Image:
Yes! Most doctors say you should state in a birth plan if you don't want an episiotomy, but doctors usually try to get you to change what you have written if you have a birth plan. They also say 'unless there is an emergency, then we will do one anyway'.
What they don't tell you is, you have an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to refuse and if you withhold consent, legally they cannot perform one. This applies to all other maternity procedures too.
You are not even compelled to have a caesarean if you don't want one. This is because the human rights we have as defined by law do not include unborn babies.
In the landmark case of St George's Healthcare NHS Trust v S in 1998, the Court of Appeal reiterated that fetuses are not legal persons and found that a court-ordered C-section on a detained mental patient (unlawfully detained at that) was unlawful. The lady who had a court ordered C section was offered compensation for her ordeal.
While I personally do not agree with abortion and think that reasonable care should be provided for the unborn baby, I don't believe that unborn babies should have rights. Why?
If that was the case, a woman would be compelled to undergo medical procedures which may endanger her health long term or even kill her, for the benefit of another human and this would mean that pregnant women would have less rights than any other member of society, including non-pregnant women, men and children.
If this is the stance that society would take, where would it end? Would people be compelled to give organs away because someone needed a kidney transplant to live?
Any mother wants the best for her child, but in order to be a good mother you have to be a happy mother and a healthy mother and if you don't want a procedure, or you know there is ample evidence that it is harmful, like with episiotomy, then you have a right to protect your own body as an individual.
The main reasons for episiotomies are cited to be to prevent tearing but this is nonsensical because nearly every study written shows that the pain of an episiotomy is worse than a tear, takes longer to heal than a tear and is associated with significant complications and even death.
In contrast, I had a tear with my second child and this didn't cause me pain. I was up walking around within a few hours of birth.
Other reasons include worrying that the baby will be brain damaged by its head hitting the perineum or being too big to be born. This is ridiculous as the vagina is designed to give birth to a baby. A baby is supposed to be born that way and is not going to get brain damage from hitting its head.
Very rarely, especially in first births, the mother might have difficulty in delivering the head but this is usually due to the hospital protocol of having her lie on a bed. Gravity helps solve this. Ventouse suction can also be used to assist without needing to cut the vagina.
If the baby is in severe difficulty and you absolutely don't want an episiotomy, you can request a caesarean. Although this is still painful, it is not female genital mutilation and is not associated with sexual problems in the same way.
No. Internals are purely to check how far the cervix is dilated. The standard hospital model for birth is 1cm dilation per hour, with on average 12 hours *allowed* for a first birth without intervention. Dilation can vary enormously and is not an accurate indicator of how the labour is going.
For instance, in my third labour I was told I was 8cm dilated and they said I wouldn't have the baby for another 2 or 3 hours. However, my waters broke half an hour later and suddenly I was fully dilated and the baby was born. With my fourth I dilated 0 to 10 in 25 minutes. I personally believe it is a worthless examination and cannot predict how the baby is.
If you consent to exams, then they may try to give you drugs to speed things up if you aren't following their pattern, which puts you and your baby at risk of complications.
If you want to know how your baby is, listen to his heart beat!
You have an ABSOLUTE right to refuse exams, and to get your point across you can write 'I do not wish to have internal exams. If you do so without my permission I will see this as a sexual assault.'
Over-zealous midwives and doctors backed off me immediately when I stated this.
You are allowed to give birth to your baby wherever you like. If you are told you need permission, they are lying.
If the NHS tells you they haven't got enough midwives, tell them they have to come out to you when you are in labour, as they are legally required to do so if you call them.
No. There is no legal requirement for a medical attendant at your birth. No woman can be prosecuted for giving birth to her baby.
It is also legal for your husband or partner to be present. What is illegal is if he tried to do something medical, like performing internal exams on you, because then he could be charged with practicing as a midwife without a licence.
If he is there purely as an emotional support, he is not breaking the law.
Jacqui Smith MP, Minister of State, Department of Health, wrote to Julia Drown MP on the 23rd September, 2002 stating:
'Attending a woman in childbirth, as opposed to general support given by partners and relatives, has been an offence against the protected function of midwifery since the Midwives Act 1902 and the fines are set at a level to reflect the seriousness of the offence. By 'attend' we mean, 'assume responsibility for care' and this is not intended to outlaw husbands, partners and relatives whose presence and support during childbirth are extremely important'.
Other pages:
This is the text-only version of this page. Click here to see this page with graphics.
Edit this page |
Manage website
Make Your Own Website: 2-Minute-Website.com