Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Female Info Boards => Open Talk for Girl Discussion => Topic started by: BayGBM on June 05, 2008, 11:16:35 PM
-
This evening I watched a documentary called The Business of Being Born. It was filled with some pretty surprising statistics and scenarios around births in the USA, statistics that are in sharp contrast to what’s happening in other industrialized countries. As a guy (who cares about women and loves babies) I found it all fascinating.
One of the early arguments set forth in the film is that in the USA pregnancy/delivery has been framed as a medical “problem” that requires treatment in a hospital by an ob/gyn. In other industrialized countries the use of trained, home birth mid-wives are much more common and the mortality rate for mothers/babies in those countries is much lower than in the USA.
In the 1970s, Cesarean births in the US went from 4% to 23%. Since 1996 the C-section rate in the US has risen 46%. The incidents of C-sections are going up and up and up! Why the rise in C-sections? It turns out that they are extremely “doctor friendly.” That is to say, they focus on the doctor’s needs rather than the best interests of the mother & baby.
They’ve done studies and found that the majority of C-sections occur just after 4pm and just after 10pm. In other words the doctor can do it and still get home in time for dinner. Or he can do it and not have to stay up all night tending to the expectant mother. The typical C-section is done in 20 minutes.
The film talks about a lot of other issues (insurance companies, for example) that I think you’ll find interesting. It calls into question a lot of the assumptions we have about childbirth—including the ideal position from which to give birth--lying on your back with your legs up in stirrups is not it. So why is this position so common? Again, it has to do with convenience for the doctor... :-\
I highly recommend this film. It's available on DVD and via Netflix.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0995061/
-
Wow, thanks Bay. This is something not many people talk about...but its so true.
I was scared shitless they were gonna try to make me have a C-section. Many times they will try to scare the women into doing so. I have a hard time trusting doctors.
-
They talk about this (scaring the mother) in the film too. Any and every suggestion doctors & nurses make leading up to and during delivery is framed as “this is best for the health of your baby” because they know it is a phrase that will ultimately shut you up and make you comply with whatever it is they want to do. No reasonable woman--especially a first time mom--is going to challenge a comment like that from a physician. Doctors know this and they use it (that phrase) all the time to control you.
The film has commentary from expectant & recent moms, OB/GYN residents & experienced physicians from several hospitals, and some doctors from Europe, all of which paint a scary picture about the way women in the US have been manipulated into thinking that having a baby is a medical “problem” that can only be “treated” in a hospital. Question: why has this happened? Answer: $$$
More surprising facts from the film:
Whether in a hospital or at home, midwives attend between 70%-80% of births in Europe and Japan; in the USA midwives attend less than 8%.
Midwives are essentially banned from hospitals in the USA. In America midwives only participate in births that take place at home, a birthing center, or elsewhere--never in a hospital.
The USA has the second worst newborn mortality rate in the developed world.
In 1900 95% of births in the USA took place at home.
In 1938, half of all births took place at home.
By 1955, less than 1% of births took place at home.
View the trailer for the film here
-
They’ve done studies and found that the majority of C-sections occur just after 4pm and just after 10pm. In other words the doctor can do it and still get home in time for dinner. Or he can do it and not have to stay up all night tending to the expectant mother. The typical C-section is done in 20 minutes.
Very interesting. My friend who at the time was about to give birth to her first baby wanted me in the room w/her and her husband. We were there all day and at about 9:30pm they decided to do a C-Section. Interesting.
And is it true that if the woman has a C-Section that all births subsequent to that must be C-Sections?
-
Very interesting. My friend who at the time was about to give birth to her first baby wanted me in the room w/her and her husband. We were there all day and at about 9:30pm they decided to do a C-Section. Interesting.
And is it true that if the woman has a C-Section that all births subsequent to that must be C-Sections?
I don't know, "check with your doctor" but one of the female OB/GYNs in the film did mention that the first C-section is usually very simple but the second, third, fourth, etc poses huge risks to the mother in terms of injury to her bladder, intestines, appendix, etc. and other complications.
Another doctor mentions that a C-section is major surgery with all the attendant risks (for example, infections that are harder to treat with antibiotics) but it is offered with the frequency and rhetoric as if they were cutting your fingernails.
All the doctors featured in this film agree that a vaginal birth is safer and less risky than a C-section. Though I suppose there are doctors not featured in this film that might disagree. :-\
-
Very interesting. My friend who at the time was about to give birth to her first baby wanted me in the room w/her and her husband. We were there all day and at about 9:30pm they decided to do a C-Section. Interesting.
And is it true that if the woman has a C-Section that all births subsequent to that must be C-Sections?
No. Common misconception, fed in part by doctors. My wife had three VBACs (vaginal birth after caesarean). Not sure if they still call them that.
