Birth Drugs

Just say no? Of course not!

Drugs save people's lives. Antibiotics, antiretrovirals, opiates, anesthetics, statins .... the list goes on and on. Every day, millions of people are kept alive by modern medicine and by appropriately prescribed medication.

In obstetrics, however, as in psychiatry, medications are overused and used inappropriately. The other day I heard a story about a woman who needed surgery like she needed a hole in the head. She is alone, poor, and anxious. She was going to have a difficult entry into motherhood without major surgery, dealing with the stress of a newborn along with the continued stresses of poverty and cultural isolation.

She was scheduled for an induction and her uterus reacted too strongly to a Cervidil insertion and started hyper-contracting. Baby went into distress and surgery was needed to save the baby. 

I would need a crystal ball and a full-on fortune telling kit to figure out if this particular mother-baby dyad would have needed surgery if left alone. But it is true that "Care providers need to consider that induction of women with an unfavourable cervix is associated with a higher failure rate in nulliparous patients and a higher Caesarean section rate in nulliparous and parous patients" (SOGC).

Why are we giving drugs to laboring women? I took a picture of this drug the other day. It is called synthetic oxytocin. It can save women's lives if they are experiencing a serious postpartum hemorrhage. But it is used much too often to speed up or stimulate labor in cases where a good dose of patience is all that is called for.

This is a high risk drug!

Another cocktail of drugs that is commonly administered is the epidural cocktail. The components vary from hospital to hospital. You can find detailed information on the most common ingredients here (page 20). Most epidurals do contain Fentanyl (see below), which is an opiate. I have never heard an anesthesiologist ask a laboring woman if she has a history of substance addiction, but most recovered addicts I know would not willing put an opiate into their bodies unless they really had to.

Which leads me to the next question, which is: when is it necessary to give pharmaceutical medication to women in labor? And I would like to suggest that the answer should be: when the pharmaceuticals are directly involved in saving the life of mother or baby or both. 

We simply do not know the long-term effects of epidural medication on the baby.  

And no, I am not speaking from a pedestal of wonderful candle-lit home births here, either. I have experienced my fair share of birth trauma. And yes, I am fully aware that taking an epidural during labor is often very important for the woman's emotional and psychological well-being, and her sense of empowerment. But these drugs are becoming normalized and their effects minimized. I would like to see the brake put on this candy store mentality where we are offering dangerous drugs to women and newborns.

Here is a brief description of one of these candies:

Fentanyl is a powerful synthetic opiate analgesic similar to but more potent than morphine. It is typically used to treat patients with severe pain, or to manage pain after surgery. It is also sometimes used to treat people with chronic pain who are physically tolerant to opiates. It is a schedule II prescription drug.

In its prescription form, fentanyl is known as Actiq, Duragesic, and Sublimaze. Street names for the drug include Apache, China girl, China white, dance fever, friend, goodfella, jackpot, murder 8, TNT, as well as Tango and Cash.

Like heroin, morphine, and other opioid drugs, fentanyl works by binding to the body's opiate receptors, highly concentrated in areas of the brain that control pain and emotions. When opiate drugs bind to these receptors, they can drive up dopamine levels in the brain's reward areas, producing a state of euphoria and relaxation. Medications called opiate receptor antagonists act by blocking the effects of opiate drugs. Naloxone is one such antagonist. Overdoses of fentanyl should be treated immediately with an opiate antagonist.When prescribed by a physician, fentanyl is often administered via injection, transdermal patch, or in lozenge form. However, the type of fentanyl associated with recent overdoses was produced in clandestine laboratories and mixed with (or substituted for) heroin in a powder form. Mixing fentanyl with street-sold heroin or cocaine markedly amplifies their potency and potential dangers. Effects include: euphoria, drowsiness/respiratory depression and arrest, nausea, confusion, constipation, sedation, unconsciousness, coma, tolerance, and addiction. (National Institute of Drug Abuse (2012). Fentanyl Retrieved from http://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/fentanyl on September 23, 2014)

Breathe Together

I have had some feedback about the title of my book. Several reviewers have given it "five stars", but have had doubts about reading it because they thought it would be an angry, polemical work about the horror of hospitals and the saintliness of doulas.

And it isn't.

I have a holistic world view, which means that I believe that there is a place for most types of activities and interventions, within very strict limitations. A 90% epidural rate for first-time mothers is just plain wrong. 90% of all first time mothers do not want an epidural, although certainly some do. And very few first-time mothers actually need pain medication. If and when they do, an epidural is a very effective tool that can provide exactly what the doctor ordered.

