Mothers Instincts

There once was a town called Allopath. It had many people, streets and cars, but due to budget limitations, there were no stop signs or traffic lights anywhere in Allopath. Not surprisingly, traffic accidents were common. Cars would crash into each other at nearly every intersection. But business was booming for the auto repair shops and local hospitals, which dominated the economy of Allopath.

As the population of Allopath grew, traffic accidents increased to an alarming level. Out of desperation, the city council hired Doctor West, a doctor of the Motor Division (M.D.) to find a solution. Dr. West spent days examining traffic accidents. He carried an assortment of technical gear – microscopes, chemical analysis equipment, lab gear – and put them all to work as part of his investigation. The townspeople of Allopath watched on with great curiosity while Dr. West went about his work, meticulously documenting and analyzing each traffic accident, and they awaited his final report with great interest.

After weeks of investigation, Dr. West called the people of Allopath to a town meeting for the release of his report. There, in front of the city council and most of the residents of Allopath, he announced his findings:
“Traffic accidents are caused by skid marks.”

As Dr. West explained, he found and documented a near-100% correlation between traffic accidents and skid marks.
“Wherever we find these cars colliding,” he explained, “we also find these skid marks.” The town had “Skid Marks Disease,” the doctor explained, and the answer to the town’s epidemic of traffic accidents would, “…require nothing more than treating Skid Marks Disease by making the streets skid-proof,” Dr. West exclaimed, to great applause from the townspeople.

The city paid Dr. West his consulting fee, then asked the good doctor to propose a method for treating this Skid Marks Disease. As chance would have it, Dr. West had recently been on a trip to Hawaii paid for by a chemical company that manufactured roadaceuticals: special chemicals used to treat roads for situations just like this one. He recommended a particular chemical coating to the city council: teflon. “We can treat this Skid Marks Disease by coating the roads with teflon,” Dr.West explained. “The streets will then be skid-proof, and all the traffic accidents will cease!” He went on to describe the physical properties of teflon and how its near-frictionless coating would deter nearly all vehicle skids.

The city council heartily agreed with Dr. West, and they issued new public bonds to raise the money required to buy enough teflon to coat all the citys streets. Within weeks, the streets were completely coated, and the skid marks all but disappeared. The city council paid Dr. West another consulting fee and thanked him for his expertise. The problem of traffic accidents in Allopath was solved, they thought. Although the cure was expensive, they were convinced it was worth it.

But things weren’t well in Allopath. Traffic accidents quadrupled. Hospital beds were overflowing with injured residents. Auto repair businesses were booming so much that most of the city council members decided to either open
their own car repair shops or invest in existing ones. Week after week, more and more residents of Allopath were injured, and their cars were repeatedly damaged. Money piled into the pockets of the car repair shops, hospitals, tow truck companies and car parts retailers. The town economic advisor, observing this sharp increase in economic activity, announced that Allopath was booming. Its economy was healthier than ever, and Allopath could look forward to a great year of economic prosperity! There were jobs to be had at the car repair shops. There were more nurses needed at the hospital. “Help wanted” signs appeared all over town at the paramedic station, the tow truck shops, and the auto glass businesses. Unemployment dropped to near zero. But the traffic accidents continued to increase. And yet there were no skid marks.

The city council was baffled. They thought they had solved this problem. Skid Marks Disease had been eradicated by the teflon treatment. Why were traffic accidents still happening? They called a town meeting to discuss the problem, and following a short discussion of the problem, an old hermit, who lived in the forest just outside of Allopath, addressed the townspeople. “There is no such thing as Skid Marks Disease,” he explained. “This disease was invented by the roadaceuticals company to sell you teflon coatings.” The townspeople were horrified to hear such a statement. They knew Skid Marks Disease existed. The doctor had told them so. How could this hermit, who had no Motor Division (M.D.) degree, dare tell them otherwise? How could he question their collective town wisdom in such a way? “This is a simple problem,” the hermit continued. “All we need to do is build stop signs and traffic lights. Then the traffic accidents will cease.”

Without pause, one city council member remarked, “But how can we afford stop signs? We’ve spent all our money on teflon treatments!” The townspeople agreed. They had no money to buy stop signs. Another council member added, “And how can we stop anyway? The streets are all coated with teflon. If we build stop signs, we’ll waste all the money we’ve spent on teflon!” The townspeople agreed, again. What use were stop signs if they couldn’t stop their cars anyway? The hermit replied, “But the stop signs will eliminate the need for teflon. People will be able to stop their cars, and accidents will cease. The solution is simple.” But what might happen if stop signs actually worked, the townspeople wondered. How would it affect the booming economy of Allopath?