-
Vaginal is natural C sects are for emergencies.
for you insecure guys, just asked the Doc to add a few extra stitches if he has to cut the perineum.
-
I had my kids via c-section due to my pelvic/hips never expanding. I would never have been able to pass them naturally and would have lost them. Women's pelvic regions tilt and expand durning pregnancy to cradle and then give room for the baby to pass through the birth canal, which is why most women's hips look so wide during their pregnancy. Mine never moved. :-\
-
I had my kids via c-section due to my pelvic/hips never expanding. I would never have been able to pass them naturally and would have lost them. Women's pelvic regions tilt and expand durning pregnancy to cradle and then give room for the baby to pass through the birth canal, which is why most women's hips look so wide during their pregnancy. Mine never moved. :-\
That's why I said C-sects are for emergencies or abnormal situations. I bet Mike is happy about that :)
-
That's why I said C-sects are for emergencies or abnormal situations. I bet Mike is happy about that :)
Yup ;D
-
Vaginal births are better for both mothers and babies.
As the baby passes through the birth canal, it passes over the Grafenberg spot. This area is not just for pleasure during intimate moments with your partner, it also raises a woman's pain threshold during childbirth. In addition, the baby's passage through the birth canal aligns the spine and chakra points of the baby. Babies delivered vaginally are happier and more well adjusted over the long term and as a rule don't cry as much as those delivered through C-Section.
C- sections give raise to opportunistic infections in the mother, that can result in future sterility.
They also can weaken the uterine walls making subsequent vaginal births very difficult.
Recovery times from C-Sections far exceed those from vaginal deliveries.
Modern medicine has infact shifted a natural process of life into a medical procedure from which much profit can be derived.
-
Vaginal births are better for both mothers and babies.
As the baby passes through the birth canal, it passes over the Grafenberg spot. This area is not just for pleasure during intimate moments with your partner, it also raises a woman's pain threshold during childbirth. In addition, the baby's passage through the birth canal aligns the spine and chakra points of the baby. Babies delivered vaginally are happier and more well adjusted over the long term and as a rule don't cry as much as those delivered through C-Section.
I have heard this straight from the Mommy's mouth but she also said she was sexually aroused during the childbirth. I found it strange at the time but I have a better understanding of the process now.
-
Vaginal births are better for both mothers and babies.
As the baby passes through the birth canal, it passes over the Grafenberg spot. This area is not just for pleasure during intimate moments with your partner, it also raises a woman's pain threshold during childbirth. In addition, the baby's passage through the birth canal aligns the spine and chakra points of the baby. Babies delivered vaginally are happier and more well adjusted over the long term and as a rule don't cry as much as those delivered through C-Section.
C- sections give raise to opportunistic infections in the mother, that can result in future sterility.
They also can weaken the uterine walls making subsequent vaginal births very difficult.
Recovery times from C-Sections far exceed those from vaginal deliveries.
Modern medicine has infact shifted a natural process of life into a medical procedure from which much profit can be derived.
Vaginal births are definitely more natural, but not always better. As I said in my case, my children would never have passed and would have both died, not to mention probably killed me too. Many woman have died due to not being able to have a c-section (I'm talking in the past...before it became a science). And as someone has stated in this thread...women are capable of delivering a child vaginally after a c-section. Many have done so. They are things that should be discussed with your doctor in detail when pregnant.
As far as vaginally babies being happier, that's so ridiculous (IMO). Both my kids were the happiest babies ever. Always laughing, always well behaved. Both were walking and talking early. My son has always been in advanced classes and my daughter graduated a year early. IMO it seams more traumatic to squeezed slowly through a small hole (hearing the mom screaming, lol) than it is to be pulled out a larger one, lol.
I'll agree the recovery time is definitely greater, but it really doesn't take anything away from the baby. You have a couple of weeks of not being able to drive or lift things over 10 pounds. But, I think those small sacrifices are worth what I brought home. :)
-
Vaginal births are definitely more natural, but not always better. As I said in my case, my children would never have passed and would have both died, not to mention probably killed me too. Many woman have died due to not being able to have a c-section (I'm talking in the past...before it became a science). And as someone has stated in this thread...women are capable of delivering a child vaginally after a c-section. Many have done so. They are things that should be discussed with your doctor in detail when pregnant.
Laura,
Vaginal births are always better! In your case, your body didn't function the way it was supposed to, so a C-section was required, however, had your body functioned the way it was supposed to, a vaginal birth would have been better for your kids.
As far as vaginally babies being happier, that's so ridiculous (IMO). Both my kids were the happiest babies ever. Always laughing, always well behaved. Both were walking and talking early. My son has always been in advanced classes and my daughter graduated a year early. IMO it seams more traumatic to squeezed slowly through a small hole (hearing the mom screaming, lol) than it is to be pulled out a larger one, lol.
