Preparing sibling for birth process?

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:20:52 -0700 (PDT), Akuvikate
wrote:

So yesterday I was sitting on the couch and she took my hand and said,
"When little dude is getting born I'm just going to hold your hand
like this. Because it may look like you're just lying there, or
hooting and hollering, but inside you'll be working very hard." It
was just about the sweetest thing I've ever heard in my life.

Amazingly sweet!
It sounds like she may do well being there. I had planned on having
my just-turned-4 yo present, but she's pretty sensitive and I realized
she'd be upset if she saw I was in pain. I wanted to be able to focus
on having the baby and not worrying about E and I knew I'd worry about
E so we enlisted some friends to help and she stayed with them.
Turned out I was in labor in the hospital for 2 days before having a
c-section around midnight so it worked out the best for us.

Nan

On Mar 17, 11:20 am, Akuvikate wrote:

So yesterday I was sitting on the couch and she took my hand and said,
"When little dude is getting born I'm just going to hold your hand
like this. Because it may look like you're just lying there, or
hooting and hollering, but inside you'll be working very hard." It
was just about the sweetest thing I've ever heard in my life.

Oh geez that's adorable!

I was following with interest because though I'm not expecting #2 yet,
I'm hoping that'll happen soon and am wondering what to do about DD
(now 20months) as we intend a homebirth. I didn't scream/yell at all
last time, so I kind of don't want to show her videos with lots of
screaming that might freak her out. Well, I'll wait til I get pg to
decide how to deal with it

Good luck!

On Mar 17, 5:46 am, enigma wrote:
Nan wrote innews
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:56:41 +0000 (UTC), enigma
wrote:

alt.gothic.
remember, i'm one of *those* people
i will say one thing for mr.agsf (which he "borrowed" from
the AGSF) though, he's a pretty consistant troll. he's been
making himself at home over there since 1997 or so... kinda
like those annoying neighbors that won't take a hint & go
home. lee

Good grief... a Goth with a 1950s marriage. That sounds
like a bad comedy!

he's not a goth. he's a troll.
lee

Yeah, it's easier to label someone as a troll than to argue or
acknowledge their point of view. I don't think a child or a father
should be in the delivery room. I was there for my son's birth (The
goth in me took pictures and video of the eventual c-section after 14
hours of a failed labor) and if I had to do it all over again, I would
have waited outside. In asking a question, one must be prepared to
look at all points of views.

Also, having many girlfriends, both live in and non, and experiencing
the attitudes and views of how feminism has rotted their brains, only
a fool would marry in the US and a bigger one would marry to a
Westernized woman. There is simply no reason why a man should get
married in this day and age to this type of woman until they change
the laws to make it more equal and fair. So yes, a traditional
marriage of the "50's" where a woman is not selfish and is supportive
of her husband is much better than a modern marriage with a high
divorce rate. In California, our divorce rates are near 70%!!!

Anyway, in regards to the husband in the delivery room debate, here is
a source that covers all aspects:
http://www.squidoo.com/husband-in-delivery-room
or
http://tinyurl.com/34u8zg

Regards...

wrote:

[...]
So yes, a traditional
marriage of the "50's" where a woman is not selfish and is supportive
of her husband is much better than a modern marriage with a high
divorce rate.
[...]

The question is, though - better for whom?

As I understand it, the traditional marriages to which you refer have
two salient features:

1. One partner gives up their career, or their chance at having a
career, in order to take care of all the cleaning, cooking, and
childcare needs of the couple.

2. The decision as to which partner does this is made not on the basis
of ability or desire but on the basis of gender.

Now, I can see why this would be better for most men. It's pretty
self-evident that having someone in your life who'll do all your
housework, cook all your meals, and sort out all your childcare issues,
all totally reliably and for minimal cost, is an improvement over not
having said someone. I can also see how it would be better for some
women - if bringing up your children and maintaining a household is what
you want to do with the rest of your life, then obviously the best thing
for you is to be able to do it.

However, lots of women did, and do, want careers either after or instead
of bringing up children. In addition, some men rather like the idea of
staying at home with children full time for at least some years. For
people who feel that way, traditional marriages really aren't better.
The problem with one-size-fits-all solutions is that generally they don't.