Realizing the consequences, a burly old man who owned a local repair shop jumped to his feet and said, “If we build these stop signs, and traffic accidents go down, I’ll have to fire most of my workers!” It was at that moment that most of the townspeople realized their own jobs were at stake. If stop signs were built, nearly everyone would be unemployed.They all had jobs in emergency response services, car repair shops, hospitals and teflon coating maintenance. Some were now sales representatives of the roadaceuticals company. Others were importers of glass, tires, steel and other parts for cars. A few clever people were making a fortune selling wheelchairs and crutches to accident victims.  One enterprising young gentleman started a scientific journal that published research papers describing all the different kind of Skid Marks Diseases that had been observed and documented. Another person, a fitness enthusiast, organized an annual run to raise funds to find the cure for Skid Marks Disease. It was a popular event, and all the townspeople participated as best they could: jogging, walking, or just pushing themselves along in their wheelchairs.

One way or another, nearly everyone in Allopath was economically tied to Skid Marks Disease. Out of fear of losing this economic prosperity, the townspeople voted to create a new public safety agency: the Frequent Drivers Association (FDA). This FDA would be responsible for approving or rejecting all signage, technology and chemical coatings related to the town’s roads. The FDA’s board members were chosen from among the business leaders of the community: the owner of the car shop, the owner of the ambulance company, and of course, Dr. West.

Soon after its inception, the FDA announced that Skid Marks Disease was, indeed, very real, as it had been carefully documented by a doctor and recently published in the town Skid Marks Disease journal. Since there were no studies whatsoever showing stop signs to be effective for reducing traffic accidents, the FDA announced that stop signs were to be outlawed, and that any person attempting to sell stop signs would be charged with fraud and locked up in the town jail. This pleased the townspeople of Allopath. With the FDA, they knew their jobs were safe. They could go on living their lives of economic prosperity, with secure jobs, knowing that the FDA would outlaw any attempt to take away their livelihood. They still had a lot of traffic accidents, but at least their jobs were secure. And so life continued in Allopath. For a short while, at least.

As traffic accidents continued at a devastating rate, more and more residents of Allopath were injured or killed. Many were left bed-ridden, unable to work, due to their injuries. In time, the population dwindled. The once-booming town of Allopath eventually became little more than a ghost town. The hospital closed its doors, the FDA was disbanded, and the Skid Marks Disease journal stopped printing. The few residents remaining eventually realized nothing good had come of Skid Marks Disease, the teflon coatings and the FDA. No one was any better off, as all the town’s money had been spent on the disease: the teflon coatings, car parts and emergency services. No one was any healthier, or happier, or longer-lived. Most, in fact, had lost their entire families to Skid Marks Disease.

And the hermit? He continued to live just outside of town, at the end of a winding country road, where he lived a simple life with no cars, no roads, no teflon coatings and no FDA. He outlived every single resident of Allopath. He gardened, took long walks through the forest, and gathered roots, leaves and berries to feed himself. In his spare time, he constructed stop signs, waiting for the next population to come along, and hoping they might listen to an old hermit with a crazy idea: …that prevention is the answer, not the treatment of symptoms.

This fable was authored by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger www.NaturalNews.com

Just mention the subject of vaccines and it can sometimes feel like a battleground! If you say you do not vaccinate then you are open to attack on your decision and given certain amounts of pressure to ‘conform’ from both other parents and medical establishment. Often this is along the lines of ‘how can you put your child at such risk?’, or ‘you owe it to other children that are immunocompromised’

This was something I also once thought, I ‘blindly’ vaccinated my eldest 3 children despite every cell in my body saying ‘this is wrong’  before I was so shocked at the thought of having to give my 8 week old baby 8 vaccine diseases on one day that I started to educate myself on vaccines and disease.

The more information I find, the more I know I have made the right choice for my youngest by not vaccinating him, and that I am extremely grateful that my older children didn’t have a bigger reaction than they did to their vaccines.

If the whole vaccination idea does not sit right with you then if nothing else, please delay them until you have read up on a few of the facts and then if at that point you still want to vaccinate at the recommended schedule, your own schedule, vaccinate with only a few vaccines or not at all – at least you have done it in an educated manner, and hopefully will be happy with your decision. No one should ‘bully’ you into anything different.

Luckily when my youngest son was still only a few months old (and I was still unsure of my decision) I found out that a group that promotes natural health had just re-started in my area. Arnica.org.uk has been a huge blessing as I have learnt so much from the other members, many who also have spent hours researching the decision to vaccinate and also many other ways on how to keep your child as healthy as possible. There are now over 40 support groups around the UK, as well as an online yahoo group.

I also attended at one of these Arnica meetings an amazing talk by Trevor Gunn – Graduate in Medical Biochemistry and a practising and registered homeopath – One of his lectures is available on this link where he presents the current and historical evidence surrounding the controversial issue of vaccination. He will reveal how vaccines affect the physical body as well as their impact on our mental and emotional faculties. He will also explore the wider context of disease and immunity, sharing scientific evidence that points to a more holistic view of disease. Trevor says: “This talk is designed to provide insight into the alternatives to looking at health and disease outside of fear and risk analysis, and a way out of the dilemmas faced by many in their vaccine decisions.”