It may be ridiculous in your opinion, but it is a fact in the greater body of knowledge.
A good deal of the "trauma" involved in vaginal hospital births have to do with the environment itself.
When you couple that with the drugs they use, which prolongs labour, it is bound to be traumatic. Now the child is delivered in an unnatural position, which is not conducive to labour, brought out of his/her warm home into a freezing cold environment, with bright lights, and some SOB grabs him by the ankles, turns him upside down and slaps him on the ass real hard? You'd be traumatized too.
I'll agree the recovery time is definitely greater, but it really doesn't take anything away from the baby. You have a couple of weeks of not being able to drive or lift things over 10 pounds. But, I think those small sacrifices are worth what I brought home. :)
Duh, ...of course it is when you look at the alternative in your particular individual case, ...however, the greater point of this thread that BayGBM was getting at, and which the film depicts is that the majority of C-Sections done in America are done for the convenience of the doctor and profit to the system, rather than for what is best for women and their children.
C-Sections deprive the baby of their passage through the birth canal. There are energy meridians throughout the body and certain chakra points that align along the spine. Western science has long poo-pooed these areas which are common knowledge in Eastern philosophies, areas that modern Western science is just catching on to. During gestation, the fetus is curled up without much opportunity to flex it's muscles so to speak, just as it cannot use it's lungs during gestation, so too are it's chakra energy centres dormant. The passage through the birth canal brings the spine into alignment, and activates these chakra points. When lifted out of the womb, this does not occur.
-
Laura,
Vaginal births are always better! In your case, your body didn't function the way it was supposed to, so a C-section was required, however, had your body functioned the way it was supposed to, a vaginal birth would have been better for your kids.
It may be ridiculous in your opinion, but it is a fact in the greater body of knowledge.
A good deal of the "trauma" involved in vaginal hospital births have to do with the environment itself.
When you couple that with the drugs they use, which prolongs labour, it is bound to be traumatic. Now the child is delivered in an unnatural position, which is not conducive to labour, brought out of his/her warm home into a freezing cold environment, with bright lights, and some SOB grabs him by the ankles, turns him upside down and slaps him on the ass real hard? You'd be traumatized too.
Duh, ...of course it is when you look at the alternative in your particular individual case, ...however, the greater point of this thread that BayGBM was getting at, and which the film depicts is that the majority of C-Sections done in America are done for the convenience of the doctor and profit to the system, rather than for what is best for women and their children.
C-Sections deprive the baby of their passage through the birth canal. There are energy meridians throughout the body and certain chakra points that align along the spine. Western science has long poo-pooed these areas which are common knowledge in Eastern philosophies, areas that modern Western science is just catching on to. During gestation, the fetus is curled up without much opportunity to flex it's muscles so to speak, just as it cannot use it's lungs during gestation, so too are it's chakra energy centres dormant. The passage through the birth canal brings the spine into alignment, and activates these chakra points. When lifted out of the womb, this does not occur.
I was under the impression before and after the film that the drugs used accelerate rather than prolong labor. For example Pitocin is almost always given to women in hospitals to cause/accelerate contractions to "get it over with." Labor in a natural delivery can drag on for hours--literally, and hospitals don't like that. They want you in and then out--quickly! It's convenient for the doctors, nurses, and hospitals to have pregnant mom's move through like an assembly line and a labor that drags on for hours is basically unwelcome in their smooth running system. So they drug you up with Pitocin, etc.
If you look at the movie trailer again they even make reference to Pitocin several times they call it "Pit". Look for it at time interval :38 seconds thru 49 seconds. :-[
-
C-sections save a lot of headaches. Anytime something goes wrong it's the doctor's fault for not doing a c-section soon enough.
-
C-sections save a lot of headaches. Anytime something goes wrong it's the doctor's fault for not doing a c-section soon enough.
That is what doctors (are trained to) think and that is why they have become so common. One of the film's primary arguments is that decisions are being made based on legal and monetary reasons rather than what is medically in the best interest of the mother and newborn.
-
I was under the impression before and after the film that the drugs used accelerate rather than prolong labor. For example Pitocin is almost always given to women in hospitals to cause/accelerate contractions to "get it over with." Labor in a natural delivery can drag on for hours--literally, and hospitals don't like that. They want you in and then out--quickly! It's convenient for the doctors, nurses, and hospitals to have pregnant mom's move through like an assembly line and a labor that drags on for hours is basically unwelcome in their smooth running system. So they drug you up with Pitocin, etc.
If you look at the movie trailer again they even make reference to Pitocin several times they call it "Pit". Look for it at time interval :38 seconds thru 49 seconds. :-[
The drugs do prolong the labour.
Most women who's babies pop out in minutes vs hours are those who had completely natural childbirths.
