it receives approval for use, and then I'm sure it'd only be used on high risk cases anyway for a while before eventually, MAYBE, becoming a common technology utilized on all women in the name of safer birth practices. Safer....because...well, cutting into a women before her due date, before she's gone into labor, before her Baby is ready might be considered crazy and creepy and detrimental to all involved UNLESS one cited the save-all catch-phrase,  'safety of mother and child' as a viable reason.

I only know what I've experienced in birthing my own child, what I've seen in the births of the women I've attended as a doula, and what I've read and studied through commonly available sources, but really...there doesn't seem to be much call for INCREASING the elective C-section rate when we're already dealing with a national C-section rate of over 33%!!! Well, over the WHO's suggestion of a 10% rate.

There's no indication that Predibirth is intended to LOWER the overall C-section rate. No indication of that whatsoever, and if we follow through with that train of thought, one might become quite concerned that this will result in a stronger association of fear, risk, and emergency with vaginal delivery. (we're not even talking 'natural', drug-free, here...we're talking pushing a baby out of your womb along the same passageway as our ancestors.) And, with an increase in these associations, and an increase in elective C-section options, then it only follows that more and more women will choose surgery over vaginal delivery simply because it gradually (one can only hope gradually!) becomes the socially 'safer' option.

It's all very sad.

Gender Neutrality for the Newborn

My sister-in-law happens to be pregnant. Which, is utterly beyond exciting to me because it's another birth experience I'll hear about, another baby to hold one day, and another woman entering motherhood. The close proximity of all of this brought on by our familial connection just makes it all the more wonderful.

Anyway, since it's not my OWN baby, I'm finding that there are all these adorable little 'gift's for babies that you just wouldn't buy for yourself, but suddenly become too cute to resist when you imagine the item going to someone else and their new child. Which, is weird, and I know I should have better self-control because babies really don't need much of anything beyond love and mother's milk, but...well...maybe time will help me to resist.

To come to the point of this blog post, I found myself in Kohls today...don't ask me why. And, saw literally twenty mothers with practically newborns shopping in the baby section. (alright, I might be exaggerating a bit here, but, trust me, it's more mothers with newborns than I've ever seen in a store before!) I assumed there was a sale, so wandered over to have a look at the gender neutral selection. And, I remember feeling this way while shopping for my son, but it's utterly amazing how ridiculous some of the baby stuff IS. Not to mention how incredibly NON-gender neutral. I saw lots of brown...which I actually like on babies...good camouflage for all the mess...but brown is only available with complimentary colors of pink, purple, blue, or green. With boy puppy dogs, or girly bunny rabbits. *sigh*

There was an article out not too long ago about a family who was choosing to raise their child gender neutral. And, I still think it's a bit odd, and far-fetched to put into practice to the extreme that they have chosen to go, BUT there's some valid points about why must we classify our children by sex from the moment of birth! Whatever happened to the white layette? or yellow? or greens and blues that don't instantly bespeak BOY. I mean, what about grey? It's handsomely appropriate for a baby in a light color, and yet, it's nowhere except in hand-knit sweaters!

It's not that I really think you should avoid gender identifying clothing, it's just odd that there's no other options. The conspirator in me wonders if perhaps it's contributing to all the ultrasounds to check the sex of the unborn child. It's a legitimate thing new parents wonder about, and when surrounded by very little in the way of gender neutral options to prepare for baby, well, it can only encourage those sorts of ultrasounds right?

Natural Transitioning from Co-sleeping

I've been a proud co-sleeping mother by every sense of that phrase for nearly 3 years. In fact, to be exact, JUST under 2 years and 11 months.

As with everything having to do with 'parenting' my son, it's been a journey. We started with a Snuggle Nest after falling prey to the horror stories of parents rolling onto their tiny babies and smothering them to death. After the first four hours of sleeping our own bed, the baby was brought onto my partners stomach in a sort of cuddle sleep, and the Snuggle Nest was abandoned forever as essentially useless. T refused to sleep in any longer, and both my partner and I found that we were fully confident that there was no logical way that either of us would EVER be able to sleep so soundly that we would unconsciously smother our baby.