If you can it is well worth getting to one of Trevor’s lectures -an up to date list is available at the Informed Parent .

Another who also presents lectures is homeopath and medical doctor, Dr Jayne Donegan. She once fully agreed with the vaccination programme, until inconsistencies in the information sent out by the Department of Health lead her to start her own independent research into the subject. She was then asked by a mother to act as an expert witness in her case against the child’s absent father who wanted to force her to get his daughter vaccinated.

In the absence of any clear, open, objective and well designed studies on vaccination safety, the observations and recommendations she produced in her reports had been made using information gained by carefully sifting through what studies are published in refereed medical journals and other sources; in particular looking at the methods and the results of studies, rather than the conclusions which often do not reflect their findings.

However the General Medical Council accused her of serious professional misconduct which meant she could be struck off the medical register. But after taking them 2 years to produce any substantive charge and being taken to court. The findings were that she was not guilty of professional misconduct and that the panel accepted that her approach in her report ‘was to provide the court with a alternative view based on the material produced in her references.  That material was largely drawn from publications that were in fact in favour of immunisation and what was available in refereed medical journals.’

She took her Medical Indemnity Organisation’s very strongly worded advice not to talk to the media. As a result there was very little coverage or publicity given to the fact that Jayne was completely exonerated and some of that which was reported was incorrect. Take a look at the full story here.

There is also lots of good information at Vaccine Awareness Network including a debate with the NHS re Vaccination where they are asking the NHS if the fact measles complications are increasing in older children, adults and babies is this possibly due to the fact that the older children and adults were vaccinated but their immunity has worn off, therefore no longer protecting them at a time when the disease causes more serious side effects? Babies are also more susceptible to measles now, but again is this as the mothers have not had the disease, so therefore cannot pass on their own immunity through breastmilk?

They also ask why parents are not given the package inserts before they vaccinate?- as is supposed to happen! (I had never received these before I vaccinated my children)

Also see: ‘Are vaccines responsible for the epidemic of anaphylaxis in young children today?‘ by Rita Hoffman

K.N.O.W. Vaccines

The One Click Group

Tracking Vaccinations

Vaccination Information and Choice Network

Vaccines Exposed

Vaccination.co.uk

Vaccine Injury Coalition – Educate Before You Vaccinate!

Jabs

Child Health Safety

Australian Vaccine Network

Evidence Of Harm

Vaccination Liberation

Consumercide

If there’s a reason you can’t bring yourself to give your child the vaccine.

Your instincts are telling you not to. Trust them.

I had a conversation with my mum when I was pregnant with my 4th child, I had just seen a newspaper article about the 5in1 jab and said “that is just too much I will not be giving this baby that”, and her reply was “well we don’t like to, but its for the best isn’t it?”

A few months later we had another brief, but interesting, discussion about vaccines. My now 7 week old son had just spent a week in hospital with what the Dr’s called bronchiolitis (possibly ‘viral whooping cough’ as they said it couldn’t be ‘real’ whooping cough- a whole different story!) He was still coughing frequently, couldn’t lay down flat as he would start coughing again and had to sleep upright on me at night, and mum asked if he could still get his jabs on time. I replied “no I’m not giving them at the moment as it says on the vaccine manufacturers leaflet (that I had searched for on the internet) that the vaccine should not be given whilst ill and I’m still researching as to whether I will give him any, some or all jabs and looking at both sides of vaccination -there is no rush to do it now, especially as I am still breastfeeding him”. Her response was “well if you don’t give him them, don’t tell me as I don’t want to know and have to worry about it” …end of conversation!

We had never mentioned it again, despite my son getting to age 2 and never having an ear infection, high temperature, being sick, or having the constant colds, coughs and runny noses that my eldest (vaccinated) 3 kids had as babies.  That is until mum bought a puppy and said she was getting its jabs done soon (it had just been ill, had a upset stomach and on antibiotics so I thought that even if she did decide to vaccinate then it could wait until the puppy was 100% well again) so I looked up briefly the info on dog vaccines and printed a few pages from canine health concern and gave her. I again mentioned this on the phone and was reminded that she had once had a dog die of leptospirosis (my auntie used to live on a farm where the dog was supposed to have contracted the disease from the rats) and she would never consider not vaccinating as she watched her dog die in agony… it was far too risky.

I said but we no longer go near this farm, the disease is uncommon and the vaccines themselves do damage and can even kill them… and had she not noticed that my youngest son has been far healthier than the others had been? To which again she replied “but it’s so risky, you are risking it just for him having less minor illnesses, I don’t know how you can do it?” My answer was “in my eyes it’s far less risky than giving them the injections and increasing his chances of cancer, autoimmune diseases, autism, asthma, eczema, and who knows what else”. The conversation sort of then stopped there!!  (and the dog got its vaccinations the next week!)