They didn't go though the rigamaroll of a hospitalized birth. Those who do make it to the hospital in time,
are too far along to receive any kind of drugs and the babies just pop right outta there.
Drugged up, on your back, with legs in stirrups is unnatural. Squatting in an unchlorinated hottub in the dark (http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/thumbup.gif)
In China, a woman delivers, ...and is back in the rice fields that afternoon. ;D
-
That is what doctors (are trained to) think and that is why they have become so common. One of the film's primary arguments is that decisions are being made based on legal and monetary reasons rather than what is medically in the best interest of the mother and newborn.
Trained to think in a sensible way is a good thing. The one time a doctor doesn't do a C-section early enough all hell breaks loose. You have no idea what happens to them after and ultimately, being sued restricts a doctor's ability to help others. Better safe than sorry, as the old saying goes. In about 5 years the shortage of OBGYNs will start to really impact the middle class and no one will understand why, LOL! Lawyers have made it so OBs are responsible for a child until it turns 18. If you were an OBGYN and about to retire tomorrow and wanted to deliver one last baby (for old times sake or the money) the law makes it so paying for tail coverage (malpractice) on that delivery until the kid is 18 or you might get screwed. Blame lawyers but a lot of OBs are only doing pre-natal care now and explain to women that they'll have to find another doctor to deliver the baby. I really can't imagine how abandoned some women would feel in that situation but I do understand that from a medico-legal standpoint the doctor is responsible for that baby a long time and anything can be blamed on a delivery.
I doubt the laws will change so more and more OB slots will be taken by immigrants.
-
Judi...how many babies have you had?
-
Judi...how many babies have you had?
I've had about the same amount of vaginal births as you.
I also have a baby everytime I read some of the ridiculous BS on here!
...plus I stayed in a Holiday Inn Select once. ;D
-
I've had about the same amount of vaginal births as you.
I also have a baby everytime I read some of the ridiculous BS on here!
...plus I stayed in a Holiday Inn Select once. ;D
LOL
BAD JUDI
LOL
-
LOL
BAD JUDI
LOL
:P
-
I've had about the same amount of vaginal births as you.
I also have a baby everytime I read some of the ridiculous BS on here!
...plus I stayed in a Holiday Inn Select once. ;D
Well I can say I tried the vaginal birth darling and if it weren't for the c-section...I nor my children wouldn't be to talk about it. Some people live through experience while others live through someone else's numbers (statistics).
And your quote of "I also have a baby everytime I read some of the ridiculous BS on here!" is ridiculous, especially when you haven't had one to compare too. Maybe you should change it to "I also have a shit everytime I read some of the ridiculous BS on here!" That seems a bit more logical.
-
I think OS and the Jagged One need to become birth surrogates just for the experience of carrying life around for 9 mos. You can hand the little one over to the bio parents right after the birth and immediately return to the gym and get back in shape!
My fiancee wants to have a baby now and the urge is very intense for her! I don't know if I am equipped to return to that stage in life ( diapers, mid-night feedings, but she is ready now! I don't know what to do. Having 4 steps is not enough for her!
Help!!!
-
My fiancee wants to have a baby now and the urge is very intense for her! I don't know if I am equipped to return to that stage in life ( diapers, mid-night feedings, but she is ready now! I don't know what to do. Having 4 steps is not enough for her!
Help!!!
This is something that should be discussed prior to getting involved HM. Although sometimes even that fails. My dad and his ex-wife had that very same discussing prior to getting "serious" and also prior to "marriage". Then one day after they were married 5 years she decided she desperately wanted a child. My father told her they had already gone through this and he was done having children. She didn't like that answer (even though it was understood prior). She divorced him, married someone else and had herself some children.
One can't go into a relationship thinking they can change the other's mind at a later time. It's just not fair.
-
This is something that should be discussed prior to getting involved HM. Although sometimes even that fails. My dad and his ex-wife had that very same discussing prior to getting "serious" and also prior to "marriage". Then one day after they were married 5 years she decided she desperately wanted a child. My father told her they had already gone through this and he was done having children. She didn't like that answer (even though it was understood prior). She divorced him, married someone else and had herself some children.
One can't go into a relationship thinking they can change the other's mind at a later time. It's just not fair.
I thought we had discussed this already, she was very sure (at that time) that she was pass the making babies stage of life.
Also, it never has never been a topic of discussion until about a month ago when she baby sat a friend's year old baby. All of a sudden out of nowhere as we are about to go to SLEEP came "Gary, what do you think about having another baby?" I immediately turned mute, I did'nt know what to say because I damn well did not want to offend her especially since the timing was at best very peculiar.
I just said let's talk in the morning, well that morning has not made full circle yet. I know she is waiting but I am hoping she has forgotten and the feelings has dissipated.
