Two women in my Bradley class had light epidurals (to sleep/rest during long labors) and it seemed to have worked really well for them.

What a helpful post. I wonder how many other techniques like this one (vertically supporting laboring woman w/ an epidural) are out there but no one is promoting? A technique like this one could be a useful tool for women too afraid (even if not injured) to push without pain relief but not wanting to give up the help of gravity.

Of course, the sad part of your story is that if she hadn't been so mistreated the first time, she might not have needed so much help the second! I have heard stories of broken pelvic bones before, but only recently have heard enough details to connect them to bad pushing procedures/laboring horizontally.

Hi! Nice blog. I am a labor and birth nurse in Saskatchewan, Canada and I my hospital all epidurals are "walking epidurals". pretty much every woman with an epidural is able to get out of bed, walk to the toilet to empty their bladder/bowels, walk around the room or even in the hallways if their legs are especially strong. they can also be in more varied positions like hands & knees or squatting. Of course the nurse must always be present and have a helped to help stabilize her if her legs 'give out'. In 2nd stage, the urge to push is almost always strong and women are able to push spontaneously without much guidance. Down side...they will feel the "ring of fire" etc, however I do believe that these
sensations also help the flow of hormones involved with bonding. I don't know why this kind of epidural isn't the norm!

This is a great article! This type of judicious use of a light epidural could spare a number of women unnecessary surgery! The baby can get into a better position and gravity aids the mom! This should be part of the standard of care, rather than numb from the waist down! Congrats to this midwife! :) thanks for posting this, Jill!

A great article, and at the same time heartbreaking personally. You know that scene in Good Will Hunting where Robin Williams is like "it's not your fault, it's not your fault." Yeah, it's like that. I try not to just go having feelings all over the internets, so this is a little unusual for me.

One of my points of friction with even my own birth advocacy is the whole anti-epidural thing. I don't think I have ever seen anyone actually be judgey about a woman having an epi like the movies would have you believe, but, like someone commented on the FB thread, I feel like there can be a tendency to write off a woman's birth experience. Like "ohhhh, I see what happened" - the Navel Gazing Midwife had a really good post on the armchair quarterbacking of birth. But of course women's experiences are varied. Sure, I consented to an epidural--one that I knew, and still believe, that I needed --but did that necessarily mean that I consented to a cesarean? It's really validating to hear again that epidurals have their place.

You want another unicorn, though? The walking epidural. It's like freaking sasquatch. I went into birth pretty damned well prepared (oh buddy, I read ALL the right stuff, took a class, had a midwife), but I never heard that term til recently. I think we could do a lot to help moms with extra-painful or prolonged labors (those poor OP mamas!) avoid surgery by letting them and the OBs and anesthesiologists know that there's a middle ground between "full tilt boogie" and "dead weight."

Great post.

If we ever do have baby #3, and if we do decide to go back to the hospital, I think I would look into the walking epidural. Honestly, I have no desire to feel the pain of labor again -- definitely one downside to the homebirth -- and being able to eliminate or reduce some pain while still being able to move would be the best of both worlds, IMO. One of the reasons why I swore up and down I would not have an epidural if there ever was a next time, is because of the sheer fear of a repeat shoulder dystocia. Just the thought of having another SD, but not being able to move to resolve it, really scares me.

I would probably try med free, but if I felt I really needed some relief... a walking epidural... hmmm...

@Courtroom Mama - that is why I was SO surprised to see Heather say that she actually works at a place that uses walking epidurals! Talk about a sasquatch. Women who use those "check-off" birth plans put them in there and just get laughed at. I have NEVER seen one used or even mentioned. People sometimes ask me about them and I just shrug and say that if they want to ask about it, they'd better be asking far in advance and prepared to, you know, be laughed at. I'd really like to understand why - is it a liability thing with not wanting women to get out of bed? (due to risk of falling?) Is it a technique thing, harder to place or monitor? Is it just that some places teach them and some don't?