But if I’m honest I am cross with my mum, she never once has looked at any information as to what the full facts are, either from vaccine info sheets or anti vaccine articles…so how does she know? She then also was one of the people who were part of the ‘persuasion’ to not question the doctors or vaccines when I vaccinated my older children. Why does she judge me on the fact I have taken months looking at vaccines, hours reading books on diseases and risks, vaccines, not vaccinating, and supporting my child’s immunity in other ways. I still take time to look at any new information I can about vaccination and always spend a few hours a week researching and talking and educating others on achiving better health.

I’m also angry with myself, and the health professionals that ‘brainwash’ you into getting vaccinated. Even with my eldest son 15 years ago, it felt SO VERY WRONG to vaccinate, so completely alien to natural health and  immunity (not that I knew what ‘natural immunity’ was back then) and yet I knew nothing of the dangers of vaccinating, only the dangers of not doing so. (Incidentally you are supposed to, although I never did, get a vaccine leaflet insert before consenting to your child’s vaccinations- otherwise how can you give ‘informed consent’?!) He then got patches of eczema exactly 2 weeks after his first vaccine, but again I was reassured that this was far better than a disease. With my 2nd child I did know of one person who did not vaccinate, but she didn’t seem forthcoming in telling me why (so I guessed it may be religious reasons or similar) and with my 3rd I did know of another one non vaccinating parent but was told to subscribe to The Informed Parent for more information, but at that time we just didn’t have any spare money to spend, especially when I didn’t really know what it would say in them; and even though I tried looking… they just didn’t have books on not vaccinating at the library! My 2nd child also had eczema exactly 2 weeks after his first vaccine as well as a huge lump in his leg with each of his three  jabs…I was again reassured these were just ‘local’ reactions and nothing to worry about. He then ended up within weeks covered from head to toe in eczema and looking very run down. My GP and health visitor even admitted the eczema was probably triggered by the vaccines, but that this was the ‘safer’ option to avoiding these terrible diseases!  All three children had numerous ear and throat infections, frequent very high temperatures, croup, coughs, colds, sickness, febrile convulsions, rashes etc… all I thought a ‘normal’ part of childhood.

Then after a 6 year gap I had my youngest son, and in that time the new 5in1 jab was introduced as well as I got access to the internet…so I looked up vaccine info, bought books online, found and went to local Arnica group meetings, asked on forums and simultaneously gained information and lost much of the fear of the diseases that had been installed in me since I was tiny, and reinforced by every public health vaccine campaign ever since. The more I looked the more I didn’t like what I saw, what I had been told previously. I found info such as this “Patients with either B or T cell immunodeficiency should not be given live vaccines because of the risk of vaccine-induced illness. Associated B cell deficiencies include respiratory or food allergies; features of T cell deficiencies include heart disease; and features of combined T and B cell deficiencies include dermatitis, neurological deterioration and eczema.”

“Children with known or suspected immunodeficiency disease should not receive any live virus vaccines, since they could initiate a severe or fatal infection.”

Now I have food and chemical intolernces as well as many more severe allergies in my and my husband’s family, as well as family history of auto immune disorder after travel vaccinations, and an auntie with Guillain-Barre Syndrome,  and my older sons both had eczema…why weren’t we given this information as to if my children were suitable for the MMR? My husband as a child, also with bad eczema (in the late 60’s early 70’s) was not ‘allowed’ the live vaccines, such as measles as they were considered too dangerous for eczema sufferers!  My daughter had convulsions at age 2, 5 and 7- were these the side effect of vaccines?

I asked the GP practise nurse about vaccines what were the ingredients etc and all I got was a basic government  vaccine advice booklet (with the details on the vaccine compensation board for if they had a serious reaction on the back?!) What are they hiding if they cannot give you this information? Why could she not even tell me the exact vaccine being used?- even though she would be the one who would administer it! She also told me that as my son had been ill and still had a cough and cold he needed the vaccines now as he was ‘weak’, (completely going against the vaccine manufacturers leaflet recommendations!) Hardly reassuring that the very person who would vaccinate my baby knew what she was talking about!

I also got grilled by a health visitor for not vaccinating…I calmly said I have researched it thank you very much, but still got shouted at, in a room of mums and babies, that I was all but killing my child. It was only after I left that I wondered why I didn’t ask her does she shout at parents who smoke near their kids, who don’t even bother to try breastfeeding, who feed them junk food daily, who dose their babies up with medicine to make them sleep better, who drive without car seats? As these reasons are a thousand times far more likely, and proven, to kill a child than not vaccinating!

So now 3 years on, my baby is still unvaccinated, still healthy and my family and I will not be getting another vaccine again.