Cesarean sections are also very, very useful tools. Surgery can save a baby's or a mother's life. But one quarter of mothers and babies in North America are not in danger of dying during childbirth, adn so we see that this tool as well is overused.

We have come to believe that the overuse of these tools is necessary. Women are afraid of pain, men are afraid of birth, and children are being born into bright lights, machines, masked humans, and a mother nowhere in sight.

Here is a little explanation of my use of the word "conspiracy":

The root of “conspiracy” comes from the Latin conspirare, from con- “together with” and -spirare “breathe.” My hope is that just as women instinctively know how to breathe through their contractions, we will realize that we all know how to breathe together. Whether we are in a hospital, a birthing center, or at home, when all of us: physicians, nurses, midwives, obstetricians, doulas, birthing women, partners and, of course, the baby, are working as one in the birthing room, then the birth experience will provide a better start for the new family. When the birthing woman and her child, and not a machine or a chart, or a schedule or an agenda, are the center of our attention, then no matter what the outcome, the new mother will feel better about her experience and will be better able to care for her child. When we simplify our approach to birth, we will see that birth is simple.

Radical Doulas

One of "my" doulas was at a clinic the other day and she met a resident who apparently had worked with me in a hospital birthing room some months ago. The resident made two comments about me: "Rivka doesn't like me because I'm a man". And "she concentrates on the woman - we are just there as technicians to catch the baby".

Funny, I like men generally. I wonder if he could think a little deeper about why I may have given him the cold shoulder. Was he treating my client with disrespect? Was he reading the situation closely? Did he have the woman's best interests at heart? Was he acting according to protocol, to science, or to "ghost protocols" (those ones that get left over at hospitals because they are too hard to change)? Was he working from his heart? Did he ask my client to lie down when she was pushing perfectly well in a squat? Was he scared?

And "she concentrates on  the woman". Well, hello, that is what a doula is supposed to do. We are not there to make friends with the medical staff. I have very cordial relations with many of the nurses and physicians I work with. But I do not go into a hospital to make friends. I go into a hospital to provide my client with a safe place to give birth. That means that I make every effort to create a peaceful environment in which the woman can let go and do her work of birthing. I don't have to joke and laugh with residents. I can quietly whisper to the woman so that she is feeling good. I'm not interested in staring at her vulva as it opens. I've seen it lots of times, it is doing perfectly well, and there is no medical need for me to do so.

If a woman is undergoing an intervention that I do not approve of, then I will definitely put my back to the staff and direct all my love and attention to the woman. Women DO undergo unnecessary interventions in the hospital, far too often. I am not talking about women who go into the hospital with a clear plan to be induced, have an epidural, and be happy. I am talking about the HUGE number of women who actually believe they can give birth naturally in the hospital environment.

These women are often treated badly by under-experienced residents.  If a woman has a small leak of amniotic fluid, that's no reason to admit her to the hospital two weeks before her EDD and then break her waters twelve hours later to stimulate labor. If a woman is happily pushing in a supported squat, there is no reason why she should lie down just because the doctor hasn't caught a baby that way. If I see a resident reaching for the amnihook, with his hand in a woman's body, I will say something. That something might be said in a gentle voice, but it probably won't be friendly. And the woman on the bed will appreciate my interference. I am not against a justified AROM. But you never insert something in a woman's vagina without telling her what you're planning on doing.
Do you?

Radical doulas, we need to stand up and speak out. Women are being treated badly in our hospitals and I am ready to take a stand.

I am taking notes of occasions where my clients have been abused during labor and childbirth. Please start to take notes too and we will start to create a manifesto.

Power to the birthing woman!

Ask the Doula - the "too-big baby"

A week has gone by already, so quickly. I am involved in many interesting projects, more about them in a few days...
It's Ask the Doula time again!
Please keep sending in your questions. You can add them as comments below, or send your questions to our facebook page, or twitter @montrealdoula.

Today I am going to be looking at the question of cephalo-pelvic disproportion, or the "too-big baby". This mother generously agreed for me to print her question and the response.