I am looking out for her health here so no one start trippin!
-
Well I can say I tried the vaginal birth darling and if it weren't for the c-section...I nor my children wouldn't be to talk about it. Some people live through experience while others live through someone else's numbers (statistics).
And your quote of "I also have a baby everytime I read some of the ridiculous BS on here!" is ridiculous, especially when you haven't had one to compare too. Maybe you should change it to "I also have a shit everytime I read some of the ridiculous BS on here!" That seems a bit more logical.
Well, ...forgive me for my ignorance! Whatever was I thinking? I forgot the world revolves around Laura Lee!
If Laura Lee is incapable of having a baby the natural way, that means that ALL pregnant women in America throughout the world should have C-Sections, and they and their kids would be better off for it. Thanks for setting the record straight. ::)
-
...
The USA has the second worst newborn mortality rate in the developed world.
Take the infant mortality statistics with a grain of salt. Per the Wikipedia article on infant mortality:
"While the United States reports every case of infant mortality, it has been suggested that some other developed countries do not. A 2006 article in U.S. News & World Report claims that "First, it's shaky ground to compare U.S. infant mortality with reports from other countries. The United States counts all births as live if they show any sign of life, regardless of prematurity or size. This includes what many other countries report as stillbirths. In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) to count as a live birth; in other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless. And some countries don't reliably register babies who die within the first 24 hours of birth. Thus, the United States is sure to report higher infant mortality rates. For this very reason, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which collects the European numbers, warns of head-to-head comparisons by country." [2] However, all of the countries named adopted the WHO definition in the late 1980s or early 1990s.[2]
Historically, until the 1990s Russia and other countries of the former Soviet Union did not count as a live birth or as an infant death extremely premature infants (less than 1,000 g, less than 28 weeks gestational age, or less than 35 cm in length) that were born alive (breathed, had a heartbeat, or exhibited voluntary muscle movement) but failed to survive for at least 7 days.[3] Although such extremely premature infants typically accounted for only about 0.005 of all live-born children, their exclusion from both the numerator and the denominator in the reported IMR led to an estimated 22%-25% lower reported IMR.[4] In some cases, too, perhaps because hospitals or regional health departments were held accountable for lowering the IMR in their catchment area, infant deaths that occurred in the 12th month were "transferred" statistically to the 13th month (i.e., the second year of life), and thus no longer classified as an infant death.[5]
Another challenge to comparability is the practice of counting frail or premature infants who die before the normal due date as miscarriages (spontaneous abortions) or those who die during or immediately after childbirth as stillborn. Therefore, the quality of a country's documentation of perinatal mortality can matter greatly to the accuracy of its infant mortality statistics. This point is reinforced by the demographer Ansley Coale, who finds dubiously high ratios of reported stillbirths to infant deaths in Hong Kong and Japan in the first 24 hours after birth, a pattern that is consistent with the high recorded sex ratios at birth in those countries and suggests not only that many female infants who die in the first 24 hours are misreported as stillbirths rather than infant deaths but also that those countries do not follow WHO recommendations for the reporting of live births and infant deaths.[6]
Another seemingly paradoxical finding is that when countries with poor medical services introduce new medical centers and services, instead of declining the reported IMRs often increase for a time. The main cause of this is that improvement in access to medical care is often accompanied by improvement in the registration of births and deaths. Deaths that might have occurred in a remote or rural area and not been reported to the government might now be reported by the new medical personnel or facilities. Thus, even if the new health services reduce the actual IMR, the reported IMR may increase."
I am not saying that the film isn't correct about doctors pushing c-sections, but find it hard to believe that our infant mortality rate could be the 2nd worst in the industrial world. This article makes a good argument that a lot of the infant mortality in the US stems from attempt to save premature babies - http://baby.families.com/blog/why-the-us-infant-mortality-rate-is-so-high (http://baby.families.com/blog/why-the-us-infant-mortality-rate-is-so-high). In the US, premature babies are often delivered and doctors try to rescue them. If they die in the attempt, they are considered an infant mortality. In other countries, including industrialized countries, these premies often end up as stillborns and aren't included in infant mortality statistics.
-
I think OS and the Jagged One need to become birth surrogates just for the experience of carrying life around for 9 mos. You can hand the little one over to the bio parents right after the birth and immediately return to the gym and get back in shape!
My fiancee wants to have a baby now and the urge is very intense for her! I don't know if I am equipped to return to that stage in life ( diapers, mid-night feedings, but she is ready now! I don't know what to do. Having 4 steps is not enough for her!
Help!!!
The Jagged One? Oh mister, ...you know I'm gonna make you pay for that.
ps: ...and it's Ms. Jagged One to You! >:(
-
Well, ...forgive me for my ignorance! Whatever was I thinking? I forgot the world revolves around Laura Lee!