In any case - this was a GREAT post! I think epidurals are great tools and I tell my clients exactly that. You want to have them in your toolbox along with everything else, and just know when to use them appropriately. They can make a huge difference - I think they sometimes prevent c-sections by allowing a very tense and slow labor to progress, or a totally exhausted woman to sleep and regroup her energy for pushing.

Ya, I don't know why the "walking epidural" is so rare....when I first started working 8 years ago, we had the regular, heavy epidurals that really made the legs weak and walking really wasn't a safe option and position changes were difficult. I really hated that, it's hard to even get the woman on her side to push when her legs are so dead...not to mention the lack of rectal pressure...at least she was able to happily wait and inadvertently "breathe the baby down" or "labor down" simply because most of us nurses were in no way interested in pushing with a patient for hours on end when there was absolutely no sensation. Even then we (nurses and most docs) had the sense to wait for the baby to come down on it's own, at least til mom could feel "something". Anyway, We've used this epidural "cocktail" for probably 5 years now, or more. It's great!

I've worked in a few other hospitals in the last few years and I have to say, my little city hospital is pretty sweet when it comes to low-intervention. Most of the nurses actually enjoy providing labor support and we pretty much encourage every woman to labor in the tub for as long as she can before she gets an epidural. We also don't use the electronic fetal monitor unless there's an indication like high blood pressure or decreased fetal movement. I once worked in a hospital where every woman had to have a 20 minute monitor tracing done...even if it was normal after 10 minutes, we had to leave it on for 20. It was so engrained in the nurses minds that when a lady arrived fully dilated and delivering precipitously, they were still trying to hook up the monitor when the head was crowning! Ridiculous!!

We're not perfect in my hospital, there's a lot that we can improve on. But Comparatively, I think that we're doing a pretty darn good job of letting birth happen.

Sigh.. I am one of those "natural birth zealots" but I have to say epidurals DO have their place.. just not in NORMAL birth.

NORMAL birth does not cause a woman to be so exhausted she can't stand or so tired she cries non-stop for an hour. NORMAL birth does not cause -severe- pain (like 12 on a scale of 10) or require a woman to push very, very, very, slowly so she does not re-break her fragile pubis.

In NORMAL birth, epidurals are not necessary.

Abnormal birth, on the other hand can end up requiring an epidural. And, if an epidural is needed -- then a walking epidural is usually the BEST option, for sure!

I personally ended up with an epidural. I was in labor for 72 hours (24 of which were very painful) before I got one so I could take a nap. I was so exhausted I could not function anymore and in so much pain I couldn't stop crying. It was not NORMAL and my son was mispositioned in a couple of manners causing this. He was posterior, and he had his hand on his face and this made my labor very long and very painful. I tried every trick to get him to turn from posterior.. but we were not aware his hand was on his head holding him there. Short of turning him manually (which would've required an epidural) they couldn't do anything. So, I got the darn epidural and wanted him rotated, knowing it might increase my risk of c-section.

It was a tough decision on my part because I am very anti-intervention and SWORE up and down I never would get an epidural.

It wasn't supposed to be a walking epidural, (they kept saying I should not be able to move my legs) but I'm a redhead and I could always move my legs with my epidural .. but I could also finally take a nap after he was re-positioned. About 4 hours later I was progressing and pushing.

In abnormal situations they should try to give women lower doses of epidural so they can be like me and move and feel. I think it helps labor continue to progress.

I do not think, in abnormal situations, that if a woman has an epidural and the epidural leads to failure to progress. it is the woman's fault at all.

In normal situations however I think someone should be suffering considerably before they get pain relief since that is what is best for the baby and mother's health. BUT, whatever. ;)

I had an epidural for my first birth due to preeclampsia; the OB thought the blood pressure drop that often follows getting one would help me keep from progressing to full eclampsia. After 5 days of every-three-minute contractions followed by an induction, the relief was unbelievable. Unfortunately it conked out right at transition, but I'm still glad I got it. Those 12 hours or so of relief probably saved me from a C-section. It frustrates me when I hear a few natural birth advocates rail against epidurals, because I know that mine was the factor that saved me from surgery!