If there’s a reason you can’t bring yourself to give your child a vaccine. Your instincts are telling you not to. Trust them.

Pregnancy and the first few months, or even years, afterwards seem to be a time when almost daily someone will comment on your size or shape -no matter how you look!

I have heard from mums with ‘big bumps’ that they felt maybe they should restrict their food, even though they were already eating healthily, and mums with ‘small bumps’ concerned that their baby wasn’t growing as it should purely from others comments!

And then after the birth it is the same, or worse, be it you have lost weight easily and people accuse you of not eating properly, or you are still holding on some of those extra baby kilos and still struggling with accepting your own body image, let alone others opinions of it!

Obviously the better nutrition you eat then not only will you lose the weight faster, but you will feel the best you can when your life is turned upside down with a new baby.

But remember it took 9 months for your body to grow a baby, give it 9 months to have chance to change back.
Even if you do get back into your old jeans, there are probably parts of you that will be changed forever; be it stretch marks, a saggy belly or boobs.

However if you are still pregnant, try getting some natural Wheatgerm oil  and putting it on your belly and boobs every night . I have recommended this to a few mums and they all seem to have less than average amounts of stretch marks, or even none!

Whether you are pregnant or with a newborn treat yourself to some clothes that you feel good in, buy a maternity or breastfeeding bra that is comfy and flatters you (try HotMilk bras) and treat yourself to things that make you feel better, even if it is just a soak in the bath!

Then take a look at The Shape of a Mother. This website is out there to show us real women and their bodies, that women don’t look like Hollywood stereotypes after you give birth, that many of us don’t ever regain our figures, even if we are seen as slim. It tries to celebrate where you are, the shape of your body, and the fact it has done such an amazing job and is something we should be proud of.

Of course if you have excess weight to lose, then there are things that you can do to help- gentle exercise, get walking, put the baby in a sling or pram and take a stroll round your local park, or even join a buggy fit class if you prefer to go with others. Try Yoga, many yoga teachers do a special postnatal class for new mums that you can bring your baby to. Or try Pilates-  both great for getting some core strength back.

Eat when you are hungry- especially if breastfeeding. If your body is asking for food…feed it! You don’t want it to think there is a famine and store any extra calories you consume later on your hips! Just make sure the food is nutritious and not all low calorie and high processed low sugar food  (as is often advertised as ‘healthy’ in the shops and media) but that is often full of artificial sweeteners instead! Try to eat naturally low or medium  Glycemic Load foods and  also remember you need ‘good fats’ – yes you can add Olive or Coconut Oil to your foods!

Get some healthy snacks in- buy seeds, nuts and dried fruit, seed or nut butters to put on oat cakes as well as fruits and natural yogurts.

Plan a few quick and healthy meals that you can make easily, such as risotto, stew, curry, bolognase or even plain fresh meat and vegetables. Try and prepare some of the meals earlier in the day, cut the veggies up and leave in the saucepan, that way if dinner time coincides with a crying baby you can, hopefully, still manage to eat good food without too much stress or effort.

Buy your food online- get the bulk of your shopping delivered that way you wont be tempted by too many biscuits when you are hungry and stressed walking round the supermarket. Write a list of what you want and stick to it!

And no matter what- find the good bits about your body, the things your friends are envious about, be it your slim ankles, your long legs, your smooth skin, or your sparkly eyes …and focus on them! Tell yourself daily that your body is amazing. After a while the parts you don’t like will seem to less prominent and just part of you, rather than you being so affected by them.

Many people hate change that doesn’t jingle in their pocket – Anon

I was told I had Group B Strep (GBS) with my 4th child. A letter arrived in the post with a bright sticker to put on my maternity notes “GBS+ve please administer antibiotics in labour” and a short ‘scare story’ booklet. – I felt like I’d got some disgusting STD and was also contagious! I saw my midwife (who I had seen with 2 of my previous children) who told me that as my labours are short they could give intravenous antibiotics to baby after birth. Just give the baby a quick drip, it doesn’t take long and we could go home, or if my waters broke, or I had a longer labour I could get a drip in hospital then come home for birth, but they couldn’t administer the antibiotics at home for risk of anaphylactic shock etc. I came out of there even more worried and feeling that my homebirth could be just a wish.

I then searched the websites I trusted and found there is a brilliant page on the homebirth.org.uk website including a link to mothering.com that had this info- “While many studies have found that giving antibiotics during labour to women who test positive for GBS decreases the rate of GBS infection among newborns, research is beginning to show that this benefit is being outweighed by increases in other forms of infection. One study, which looked at the rates of blood infection among newborns over a period of six years, found that the use of antibiotics during labour reduced the instance of GBS infection in newborns but increased the incidence of other forms of blood infection”.