If Laura Lee is incapable of having a baby the natural way, that means that ALL pregnant women in America throughout the world should have C-Sections, and they and their kids would be better off for it. Thanks for setting the record straight. ::)
You are truly ignorant Judi if you got that out of my post. Where did I say All women should have c-sections. I stated that that vaginal is NOT always the best way...as you suggested. It is the most natural way, but not always the best. Be thankful your mother didn't have complications and decide that vaginal was the only way she was going to deliver you because "it's the best way".
Going with your theory...I guess I should go around and tell people what it's like to be black because there are statistics out there they state certain things about black people so it would make me an expert. ::)
-
You are truly ignorant Judi if you got that out of my post. Where did I say All women should have c-sections. I stated that that vaginal is NOT always the best way...as you suggested. It is the most natural way, but not always the best. Be thankful your mother didn't have complications and decide that vaginal was the only way she was going to deliver you because "it's the best way".
Are you done melting down yet? If so, ...go re-read what I've stated.
Going with your theory...I guess I should go around and tell people what it's like to be black because there are statistics out there they state certain things about black people so it would make me an expert. ::)
No, ...going with my theory, you would conclude that provided a woman is not deficient (for want of a better word), at giving birth, a vaginal delivery is the best way. I didn't say the "only way", ...but the best way. In your particular case, due to your inability to do it the natural way, C-Section was the only option you had. My position on the subject is, and has always been made very clear. It has far less to do with stats than it does with physiology, but if you're unable to grasp even that much, ...I'd say that makes YOU the ignorant one.
And people accuse Black people of playing the race card ::)
-
Meanwhile, I think we can all agree we are pleased that C-sections are available in cases like Laura's as well as other life-threatening situations. Bay's information is very interesting though to be sure.
-
Are you done melting down yet? If so, ...go re-read what I've stated.
No, ...going with my theory, you would conclude that provided a woman is not deficient (for want of a better word), at giving birth, a vaginal delivery is the best way. I didn't say the "only way", ...but the best way. In your particular case, due to your inability to do it the natural way, C-Section was the only option you had. My position on the subject is, and has always been made very clear. It has far less to do with stats than it does with physiology, but if you're unable to grasp even that much, ...I'd say that makes YOU the ignorant one.
And people accuse Black people of playing the race card ::)
I'm hardly melting down Judi. But I suppose someone of your stature would consider it as such. ::)
Regarding your statement. I never said that you said "the only way". And I stated that "vaginal isn't always the best way. Vaginal is the natural way, yes, but for some...not the best."
Your comment regarding physiology is pretty weak considering it was you who just made a comment in another thread about how "unatural to want to squeeze something the size of a watermelon out of an opening that can barely handle a ping-pong ball".
Btw... I wasn't playing a race card. ::) Sorry you didn't understand what I was doing. I was talking as if I were something I'm not (black) and have no right to spill out opinions about being as if I were.
...ok see that even confused me. I shouldn't have to explain what I was doing, I believe it was quite clear.
Anyway, all I'm saying is don't be so generalized. Natural births aren't a "one size fits all" deal. It may not be best for all. Idealy if everyone COULD deliver naturally and we had an option to not, then one could say "it is the best", but not all women can deliver babies naturally and it is BEST for them to go with a c-section. For the sake of the unborn baby and the mother.
End of converstation ;D
-
Your comment regarding physiology is pretty weak considering it was you who just made a comment in another thread about how "unatural to want to squeeze something the size of a watermelon out of an opening that can barely handle a ping-pong ball".
I guess you've never heard of a concept called sarcasm.
oh well, ...I'll just chalk it up as yet another area in which you reveal your ignorance. no biggie. :)
-
ladies please...geez
-
I guess you've never heard of a concept called sarcasm.
oh well, ...I'll just chalk it up as yet another area in which you reveal your ignorance. no biggie. :)
Yawn. I'm sure that's what it was. "Judi the sarcastic wit." That's how we all know you ::) Oh wait...no it's not. ;)
I believe the concept you were looking for is called "back peddling or making excuses". No worries. We understand. ;D
-
Ladies,
Couldn't this be solved by mud wrestling?
-
Ladies,
Couldn't this be solved by mud wrestling?
Hmmmm, I'd prefer jello. You know, something sweet we could lick off :D
LH will jump in this in 3 2 1 ...
-
Hmmmm, I'd prefer jello. You know, something sweet we could lick off :D
LH will jump in this in 3 2 1 ...
Im first!
-
My daughters delivery was neither C-section or natural.
Was dumped in my lap at 3 yrs old when I married her dad who had sole custody. This took 2 seconds, no medical bills and was totally painfree!