I had a walking epidural about 15-16 hours into my first labor. Water brok spontaneously before active labor and I ended up with pitocin augmentation and back labor with no breaks in between contractions. While I had planned to go unmedicated, I got to a very desperate and panicking point when I found I was only 2 cm dilated after all of my walking an birthing-ball sitting. I had thought that the "point at which you can't go on" was at transition labor. Anyway, the anesthesiologist felt that a strong epidural would not be a good idea for such a slow labor with little progress, so he only gave me a small epidural dose of fentanyl. It allowed me to be fully comfortable for about 1-1.5 hours, at about which time I hit transition labor and dilated from 6-10 cm in only a few minutes. While there was no pain relief at all for transition and pushing, I feel like that short time I had the epidural released me to dilate and might have actually saved me from a failure to progress C-section (or from losing my mind!).

I'm expecting another baby this year and hired a doula. I'm certainly planning to go unmedicated so I can be fully mobile and also to labor at home much longer. However, I don't think the walking epidural I had the first time around was the wrong decision given those circumstances.

We inquired about walking epidurals at the pitiful excuse for a childbirth education class that the hospital had, and was told that the hospital flat out didn't do them. I can't figure why they'd have a policy like that unless they just wanted women to deliver by c-section.

I'm a chronic pain sufferer who is off all pain meds in late pregnancy for the safety of the baby, despite very high daily pain levels. I have both sacroilliac joints out of place and my pubic synthesis joint out of place as well (not actually separated thankfully). I also am both a 'fast metaboliser' of anagesics but have a genetic resistance to them as well. Which means that nearly all pain medicines work very poorly on me. I feel very jealous of people who can use pain medicine and have it actually work. That being said, I would not consider an epidural, judging from my first labor, the endorphine rush from being in labor is far better pain relief than standard opiods! I have to wonder if this is purely a result of my resistance/chronic pain issues or if many people might find the endorphine rush of labor more helpful, ultimately, than an epidural if they were given 1) better support and 2) time for their bodies to work through the pain and release the appropriate levels of endorphines. I'm not against anyone choice to use an epidural during labor, but with all the horrible epidural stories I've heard, I wonder how many people are capable of that endorphine 'high' that is the bodies natural pain relief, and how many would find it preferable to medicinal measures? Anyway, I can't wait for labor to begin so I can get some pain relief!

I also remember the endorphin rush at the very end (for me, it was during pushing and right after). I wish it came on a lot earlier. Of course, during a spontaneous labor sans pitocin, my body might react a lot differently.

I'm actually surprised to hear of someone using real walking epidurals where they work. All of the feedback I've gotten is that they're not really "walking" at all, more like a very very difficult shuffle and the woman definitely can't support her own weight, let alone walk the halls. I wish that true walking epidurals were more of an option, but I have never personally met someone whose epidural worked like that.

"In normal situations however I think someone should be suffering considerably before they get pain relief since that is what is best for the baby and mother's health. BUT, whatever. ;)"

It's comments like these that are incredibly offensive to me. Why should YOU get to decide when other people should get pain relief? I'm sure you'd cry foul if someone tried to tell you what you could do during pregnancy -- whether it be diet, exercise, c-section. This kind of sanctimomminess only creates hard feelings and resentment where there should be kindness and support. Whatever a woman's reasons for needing relief, that's between her, herself, and she alone, not a judgement call based on whether you think she's suffering enough. As a sexual assault survivor, the relief I felt for the hours that my epidural worked was absolutely necessary for me to keep things together and progess through a vaginal birth rather than shutting down from fear and stalling my labor. I would never presume to dictate another woman's conscience on this matter.

I have a whole FAQ on my website about pubic symphysis separation. Interestingly, it is the article on my website that gets the most hits. I think it's a far more common problem than most OBs realize. I've experienced it myself so I know how debilitating it can be.