“The overall effect was that the incidence of newborn blood infection remained unchanged.  The increase in other forms of blood infection among newborns is likely due to bacteria made drug-resistant by the overuse of antibiotics. Evidence exists that increased use of antibiotics frequently leads to increasing bacterial resistance. When a woman is given antibiotics during labour to treat GBS, the antibiotics cross the placenta and enter the amniotic fluid. While the antibiotics may have the desired effect of killing the GBS bacteria, some GBS bacteria can survive and become difficult, if not impossible; to kill with traditionally used antibiotics. Similarly, other bacteria, such as E. coli, that may be present in the mother or infant can become resistant to antibiotic treatment. These bacteria may not have presented a large risk of infection to the newborn until they were exposed to antibiotics and made into “super-bugs.”

I then rewrote the letter from the homebirth website and sent it to my midwife saying I’d only consider having the antibiotics if I had a further risk factor….

1- Preterm baby (especially before 35 weeks, but also before 37 weeks). One recent UK study of risk factors found that 6 babies out of more than 62,000 born in the study period died of GBS infection; of these, 5 were born before 36 weeks.
2- Mother having a fever during labour
3- Prolonged rupture of membranes – over 18 hours
4- GBS found in the mother’s urine, not just the vagina
5- Mother having had a previous child with GBS disease
6- Rupture of membranes before 37 weeks

When I next saw my midwife she “completely agreed with me not to have the antibiotics (especially as I have short labours of farless than the 4 hours it takes to administer the correct antibiotic dose) but she wasn’t allowed to influence me in my decision as it was against the guidelines. But was only too happy with me having a homebirth if I had no further risk factors without them!!” She also agreed that I should limit any internal examinations; and, if my waters had broken, have none unless completely necessary. We decided we could wait and only treat the baby if it had symptoms of an infection or if tests show that it was carrying Group B Strep.

I also decided to use some of the herbal remedies and to take probiotics to minimise any GBS risks. And if my immune system and diet was as healthy as possible it would again lower my risk factors, far more than someone who ate loads of junk sugary foods.

From the stats as I understand it, it seems to say Mother may have an allergic reaction to antibiotics, up to and including anaphylactic shock, which can be fatal. 1 in 10,000 women receiving antibiotics for GBS can be expected to go into anaphylactic shock, and 1 in 10 so affected will die (ref: RCOG paper on GBS).

Which means a 1 in 100,000 risk of mother (and I assume the baby too) dying after having the antibiotics, yet ‘only’ 6 in 62,000 babies die from GBS and only 1 of these before term, so 1 in 62,000 risk of a full term baby dying. This also does not take into account any other risks that antibiotics have in the long term, or how they can impact gut flora of the baby.

The info on routinely giving antibiotics to the baby after the birth didn’t help either- “Antibiotics to prevent infections in newborn babies who don’t have symptoms. Babies at most risk of getting a group B strep infection (for example, those who are born early) are often given antibiotics to prevent this. But doctors disagree about whether all babies who are at risk of a group B strep infection should be given antibiotic treatment.

Two studies have looked at whether it’s better to:

Although it seems that most UK hospitals recommend that women have IV antibiotics during labour if they test positive for GBS antenatally, in fact the RCOG recommendation is just that antibiotics be ‘considered’ in this situation, and that the risks are balanced against any possible benefit of IV antibiotics in labour.

Ultimately, it is the pregnant woman herself who will have to decide what is right for her and her baby. Deciding to follow the recommendations is not necessarily the wrong choice, as long as a woman is adequately informed of the risks that come with antibiotic use. But none of us should blindly follow recommendations to interfere with the natural birth process without taking a good look at the risks, as well as the benefits, of doing so.

I ended up having another good homebirth, a 2.5 hour labour with my waters intact until the last 10 minutes before he was born, and no sign of any infections.

Trusting our intuition often saves us from disaster.
- Anne Wilson Schaef

Every pregnant woman should be informed of the risks of drugs they may wish to take in labour. Our society can be very critical of women who drink, smoke, or take recreational drugs during their pregnancies, but it is totally acceptable to give them far more powerful drugs during their labours without a thought to the possible implications for the baby and their still developing foetal brain.

In the UK increasing numbers of women are now giving birth at home. In areas where home birth has been properly resourced and supported the hospitals have found that their drugs bill has fallen substantially. Women who birth at home rarely use pharmacological drugs, their perception of pain is far lower in their own settings. They are not women who will suffer pain no matter what, but in the comfort of their own home they are less anxious, less tense, and more able to cope with the pain of labour. Furthermore, increasing numbers of women choose to use a pool of water for pain relief. Unlike drugs, getting into a pool has no adverse effects and if it is not successful in reducing the pain of labour the woman can get out and then use prescribed drugs.

Although most people promote the normality of birth, often not many women in hospitals will experience a normal birth. Instead, they will find themselves and their babies subjected to a range of powerful drugs. Although women allegedly give informed consent for the use of those drugs, the reality is that the majority of women have little information about drugs in labour. Often the advantages of drug use is promoted, but little is said about the disadvantages, particularly the long-term effects.