Less arguing about your birth methods, as I beat everyone in best method :D
-
My daughters delivery was neither C-section or natural.
Was dumped in my lap at 3 yrs old when I married her dad who had sole custody. This took 2 seconds, no medical bills and was totally painfree!
Less arguing about your birth methods, as I beat everyone in best method :D
NOW THAT IS THE BEST WAY!!! lol
-
Hmmmm, I'd prefer jello. You know, something sweet we could lick off :D
LH will jump in this in 3 2 1 ...
With all the ants in Fl you'd risk jello?!
A wrestling match probably wouldn't help matters much anyways. I was just trying to lighten the mood.
Best way might be other people's kids... they go home after a while. :)
-
With all the ants in Fl you'd risk jello?!
A wrestling match probably wouldn't help matters much anyways. I was just trying to lighten the mood.
Best way might be other people's kids... they go home after a while. :)
Actually, the bugs aren't bad down here (in my area anyway) as they spray a lot.
But we could always do it inside anyway. ;D
-
I didn't like Miami that much but thought south beach was pretty cool.
Damn mosquitos nearly ate me alive last month. Cigar smoke wouldn't even keep them away!!
-
My daughters delivery was neither C-section or natural.
Was dumped in my lap at 3 yrs old when I married her dad who had sole custody. This took 2 seconds, no medical bills and was totally painfree!
Less arguing about your birth methods, as I beat everyone in best method :D
Ok, that settles it... CQ wins! ;D
-
I didn't like Miami that much but thought south beach was pretty cool.
Damn mosquitos nearly ate me alive last month. Cigar smoke wouldn't even keep them away!!
They're like little kamikaze pilots around here, ...and if your Aunt Flo is visiting... LOOK OUT!
-
I didn't like Miami that much but thought south beach was pretty cool.
Damn mosquitos nearly ate me alive last month. Cigar smoke wouldn't even keep them away!!
I've been down here 3 years now and have only gotten 2 or 3 bites by a mosquito. I guess it's all about where you're at down here. I'm not in Miami, I'm about an hour and a half north of Miami. My dad lives on the other side of Florida (Punta Gorda) and when I visited him a few months ago I got eaten alive by the "no see-ums" or sand fleas. Those bastards suck! >:(
-
I've been down here 3 years now and have only gotten 2 or 3 bites by a mosquito. I guess it's all about where you're at down here. I'm not in Miami, I'm about an hour and a half north of Miami. My dad lives on the other side of Florida (Punta Gorda) and when I visited him a few months ago I got eaten alive by the "no see-ums" or sand fleas. Those bastards suck! >:(
When I lived in Jacksonville Fla. (10 years) I used to ingest raw Garlic daily that kept the sqitoes, sand fleas and no-see-ums at bay.
Try that if you will but mind you, you will also keep the humans at arms length too.
-
I've been down here 3 years now and have only gotten 2 or 3 bites by a mosquito. I guess it's all about where you're at down here. I'm not in Miami, I'm about an hour and a half north of Miami. My dad lives on the other side of Florida (Punta Gorda) and when I visited him a few months ago I got eaten alive by the "no see-ums" or sand fleas. Those bastards suck! >:(
Sadly, I've got what people in the Carrib. call "sweet blood" and mosqitos love me. I'm hoping Miami beach will be better.
HM,
And I typed this real slow. End things with her now, a child deserves two parents who actually wanted kids. Being nagged convinced to have children doesn't make sense and your lives will end up sucking in the long run.
-
Sadly, I've got what people in the Carrib. call "sweet blood" and mosqitos love me. I'm hoping Miami beach will be better.
HM,
And I typed this real slow. End things with her now, a child deserves two parents who actually wanted kids. Being nagged convinced to have children doesn't make sense and your lives will end up sucking in the long run.
Man, I can't drop her like that I really love her and Doc you know people's needs and desires change over time and this is one I have to work through. I can't just say oh you want babies after 7+ years and we are in of 40s, I don't think so, see ya! C'mon now I don't even Div would react that way.
-
Man, I can't drop her like that I really love her and Doc you know people's needs and desires change over time and this is one I have to work through. I can't just say oh you want babies after 7+ years and we are in of 40s, I don't think so, see ya! C'mon now I don't even Div would react that way.
I'm smarter than Div when it comes to women. Believe me, unless there's a reasonable chance your heart and mind will change about children within the next two years, you're wasting time. It may sound harsh but no harsher than having kids because you had to or felt it was the only thing that would save your marriage.
-
I'm smarter than Div when it comes to women. Believe me, unless there's a reasonable chance your heart and mind will change about children within the next two years, you're wasting time. It may sound harsh but no harsher than having kids because you had to or felt it was the only thing that would save your marriage.
This is a tough one for me this time out. Unless she brings it up again I will keep quiet on this one, hopefully time will take care of this whim not me dumping her.