Question Number Three 


"I had my first baby three years ago. I am expecting again and I would like to have a doula to accompany me. I am not sure how it will go. My doctor told me that my pelvis is too small to give birth. My first baby was born by cesarean after I was in labor for two days. I had contractions all day on the first day, then by the next morning they were so painful I couldn't even talk. We went to the hospital, where they broke my waters, and then I took an epidural. My baby didn't come out after two hours and they said she was too big. She ended up weighing seven pounds thirteen ounces, and had an Apgar score of 9 and 10. I have a very small pelvis and a narrow pubic arch. Do you think this is a good reason for a cesarean?"

First of all, let's understand how birth stories work. A woman will tell me her story, and it will be just that - her story about what happened to her. It is a story in the first person, about a primal experience she had. I will listen to the details but I will also listen to the tenor, the resonance, of the story.

This story is about a normal labor that somehow went wrong. The first hint is that she labored all day and after 24 hours had contractions "so painful I couldn't even talk." This is normal labor. Mothers will have contractions for a few hours, or a few days, and they will be uncomfortable and even painful. Then the body gets down to work and contractions become so intense that she cannot speak through them. Then she gets to the point where she doesn't even want to speak in between contractions, and this is when the doula knows that the laboring woman is definitely in good labor.

But in this story, the woman was not prepared for the intensity, and she went to the hospital soon after she entered the beginning of active labor. She doesn't say why they broke her waters, but usually it is done because there is a perception that labor isn't moving quickly enough.

In this case, it appears that the breaking of the waters did stimulate labor, and this stimulation increased the intensity of the contractions to the point where the laboring woman decided to take an epidural for pain relief. She was probably quite tired by now, as well, as no one had told her to rest during the night in between the contractions.

The epidural probably helped in terms of her energy, and her body obviously did the work of opening so that she reached the pushing phase. Then what happened? She pushed for two hours. The staff told her the baby was too big and she went to surgery. I cannot extrapolate too much, but here is a possible scenario:

The pelvis is narrow and small. The body made a baby that, in fact, was a perfect size for this pelvis. Her labor was progressing normally and the baby was doing the appropriate moves to navigate through the bones of her mother's body. At a certain point, she had moved her head to a sideways plane so that she could get some leverage to push it down further.

Imagine one of those wooden toys, where the child has to push blocks through different-shaped holes. The child will turn, and turn, and turn the block until it finally pops through. He learned this at birth.

But suddenly, the amniotic fluid drained, and she found her head stuck upon the bone in a awkward position. She still instinctively pushes her head to the other side, to straighten it in order to descend further. As she is doing this difficult work, she feels her mother's helpful body go limp. She has no more help from the outside, just uterine contractions that are pushing her more and more into a position that will be very difficult for her to move from.

The cervix becomes fully dilated, because the body is doing what it should. But the combination of the narrow pelvis, the crooked head, the epidural, and the impatient staff adds up to an unfortunate turn of events.

If she had decided to stay at home longer, until labor was more active, she may have avoided getting her membranes ruptured. If she had a wider pelvis, the baby may not have gotten stuck. If she had a doula by her side, she may have managed to avoid or at least postpone the epidural. If she had not taken the epidural, vertical or forward-leaning positions could have helped the baby come down. If the staff had patiently waited another hour, she may have pushed the baby out.

But we do not know. We really can never know what could have happened, had things been otherwise. But if we agree that we could never know what might have happened, then we have to also admit that we do not know if another baby, perhaps with a slightly smaller head, in a better position, without an epidural, with a doula assisting the mother, could successfully navigate through the birth tunnel and be born vaginally.

My answer? I do not know the reason for your first cesarean. But I do know that you do not have any conditions that definitely preclude your giving birth vaginally. There is a saying: "labour is the best pelvimeter". In layperson's terms, this means that the best way to measure your pelvis is with a baby's head, when you are in labor.

My advice? Hire a doula. Make sure you have a good relationship with your doctor or midwife.Stay positive and open. I wish you the best of luck!

Ask the Doula - epidurals

I am always getting letters, phone calls, or face-to-face questions about birth, doulas, and such.

Every week, I am going to  try to answer and explore a different question that is presented to me, and, in doing so, perhaps answer some of your questions, and perhaps learn a thing or two myself.

Please send me your questions as comments, and I will select one question each week to answer.



Question Number One

"I was at a birth the other day, and the doctor said to my client that there was a recent study done that proves that an early epidural [that is, administered before 4cm] does not lead to a rise in c-sections. What is your opinion on this?"