Pethidine readily crosses the placenta. If the baby is expected to be born within an hour, most midwives try to ensure that pethadine is not given because of the risk that the drug will be present in the baby. However, research shows that pethidine is most likely to have a depressant effect on the foetal respiratory system if the dose is administered two or three hours before birth. The higher the dose to the mother, the greater the effect on the foetus (Yerby, 1996). Because the baby’s liver is immature, it takes a great deal longer—18 to 23 hours—to eliminate the drug from its system. 95% of the drug is excreted in two to three days, and pethadine can have significant implications for breastfeeding. “Pethidine proved to be the (drug) most inhibiting to breastfeeding.” also, by breastfeeding, the mother often gives the baby a second dose of pethidine, as the drug is transferred to the baby through the breast milk. pethidine is often the cause of a “sleepy” baby and therefore problems with getting the baby latched on.

Little research has been done into the long-term effects of pethidine. However, infants with high pethidine exposure were more likely to cry. Pethidine also reduced the infant’s ability to quiet himself once aroused. This was still observed at three and six weeks.

Also drugs can have so many effects. If they make the mother, or baby, sleepy they can affect the precious first moments after the birth, when you first get chance to bond and make eye contact with your baby.

A study on the effects of epidural anaesthesia has shown that infants exposed in utero were most likely to be cyanotic and unresponsive to their surroundings. the higher the cord blood concentration the more the baby’s visual skills and alertness were effected, lasting for the next six weeks.

“In a well-designed case control study at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm in 1990, researchers compared children exposed to pain-relieving drugs in labour with those who were not exposed and discovered an increased risk of drug addiction later in life (Jacobson et al., 1990). In 1988 they showed that when nitrous oxide was given to the mother the child was five and one-half times more likely to become an amphetamine addict than a brother or sister born to the same parents. In their paper in the British Medical Journal(1990), patients who had died from opiate addiction were compared with brothers and sisters; the researchers found that if the mothers had been given opiates or barbiturates or larger doses of nitrous oxide, the risk to the child of opiate addiction in later life was increased 4.7 times. In a further study, researchers discovered that the risk of drug addiction was related to the hospital in which they were born. In other words, the likelihood of a child developing drug addiction in later life depended on the labour ward policies of the hospital the mother chose for the birth, and I quote: “For the amphetamine addicts, hospital of birth was found to be an important risk factor even after controlling for residential area” (Nyberg, 1993). Jacobson and Nyberg’s research suggests  that the use of opiates, barbiturates and nitrous oxide in labour causes imprinting in the babies, and we are now reaping the whirlwind.”

Quote from midwiferytoday.com

more detailed info on www.aims.org.uk

“Offer hugs, not drugs.”

-Adina Lebowitz

New motherhood, this is the romanticised image that is portrayed, but it is often a far cry from the reality. Today’s mother is generally not given the chance to enjoy her pregnancy, labour and new baby because of the pressures that society places upon her.

“Doula” (pronounced “doola”) is a Greek word meaning “woman servant or caregiver”. It now refers to an experienced woman who offers emotional and practical support to a woman (or couple) before, during and after childbirth.

A doula believes in “mothering the mother” – enabling a woman to have the most satisfying and empowered time that she can during pregnancy, birth and the early days as a new mum. This type of support also helps the whole family to relax and enjoy the experience.

Birth doulas are trained and experienced in childbirth, although they may or may not have given birth themselves. They have a good knowledge and awareness of female physiology BUT the doula is not supporting the mother in a clinical role – that is the job of the midwife/medical staff.

Postnatal doulas work flexible hours to suit the family, offering practical and emotional support to the new mother and father in the home following the birth of baby. In the West today, too often mothers are rushed back into normal day-to-day activities; in many cultures women are confined to bed and rest for a period of up to 40 days. This may be impossible in our society but with the help of a postnatal doula, a mother can enjoy some of the benefits of a prolonged “lying in” period. This will help her bond with her baby and spend extra time with any older siblings. Our work is about empowering a family to take care of itself and we facilitate this by helping around the house and offering encouragement and suggestions.

As childbirth has moved from home to hospital, a vital element of care has been lost from the whole process. Gone are the days where a woman would have continuous support from one carer throughout her labour. It used to be the case that the womenfolk within the immediate and extended family (mothers/sisters/grandmother etc…) would be on hand to provide the nurturing role for the new mother, to guide by experience and help with the practicalities that need to be performed before, during and after a woman gives birth to a baby.

Later the concept of the community midwife developed, but due to lack of resources, this service is steadily declining in many areas.

Nowadays many women feel that they have to be in hospital to give birth to their baby where it is much more likely that a birth will be medically managed and intervention methods, such as caesarean section or forceps, will be used.