-
I understand your love for her HM. But also understand that she could in the future have resentment for you if she really wants her own child/ren. You need to discuss this and not just hope it will go away. :(
-
This is a tough one for me this time out. Unless she brings it up again I will keep quiet on this one, hopefully time will take care of this whim not me dumping her.
Please listen to Laura, HM.
Issues like children to not go away over time. I have a very good friend who loves/wants children. He married a woman who would rather slit her own throat than have children hoping things would change or that some magical maternal instinct would kick in. He still doesn't have children and if it wouldn't embarrass his family he's probably get a divorce yesterday and marry a woman that wants children.
-
Please listen to Laura, HM.
Issues like children to not go away over time. I have a very good friend who loves/wants children. He married a woman who would rather slit her own throat than have children hoping things would change or that some magical maternal instinct would kick in. He still doesn't have children and if it wouldn't embarrass his family he's probably get a divorce yesterday and marry a woman that wants children.
its not jaguar is it?? oh thats right shes not married....whoops
(http://www.getuncut.com/images/whyte_chocolate_with_nelly_tip_drill_video_az2z.jpg)
-
Please listen to Laura, HM.
Issues like children to not go away over time. I have a very good friend who loves/wants children. He married a woman who would rather slit her own throat than have children hoping things would change or that some magical maternal instinct would kick in. He still doesn't have children and if it wouldn't embarrass his family he's probably get a divorce yesterday and marry a woman that wants children.
Off to talk to her right now. It'll be mucked up if this comes down to whether we stay together or not especially since she is in her early 40s. Why should this even be an issue now I think she is too old to start having babies? I could see 3-5 years ago but now?
I like where I am now and I think she does too, this has got to be an emotional phase brought on by the baby sitting experience.
Maybe we need more land for her to raise farm animals.
HM out for lunch or to lunch lol!
-
Off to talk to her right now. It'll be mucked up if this comes down to whether we stay together or not especially since she is in her early 40s. Why should this even be an issue now I think she is too old to start having babies? I could see 3-5 years ago but now?
I like where I am now and I think she does too, this has got to be an emotional phase brought on by the baby sitting experience.
Maybe we need more land for her to raise farm animals.
HM out for lunch or to lunch lol!
I personally agree with the age thing. I'm 44 and couldn't even fatham having a child now. I would be 60 years old at their sweet sixteen. Probably 70 by the time they got married or had children (maybe). Not to mention being tied down another 18 or more years from doing whatever you want to do when you want to do it. Both my kids are grown adults now and I can now enjoy myself and not worry (as much).
-
She's too old for kids anyways. Bad things start happening when the eggs get older.
You may end up adopting.
-
She's too old for kids anyways. Bad things start happening when the eggs get older.
You may end up adopting.
OMG guess who joined us for lunch today and guess what she alluded to the entire time?
The Loud Mouth and baby talk LMAO!
-
OMG guess who joined us for lunch today and guess what she alluded to the entire time?
The Loud Mouth and baby talk LMAO!
So what happened??
-
its not jaguar is it?? oh thats right shes not married....whoops
(http://www.getuncut.com/images/whyte_chocolate_with_nelly_tip_drill_video_az2z.jpg)
You say that almost with derision. NewsFlash, I wear my marital status as a symbol of pride.
I'm single & lovin' it. :)
-
OMG guess who joined us for lunch today and guess what she alluded to the entire time?
The Loud Mouth and baby talk LMAO!
Dude, you really need to snip this problem in the bud!
Not talking about the baby issues, ...that's between the two of you
I'm talking about the loud mouth(s). Too many people getting into your business messes up relationships
What is between the two of you should be between the TWO of you, ...not YOU, HER, and all your "friends who want to contribute their two cents worth. All that does is re-inforce previously entrenched positions and causes unecessary friction. It does not allow for the TWO of you to communicate towards a workable solution for your situation.
-
I shut her up quickly and changed the subject. We did'nt talk about babies the rest of lunch. I will talk with her tonight!
-
You say that almost with derision. NewsFlash, I wear my marital status as a symbol of pride.
I'm single & lovin' it. :)
HAHA your just kidding yourself
-
HAHA your just kidding yourself
If you say so. :)
-
Vaginal births are better for both mothers and babies.
As the baby passes through the birth canal, it passes over the Grafenberg spot. This area is not just for pleasure during intimate moments with your partner, it also raises a woman's pain threshold during childbirth. In addition, the baby's passage through the birth canal aligns the spine and chakra points of the baby. Babies delivered vaginally are happier and more well adjusted over the long term and as a rule don't cry as much as those delivered through C-Section.
Source(s) please, never came across it, and I have done courses on developmental psychology and never was this even slightly hinted at.