There's no one cure-all for it, but many women benefit from a direct chiropractic adjustment to the PS area. I have to be honest; the initial adjustment hurts like *#$%! but the relief afterwards is amazing. That area SO needs to be in alignment. This can go a long way towards helping that process.

As for epidurals, I like Pam England's reference to the "compassionate" use of epidurals. Sometimes they can be a godsend and are a great tool in the toolbox, but used routinely, without full understanding of the implications, they also can cause more problems than they are worth. It's important to consider both sides of the coin and not be dogmatic about it.

Often undiscussed in talking about the benefits/risks of epidurals is the problem of incomplete relief and epidural "windows." This can be incredibly traumatic during a cesarean, and it happens more than docs like to admit. I wish this was more talked about in the birth world too.

On the whole, this was an excellent article about epidurals and ways to minimize problems if an epidural truly becomes needed or wanted. Nice work!

Sorry for the repeat comment. The site had a brain freeze for a moment.

Alice,

Heya. I'm a sexual abuse survivor. Actually, incest. For 10 years. I understand being violated, and I understand how that can make you feel when you're in labor. It still doesn't magically change the fact that epidurals carry with them SIGNIFICANT risks to women and babies. Women should truly -need- an epidural before getting one. IF you were suffering from extreme psychological distress? I would define that as significant suffering in need of an epidural.

I'm not railing against them because I acknowledge they are risky or I proclaim that women should not go into labor expecting/wanting to have an epidural. Women who go into labor WANTING an epidural are selfish.

Women who are suffering in labor to whatever degree they deem to be unnecessary, perhaps need an epidural or perhaps need better support.

You are obviously the one who is sanctimonious. Don't play the "abuse" card and expect me to have sympathy. I have empathy, but not sympathy. How dare you pull that card.

This is like me asking for morphine because I stubbed my toe.

What medical professional in their right mind would say "SURE!! You say it hurts that bad you get the morphine.. never mind the risks! You know best, you person who has not read the insert to the drug nor the literature on it, you!"

Come on.

Women need to be getting informed consent. Not partially-informed consent. Alice, go read the physicians insert for an epidural.

It's fine, Jill (that you deleted my third comment).

I think sometimes I am not being clear enough.

Not all women who go into it wanting one are selfish -- just the ones who are aware of the risks. It's why I added a comment about health professionals. It is usually overkill and women would be better served if they knew the truth. Ie: truly informed consent. Most health professionals WANT women to get epidurals (without informed consent) because it makes their jobs so much easier and it disempowers women. It also is a lot easier to cut you if you've already got one (women are a lot less likely to consent to a c/s without a large run-down of serious reasons if they don't have an epi or if they would have to be knocked out.). Epidurals generally disconnect women from their bodily process, this can be good if severe human suffering and exhaustion (however often hastened by "no food" policies) is likely to ensue without it. Or it can serve to make women feel helpless and deferential.

Even walking epidurals cause women to enter the overly dependent, overly suggestible psychological state of sick role - and birth is not generally a sickness until we make it one.

If I told you it would very likely lead to complications that hurt my unborn child or strongly increased my risk of interventions that not only decrease my chances of breast feeding but increased my chances of dying (often due to complications from unnecesareeans that occur after a snowball effect) - the question becomes - was it really necessary and if it was not what didn't your health care provider disclose to you? And even if it was "necessary", was it over-kill, was it informed consent, was there an alternative that was not broached due to it being too inconvenient or requiring too much effort?

In no other field are patients given so many decisions to make in short succession and without informed consent. In no other field are patients purposely infantilised and told risky procedures that disempower them somehow empower and it's viewed by most women as a personal decision like going back to work or plastic surgery (in both those cases women can usually still breast feed btw).. In no other field are patients told "this is an emergency!!" only for it to take 45 minutes to solve the "emergency".