We also forewent the warnings about pillows, comforters, and whatever else is warned about in the common co-sleeping literature. I'm not sure I'd go ahead and vote that that's the 'safest' way to co-sleep, but again, it's one of those things that we gradually became ok with.

By the time he was 9 months or so, I was beginning to wonder how we'd ever get him OUT of our bed. I still enjoyed our sleep together, but at times it was frustrating. T tended to sleep in the middle of the bed, and he also tended to take over the entire bed in that way of small children. I wanted to be able to cuddle against my partner, but alas, there was always a flailing hot little body preventing me.

This past August, T and I entered into a mutual weaning. I'm not even so sure how it 'happened' anymore, but whatever the cause, or how we did it, within a week or two, he was completely weaned without fuss. We spent lots of time cuddling more directly in bed, and he slept EVEN closer to me than he had in the past. Which, at the time, I enjoyed because some vital bit of our bonding experience had come to an end, and I wanted reasurance that we were still just as close.

Fast forward to the present day, and T has slept in his own bed, of his own choice for the past 4-5 nights. ALL night I should add. It seems like such a natural transition that I laugh to think that at some point in the past I'd actually devoted attention to the how's and why's of this happening. His 'bed' is just a futon couch moved beside our own bed, but he's possessive about it in a way that lets me know this is probably 'for real'. He's ready to have his own sleeping space. And for the first time in nearly three years, I'm getting uninterrupted sleep. Which, is something I'd given up on years ago!

Midwifery Self-Study

Not surprisingly, given the topic (s) of this blog, I have a driving aspiration to one day assist women as a homebirth midwife. I've thought about what this means quite a LOT in the past years. Over three years now to be more exact.

When I first realized that perhaps a calling of mine might be midwifery, I was consumed by quantity. I couldn't imagine saying no to possible clients; picking and choosing among them for those that most desired my services from those that perhaps thought that they might like to utilize my midwifery skills. I wanted only to be at as many births as possible, and attend as many prenatal appointments as I could squeeze inbetween family life and that busy schedule of nightly births.

Which, in my mind, meant training as a CNM (certified Nurse Midwife). I'd be able to work in hospitals, large OBGYN practices, birth centers, and/or even my own practice.

A year or so down the line, and I began to waver. I had learned a lot more about the various distinctions between a CNM, CPM (certified professional midwife), and DEM (direct entry midwife), and I had had the opportunity to serve as the primary birth doula at three drastically different births. That experience alone clarified, for me, that the only births I was interested in regularly attending were those that took place at the woman's home, and that I was actually very interested in screening future clients.

So, I planned on training as a CPM through either a traditonal midwifery school, or directed self-study course along with an apprenticeship. Following either of those two courses of training, I intended on sitting for the NARM (North American Registry of Midwives) exam, and turning in mountains of paperwork in order to 'prove' to this overseeing body of registered midwives, that I was properly trained.

Now, I've reached some new epiphany. I still want to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to safely and skillfully assist women with their pregnancies and births. I still want to apprentice, but suddenly, the distinction between legal and illegal, for me, holds no meaning. I plan on apprenticing when the time is right. And, again when the time is right, I plan on opening my own homebirth practice without seeking registration or licensure through NARM.

If I am a 'good' midwife, then women will come to me. It's just that simple. And, if I work without care for the expense of licensing and then maintaining said licensure, or the rules/restrictions that govern such licensing, then I will be more able to assist the women who come to me in achieving the births every one of them deserves.

I think it's important here to mention that I absolutely 100% agree that some small minority of births should/must take place in the hospital or some other place where there is a supervising surgeon or doctor. However, I also believe that birth is not an illness. It is something that most women can undergo with little to no assistance and a whole lot of support.