I think more doulas and women will start to hear about this study, and I think it reflects a dangerous trend. The doctor who quotes recent research seems very with-it and up-to-date - she's done her homework. But let's have a little look at the research in questions:

The study is a systematic review of six studies that included over 15,000 women. Please click here to retrieve it. As you can see, it is a nice little study, I suppose, with one serious flaw that jumps out on first reading.
It states that the ..."review showed no increased risk of caesarean delivery or instrumental vaginal delivery for women receiving early epidural analgesia at cervical dilatation of 3 [c]m or less in comparison with late epidural analgesia." Early epidural analgesia was defined as that administered at 3 cm or less. Late epidural analgesia was not defined, so it could have been administered anywhere from 4 cm well into the pushing phase. Well, when was it? Was it at 4.5? Or was it after an hour and a half of pushing?

The danger is that, the media being the creature it is, someone could simply snip this conclusion, as I have done, and weave a generalization from it. An unsuspecting woman reads the two-sentence generalization and thinks "ahhh, well, that's a relief, I don't have to wait to take my epidural."

Let's look at the reality:
What do we see, as doulas? As I suggest in my book, IF a baby is not optimally positioned (and, by the way, this is also something that we have studied and studied, and we still can't ever really tell when and if a baby is well-positioned, except by watching her  weave successfully down the birth tunnel), and IF a woman takes an epidural early in her labor, and IF the baby's descent could have been helped by a resistant pelvic floor, then this mother and baby could end up with a surgical delivery.

So, in fact, when I see a nice easy birth and:
a mother who has always taken an epidural (and this is her sixth baby and hey! who am I to argue?)
or a mother who always maintained she would ask for pain meds
or a mother who needs meds for another, outstanding reason (sexual abuse being one - we'll get to that another week)
then I have a better feeling about outcome when she decides to take an epidural (even if I know she doesn't really need it).

But when I see a labor that is not going well, for whatever reason: for example, if a woman is having the particular kind of pain that may indicate a poor position, or a woman is undergoing an induction (more about induction coming up too) that looks like it may fail, then I worry about an early epidural, and its effects on labor.

So what can we do about it? "No, little missy, you cannot take the drugs. I as your doula know best"?
Of course not. Maybe there is not really much we can do in the moment. Maybe prenatal education is absolutely paramount. We need to sit with our clients and talk with them about what they are reading, what they understand, what they believe. We need to work with them and open up to them about our own experiences as doulas, and let them know that although a natural birth is definitely simple, it is not usually easy, and that even during labor they will probably have to make choices. And that her choices WILL affect the way her birth unfolds. If she wants a natural birth in a hospital, she will have to work for it. Part of that work will be not accepting pain medication too early in labor.
I know it goes against the review.
But I have evidence that early epidural administration DOES interfere with the normal progress of labor. That evidence comes from my own observation. No studies, no funding, no university degrees. Just women birthing.

Viagra?

I was listening to our national radio the other day in the car. There was a rather lame comedy show that took the place of a mock debate, with canned laughter and all. The debate was supposed to be about the perils of Big Pharma.
With a half an ear on the radio, one eighth of my attention on the road, and the rest of my thoughts on the woman I had just visited, I waited for a laugh - there must be some gags you can get out of the idea of drugs and the common man.
Into my consciousness blurted the voice of a youngish man, explaining the increase in Viagra's popularity over the past few years. In a ham-handed way, he was attempting to turn the problem around, and according to him, the reason why a 65 year old man couldn't get it up was because - oh, when he looks at his wrinkled, saggy, old 65 year old wife, what's there to turn him on?
I quote almost verbatim.
I was shocked. This is national radio! How can he be allowed to present older women, and older men, in such a light? Whoever talks about a long marriage with such disrespect? And how's it anyone's business anyway?
Then I remembered, of course, this is the 21st century. My 9 year old watches hockey games, where men are getting their necks broken by other men (I thought the game was about shooting a puck at a net?), and during the commercial breaks, he learns about Viagra, and imagines it is a pill you take when you are tired of going on walks.
In our drug-happy, Pharma-controlled society, little wonder that women do not expect to give birth without pharmacological pain relief. Men and women cannot maintain a long marriage without Viagra. Children cannot be controlled without Ritalin. For every mild ailment there is a pill. You can take a pill if you are shy, if you are sad, if you are scared.
But why not go through the real emotion? If you look at your old lover's body and see all the scars and lumps that were not there when you met, wouldn't that fill you with love? And if the love isn't Viagra love, so be it.