You spend your entire pregnancy being careful and planning to do what is healthiest. I don't understand making light of this very serious and heavy decision. If people don't view it that way, they are missing a piece of the puzzle. It's just like with VBAC - if women view it as sssooo much more risky - someone has not given them the real run-down. Or unnecessary induction -- if women view induction as safe, someone has seriously been lying to them!

It's misogyny, too. Epidurals are usually a control tactic.. so they're not really meant to allay suffering...

Just my take.

SO -- if you're a sexual abuse survivor like me... The LAST thing I would think you would want to do is disempower yourself, infantilise yourself, reduce yourself to a "less-than" state where you can easily be taken of advantage of or raped in the name of "help" or "medicine". At least, that's how I felt about it. It made me paranoid and anxious at the thought of not being able to fight them off.. and in many ways I was correct and it was a violating process.

Agreeing to it was the absolute last thing -I- wanted to do. But I did. And my biggest regret is being at a hospital at all.

I don't think most would trade hours of relief for years or even a life-time of regret, or anger, or pain if they had any idea what they were possibly agreeing to.

Come on, "very likely to lead to complications that hurt [my] unborn child" is a little overkill. It's an increased risk of interventions and complications, but certainly not more than 50% risk of one as "very likely" implies. And, FYI, I have two years of PhD work in a hard science under my belt, so I am fully informed of the risks and potential benefits of epidural anasthesia (and that there is no such thing as a "physicians' insert" for a procedure...duh). We all take calculated risks every day -- whether it is driving on the highway, choosing pain relief, deciding to eat some trans fats, whatever. Just as I personally would not have an abortion short of needing one to save my life, but I staunchly defend the right of any woman to choose that as the best decision for her in her unique circumstances. By presuming to judge others without walking a mile in their shoes, you are infantalizing them far more than any doctor. Just as you had reasons for your choices, so do other people. And, yes, I "dare" play the "abuse card" because it is a significant factor and affects everyone differently -- I'm sure your experiences were different from mine.

Number One negative effect of having an epidural: Inability to leave on your own two feet if you don't appreciate the "service".

Alice, Come on. You and I both know you pulled that card to get the sympathy vote. "Oh, well if THAT'S the reason" which is the typical response from someone who doesn't understand.

I disagree. I am not infantalising women by assuming most are dually uninformed. It's infantalising that they cannot be informed of the risks fully, treated like children told "it's safe, don't worry".

And there IS information about every drug in with the drug. This isn't a procedure like an episiotomy that's risks and side effects are only listed in a textbook about performing the procedure - the risks of the medication are in with the medication. They get it out in a vial, and where was the vial? Generally it was in a pack of vials and there most certainly is a leaflet in it about risks/side effects from the manufacturer about the drug (physician's insert!). It doesn't necessarily list ALL risks, but the drug risks alone of most anesthesia used is --scary-- stuff. Then you get into the risks from performing the procedure itself and the risks of using it on a laboring woman/fetus - which are not always minimal. The percentages look like 1 - 75% depending on what it is. But some of the risks are very serious, very common, and are NOT told to women (fevers, back aches, mistaken infection, breast feeding trouble, fetal bradycardia, maternal low blood pressure, inadequate/erratic contractions leading to pitocin use, significantly slowed labor).

You might have a PH.d, but Henci Goer doesn't and I bet you she knows far, far, far, more about epidurals and the research than you or I do. Maybe not, but I will just go out on a twig and say she does ;) I don't have a PH.d but I have common sense and am perfectly capable of reading research information and poking huge holes in pro-epidural studies. Most pro-epidural studies are retrospective with poorly controlled for variables. Some compare narcotics to epidurals (lol) and some that are positive also eliminated other problems along WITH changing epidural protocols - so they messed up their data by reducing c-sections and complications by other means first (like using midwives, allowing women to eat, not inducing for spurious reasons, and not using EFM. DUH. Even with epidurals women in those situations have less c/s than usual. Adding in the epidural caused the statistics not to change. I bet if they'd entirely eliminated easily accessible epidurals and narcotics the c/s rate would've dropped!) Other pro-epidural studies find that women who are induced are c/s'd less if they are given epidurals. Well, in the very rare event women should need an induction, pain relief is often necessary because pitocin is so hard to cope with without it (and I doubt this hospital encouraged alt. pain relief). Another issue is that - that hospital c/s'd about 60% of the patients who were induced anyway. Hardly reassuring.

