--------------------------------------------------
CNN featured a story today about Aneka, a woman who recently gave birth to her fourth child, vaginally and at home, after previously enduring three cesarean births. Apparently her obstetrician had told her that her pelvis was "too small" to deliver vaginally, and, after her first cesarean, she continued birthing surgically because she was told that was what she had to do.
For her forth child, the obstetrician scheduled a cesarean, but Aneka never showed. Since seven months gestation, she had been researching vaginal birth after cesarean, or VBAC. And, due to her area's hospitals not supporting VBACs and her doctor's suggestion for yet another cesarean, Aneka chose to give birth at home under the care of a midwife. The birth resulted in a healthy 9 pound baby, born vaginally after only four minutes of pushing. (Small pelvis my ass.)
CNN offers dueling perspectives on the matter: some in the medical establishment believe Aneka's actions were "irresponsible" and dangerous, while birth advocates applaud her as a hero of the birth movement.
The home birth vs. hospital birth, VBAC vs. repeat cesarean debate is ongoing, with more and more evidence surfacing to suggest that a) home birth is as safe as hospital birth, assuming the woman does not experience major complications and is under the care of a midwife, and b) attempting a VBAC is safer than repeat cesarean, which is a major abdominal surgery that lengthens recovery time and often acts as an affront to breastfeeding.
But what concerns me about this story most is not the fact that this woman couldn't be better supported in her choices, or that she had to endure three cesareans before she found out that her body could give birth on its own, or even that it paints home birth as more dangerous than it is. What concerns me most is the public opinion surrounding Aneka's situation as evidenced by the article's comments. From the peanut gallery:
"Wow, talk about stupid. She got lucky, it really wouldn't have hurt her to go and have that c-section just to be safe. Well, I guess it's her decision. I'm just happy the baby didn't die because of her risk taking."
"I love the 'it's a woman's choice' line of thinking. What about the father (husband or not)? What about the baby?"
"This woman is a fool!"
"Who was she more concerned about, herself and her 'birth experience', or the risks to her baby?"
Never mind that this particular woman's birthing experience ended positively, or that most home birth experiences end that same way. No, Aneka was defiant and therefore is an idiot. She's irresponsible. She "could have" endangered her child's life by not listening to the doctor. In other words, women should do what they're told with their bodies, and besides, women need to stop thinking about what they want and just think about the baby (sound familiar?).
Even more troubling, many of the comments don't focus on stupidity; they focus, not surprisingly, on the number of children this Black woman has:
"I just hope she stops feeding her need to breed! Plus, she was really stupid."
"YOU HAVE 4 ALREADY! FIND THE OFF BUTTON! AND ALL YOU IDIOTS CRYING ABOUT MEXICANS AND THEIR KIDS, LOOK RIGHT HERE! THIS IS WHATS TRULY WRONG IN THIS COUNTRY TODAY, NOBODY NEEDS 5, 6 , 7 KIDS, THTS [sic] JUST NUTS...."
"Newsflash: She's an entitled black person."
So, in conclusion:
- A woman who makes an informed decision to switch to the care of a midwife after her scalpel-happy OB pushes cesarean surgery is "defiant."
- It's irresponsible to worry about having positive birthing experiences; all that matters is that the baby gets out alive.
- Women should never, ever have more children than the public thinks you should have, especially women of color.
No comments:
Post a Comment