RESEARCH has shown that having a doula present at a birth ;
• Shortens first-time labour by an average of 2 hours
• Decreases the chance of caesarean section by 50%
• Decreases the need for pain medication
• Helps fathers participate with confidence
• Increases success in breastfeeding

Findings from “Mothering the Mother” Klaus, Kennell & Klaus, 1993

from www.doula.org.uk

If a doula were a drug, it would be unethical not to use it.”

-John H. Kennell, MD

When I was pregnant with my first child there was one item that was my best buy it was ‘New Active Birth A Concise Guide to Natural Childbirth by Janet Balaskas’ it helped me understand that birth has been more and more medicalised over the years and that there are so many things that are in the way from us getting a natural birth.

This book gave me some knowledge, so that when other mums gave their scary birth stories I could see that‘possibly’ there was a reason that they had that outcome, be it from having an epidural,lying on their backs, time limits, or simply not feeling safe to birth.

“Over the last century there has been a very rapid development in obstetrics. No one would deny the safety net provided by modern obstetrics when problems occur. However, the vast majority of labours have the potential to be uncomplicated when not hindered by the routine use of interventions in labour.”

“Janet Balaskas, founder of The Active Birth movement, has pioneered an approach to birth in which the woman regains the responsibility of childbirth, and in which she is enabled to use her body to the best advantage. Many studies have revealed the advantages to a woman when she is walking about and assuming upright positions in labour.

This will probably mean that she will move around freely, choosing comfortable, upright positions during contractions, and resting and relaxing between. She will also be able to benefit from medical support, where it used appropriately, to bring about a positive result.”

I booked into a local Active Birth class (or try Yoga Birth) with my second child and found this information- it really helped my belief that I could have the natural birth that I wanted. Other alternatives are with the excellent info given with the NCT or the Active Birth Centre.

I also learnt here more about ‘Optimal Foetal Positioning‘ (OFP)

‘Optimal Foetal Positioning’ (OFP) is a theory developed by a midwife, Jean Sutton, and Pauline Scott, an antenatal teacher, who found that the mother’s position and movement could influence the way her baby lay in the womb in the final weeks of pregnancy. Many difficult labours result from ‘malpresentation’, where the baby’s position makes it hard for the head to move through the pelvis, so changing the way the baby lies could make birth easier for mother and child.

The ‘occiput posterior’ (OP) position is not so good. This means the baby is still head down, but facing your tummy. Mothers of babies in the ‘posterior’ position are more likely to have long and painful labours as the baby usually has to turn all the way round to facing the back in order to be born. He cannot fully flex his head in this position, and diameter of his head which has to enter the pelvis is approximately 11.5cm, circumference 35.5cm.‘

Unfortunately our modern lifestyle doesn’t help with getting the baby into the best position- for example slouching on a sofa (which most of us want to do in late pregnancy!) can encourage your baby to be posterior and in turn a longer or more problematic labour. Instead you need to find ways of keeping your belly tipping forward, spend lots of time kneeling upright, or sitting upright, or on hands and knees. When you sit on a chair, make sure your knees are lower than your pelvis, and tilting slightly forwards.

There is also another great website Spinning Babies, on how to get your baby into the best position for labour, helping turn them if they are not, as well as helping you find out for yourself what position you baby is in yourself using pictures and a belly map. It has really detailed information on positioning and why it often makes such a difference to your labour. Especially important for first time mothers or mother’s who had long labours or long pushing stages in the past may benefit the most from optimal foetal positioning. Women who had an easy birth in the past can usually give birth to a posterior baby.

There are many sites, much information, and many stories out there about pregnancy and birth, unfortunately many of which are downright negative and seem to ‘promote’ the ‘it isn’t called labour for nothing’ & ‘you’ll be begging for drugs’ brigade.

Of course you do need to be prepared for all eventualities,but the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends that caesarean sections rates should not go above 10-15% in any country, yet in the UK and many developed countries it is currently around one third of all births. Many of the ‘natural’ births aren’t all that natural either, so something is going wrong!

If everyone you talk to tells you ‘labour hurts like hell’, ‘you have to push for England  and ‘breastfeeding is agony’ then it starts to sink into your belief system and make you feel it’s an uphill struggle, more likely for problems to occur (especially with the ‘time limits’ that are often given by Health Professionals) and you are then a failure if it all goes wrong! From having been through four births, I found there were three main things that helped- Information, Belief and Support

Giving birth can be physically and emotionally hard work, but it needn’t be the agonising, screaming for drugs experience we’ve been taught it is. I have put several links to birthing information; from how to get your baby in to the best position for labour (did your midwife ever tell you this? –none of mine have!), how to strengthen your belief that natural birth is normal and more often than not possible, and how to get the support and help you need to increase the chances of a normal delivery – possibly a birth that you can even say you ‘enjoyed’ after!!

Luck is:

Labour

Under

Correct

Knowledge