I get it, you were freaking out and an epi made you feel better. That's usually the case until it causes some sort of issue or intervention, and one could argue you have no idea how natural hormones would affect you, or how a doula would affect you, or how warm water would affect you, or how meditation would affect you, or how a strong midwife would affect you. You might like those better, if you gave them a chance.

I just cannot agree with you guys. lol. I don't think you're understanding me, tho. The research dictates that epidurals alter birth outcomes in a negative way. Even killing women and babies and cause untold numbers of unnecessary surgeries (that carry a lot of risk). I think getting away from routine epidural use is a really good idea. I don't think they should stop offering them entirely, but I think they sure as heck should stop encouraging them and be clear about the risks before giving it to the women. I mean.

Smoking while pregnant is a pretty good analogy here.

You don't advocate that, do you? You are clear about the risks of that, aren't you? To try to get women to stop/think about it/not do it! But some women do it anyway. And that is TOTALLY within their rights as autonomous human beings. BUT - when push comes to shove it's not a good idea. So telling women it's really not a good idea, and it's selfish to do it if you know the risks, is totally fine with you guys. Isn't it? I mean not all babies are hurt much by it. My mom smoked, I'm fine. And, we don't know why she's smoking. Maybe this pregnancy was a result of rape and she has panic attacks if she doesn't do it. But it still isn't the healthiest or best option and all avenues should be addressed and all risks should be clearly spelled out.

If risks are clearly spelled out and women still make the -choice- to do it (not the BEST analogy because epidurals can become necessary and smoking pretty much never is) it's within my rights as a free-thinking individual to view the women who still choose it from the beginning as selfish.

And, it's within your rights to think I'm judgmental and annoying. BUT it's not about me judging it's really all about informed consent. I'm highly irritated women are not being given informed consent and are being actively encouraged to use epidurals.

Even these low-dose epidurals carry risks - and even in situations where they may be of benefit other options should be explored first if possible!! Like meditation/water/etc.

Fogedaboudid, the hypocrisy you're spewing is appalling. You yourself had an epidural, which you defend as the best option under the circumstances, but anyone else's is selfish or born of ignorance. Despite your claim that you know why I mentioned the rape history, you are quite wrong; I brought it up because many women are not aware that previous sexual trauma can cause difficulties during labor -- perhaps another survivor can learn something and be better prepared. I refuse to be ashamed of the rape or hide it because someone might be uncomfortable or think I'm looking for sympathy.

As for your "helpful suggestions", I received the epidural after many other attempts at intervention which were not successful to serve the dual purpose of lowering my blood pressure and helping reduce the PTSD flashbacks. "Freaking out" is a dismissive and infantalizing word choice. There's obviously no point in trying to discuss the issues with you.

@Jill, I'd love to see women not judged for their choices, either, but it seems like women often end up juding others as a way to feel better. (As background, I never finished my PhD, but instead ran off and enlisted in the Army after I was assaulted.) During my Army years, I was often flabbergasted at how differently the women's and men's barracks cultures developed. Although the men had their share of disagreements, they usually ended up solving them with a wrestling match or a shouted arguement, but there weren't a lot of hard feelings afterwards or grudges. With the women, though, resentments seemed to simmer and boil over into telling tales, sniping, and personal vendettas. Of course, that's a broad generalization and doesn't apply to every woman, but it does seem that somehow we are socialized that there's only enough "goodness" for one woman at a time -- in order to feel good about our own choices, we have to denigrate someone else's. It's a very hard conditioning to break, but I really feel that we owe it to ourselves and our fellow women to be more compassionate with each other.