So, certifying myself in such a way where I am then restricted via liabilities and regulations as to who I may attend, how I may assist them, and where I may attend them does not make sense with my personal take on birth. I do still want to assist as many women as desire my services. I also want to do the best I personally (and safely) can to maintain their birth as a natural affair that takes place within the privacy and sanctuary of their chosen place of birth. Which means, I simply cannot be concerned with the overwhelming practical liabilities that come with national regulations of midwifery.

So, DEM it is!

Having made this final decision on what path I will follow, I still have to wait on a more appropriate timing before attaining an apprenticeship. My partner and I are travelers at heart although perhaps that's been more a characteristic of our youth than our innate personalities as my desire for a stable, "Home" is increasing with the passing of time. There's not yet a standing promise of staying in one place for the length of time I'd prefer for an apprenticeship, so that may yet wait for a better time. However, I've begun a personal course of self-study based loosely on the NARM syllabus found in the Candidate Information Bulletin.

Yes, self-study. It sounds ludicrous at first, I know, but remember, there are textbooks, workbooks, a wealth of valid research to be found both online and in countless 'birth' books. There are midwives to talk to, forums filled with debates upon the appropriate course of action for literally thousands of specific instances, more blogs, and personal accounts of midwives all around the world than could ever be read, and even online midwifery classes with such infamous midwives as Gloria Lemay!

For both myself, and any future midwife I seek an apprenticeship with, I am trying to keep very physical documentation of my studies. Lots of notes, well-ordered binders, notecards, physical copies of the books I am using, and copies of any research or articles I find useful throughout my studies.

It's exhilarating to finally feel as though I am settled in my future path, and to also feel as though I am making real headway in making it one day happen.

Hats and the Newborn

One of the things I'm constantly reminded of, is that much of what I still presume to be true about fertility, conception, pregnancy, birth, and the immediate postpartum period is just as false or exaggerated (in a fearful sort of way) as those glaring falsehoods I've already come to recognize.

For instance, this one isn't a big deal, but until a day ago, I actually believed that hats on a newborn were 'necessary'. I'm a knitter, so maybe that made it easier to forego questioning when my time came to give birth...after all, I arrived at the birth center and then, eventually, the hospital with no less than FOUR hand-knit hats. But whatever the presumption, I never once in all these years thought to question the reasoning behind 'hatting' our babies from the moment of birth.

I had always seen newborns wearing a hat of some sort...generally with an anxious guardian ensuring that the hat was never off of Baby's head for longer than the seconds it took to replace. And, when I entered into my own prenatal period, I was reminded continuously to provide a hat for my babe at his birth; it was a bulleted item on every single "What should I Pack for the ______(enter place of much looked forward to Birth)" list we ever received, and I know that it was verbally mentioned to me by both my midwife and obstetrician at various points in the pregnancy.

But here I am, nearly three years after my child's birth, and three years deep into my growing obsession into all things birth-related, and I come to find that hats are relatively pointless. In fact, under normal, healthy circumstances, they may actually be more harmful than good! (think overheating and infringing upon quality mother-child bonding time)

Research has proven that 'Hatting' a baby born under normal, healthy circumstances does little in the way of benefit. In fact, it was found that the best course of 'action' regarding a normal, healthy newborn would be to  leave it and the mother well enough alone. The baby's body would take care of itself.

Gloria Lemay recently published a blog post on this same issue bringing up some good points about how the obsession with placing a hat on Baby's head immediately following his birth interrupts the primal imprinting that takes place between the Mama and her child in those first moments after birth. Instead of leaving the two alone, much is made of finding Baby a hat, fitting it onto his head, and then, ensuring that said hat remains on his head. There are hands in and out of the mother's field of vision, and one of the first decisions of new motherhood (how and when to clothe her child)  is removed from the Mother.

Common Sense Breastfeeding also wrote an interesting post stating many of the reasons mentioned above for why it might make better sense to "Hold That Hat".