I'm not a hypocrite. I've said repeatedly that there are calls for it. But I didn't go into it saying I wanted it, I went into it saying I'd rather walk through fire. Thing is, a fire was lit and I walked through it. I don't think you quite get it that my son was pretty darn well stuck and it was policy that if they turned him they had to give me an epidural first. It was c/s or epidural.

Thing is the minute you have an epidural, you DO turn your body over to the hospital. It really shouldn't be that way. But if you can't take off and run like H - E - double hockey sticks and squat in a church? You've seriously reduced your chances of getting out of something you do not want. It should not BE THAT WAY, because hospitals should not be getting away with kidnapping and rape, but it is the way it is.

Why would someone be terrified of labor?! Previous bad experiences can make you a bit apprehensive, but, most women I talk to are terrified of labor and they've never had it / had the usual hospital ride. See. This is the sort of backwards stuff that this country has spewed that makes me want to scream. Birth is Normal. We're not the only mammal that gives birth (lol) and none of the other mammals freak out like we do about it unless something (rarely) goes wrong with the process (like, a baby's head getting stuck in a bad position or twins entangling etc. etc.). Humans are so quick to blame our frontward hips but really I think it's awareness and mainly learned fear. If you expect something to hurt, it's going to hurt. If you expect something to feel like pressure, like waves overwhelming you, imagine your cervix opening, imagine your baby coming out and into your arms, imagine yourself walking through a garden pregnant and full of life and squatting and delivering your baby painlessly..

Birth is normal, but our views on birth are abnormal.

Most people in the world get no medical pain relief in labor and they deal just fine ;) They're not generally afraid. Because there isn't a reason to be afraid. Maybe be aware, but fear? If you're afraid? Many women might as well just march themselves into the OR. The fear and the misconception that medicine is supposed to save you/baby is what has caused all of this to transpire. Fear. A basic human emotion. Fear of death, fear of pain, fear of being sued, fear that it was YOUR fault and not the doctor's, fear that the doctor COULD have done something (which usually, not really), fear that it was something YOU didn't consent to or you DID consent to or you DIDN'T say or omitted or lied about or ... Fear. And it's not even logical fear.

All of these interventions that are supposed to help, most of the research points to the fact that they don't do anything to improve birth outcomes or that they actually -harm-. So torture one and don't actually do anything to help. Or they save one, and kill two.

It's really simple. They try to manage the unmanageable, predict the unpredictable, save the unsaveable. It is really simple. With life, there is death. With birth, there is death. Trying to stop it is like trying to stop a runaway train.

Yes, medicine has helped --some-- .. But for the most part it's nutrition and sanitation that has improved maternal outcomes. You'd do yourself the biggest favor on earth to eat an awesome diet full of protein and give birth at home with a midwife that doesn't do vaginal exams and keeps you hydrated and fed while you labor. You reduce your risk of complication about 10fold just by doing those few simple things.. Intervention does not save enough, it just usually makes women afraid, hurt more, and it makes everyone feel like they tried to do something to fix a situation that had no fixing.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Trying to will just cause issues (like horrible c-section rates and bad mortality rates).

Fear is the anti-labor. Fear causes BAD amounts of adrenaline to go into your body. Adrenaline ==== anti-oxytocin, anti-pain-relief FAKE oxytocin ===== not going to help many have normal labor, despite the fact that it can work it doesn't always and it's going to HURT.

Countries that have awesome mortality rates do not rely on surgeons to do prenatal/birthing care. They rely on midwives. And not the sort of midwives most of you see at an OB's office that are so indoctrinated in the medical hoopla that they over-test, over-medication, over-intervene, over-induce, and over-"pull the plug on VBAC" .. lol They are what we call mEdwives.

Anyway, the epidural is just part of the whole "ride" I speak of. It's just a piece of the puzzle. And I'm sorry if I've irritated you, Alice.

Sigh. I guess I'm too radical for you guys ;)