All the best,

Sarah
--
http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com

"That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell

On Mar 17, 12:20*pm, Akuvikate wrote:
Replying to my own post, probably bad manners, but...

Since all of the sudden this thread has become really active (though
mostly about agsf) I figured I'd post an update. *I got the Lennart
Nilson photographic book (that classic from the 70s about in utero
development) and started talking with the Bug about childbirth.
Doctor's daughter to the end, she's more interested in the picture of
the C-section than the those of the "regular way". *The moment of
truth of course has not yet arrived, but at least the discussion went
better than I could have hoped. *For one, when I started thinking
about the nitty gritty, I realized I couldn't get either of our hopes
too pinned on her being there (it's a hospital birth, and what if
things go quickly in the middle of the night?). *I've told her I may
be hooting and hollering, it kind of hurts, there may be blood, the
baby comes out goopy, but all of that's OK. *She doesn't seem to be in
the least phased by any of it. *She knows that mommy will be busy
getting the baby born, and daddy will be busy taking care of mommy, so
she asks grandma for anything she needs. *And of course if she starts
to get freaked out, she and my mom go play somewhere else in the
hospital where she spent 3 years visiting me on call nights during my
residency.

I don't see the point of needlessly exposing children to stressful
situations where their parents are suffering. Heck, I don't see why
fathers need to be in the delivery room. It wasn't that long ago that
they usually were not. You can say a little kid is choosing to be
there, but I would not let a 4yo choose to see a movie with blood and
gore.

"Beliavsky" wrote in message
...
I don't see the point of needlessly exposing children to stressful
situations where their parents are suffering. Heck, I don't see why
fathers need to be in the delivery room. It wasn't that long ago that
they usually were not. You can say a little kid is choosing to be
there, but I would not let a 4yo choose to see a movie with blood and
gore.

I have heard grown men complain of being upset or sick from witnessing the
birthing process, so I think some kids can be even more distressed about it,
considering they understand even less about what is happening.

If a child enjoys it, it can be a memorable learning experience.
Personally, I don't see how a 4 yo can enjoy it if Mommy is screaming (I
know not everyone does) and blood is spilling out of her. It can look every
bit like Mommy is dying. I've heard stories where it's worked out. I just
have a hard time imagining it.

If the event feels traumatic to the child, it will also be etched in memory
and be difficult to undo.

toypup wrote:

If a child enjoys it, it can be a memorable learning experience.
Personally, I don't see how a 4 yo can enjoy it if Mommy is screaming (I
know not everyone does) and blood is spilling out of her. It can look
every bit like Mommy is dying. I've heard stories where it's worked
out. I just have a hard time imagining it.

Women choose to birth in very different ways, and encounter
very different circumstances. By definition, anyone considering
having their children at subsequent births have already been through
birth at least once and have some idea how they react personally.
Presumably, if it was a horror show the first time, they wouldn't
be likely to consider it the second. Birth isn't even always
particularly gory. Out of three births that were each quite
different from the others, I had absolutely no screaming and
negligible amounts of blood before or during the birth (some
afterwards with the placenta, of course, but by that time
everyone's paying attention to the baby). And none of these
things are accidents. You can't guarantee that there won't
be anything scary, but then again, you can't guarantee that
at any point in time. There's always the possibility of
your kids witnessing a miscarriage or a premature precipitate
birth or goodness knows what else, unless you send them away
as soon as you know you're pregnant. Similarly, you can't
guarantee nothing will happen during the birth (and it's
foolish not to have a backup plan for children in case that
happens), but there's a lot you can do to lay the groundwork
for a good experience. Fact is, it's hard on kids to bring
a new child into the family, period. When handled well,
their presence at the birth can actually improve the overall
experience for some. It's not right for every mother or every
child, but it certainly isn't something guaranteed to be a
bad thing, either.

It always amazes me that when men are pushed to their
physical and emotional limits, possibly involving significant
injury, we call that sport and charge boatloads for people
(including children) to see it and cheer for it and label it
the American dream. When women face something similar, some
call it child abuse to have the children witness the normal
way children enter the world. Those are some screwed up
priorities, in my book.

Best wishes,
Ericka

Ericka Kammerer wrote:


It always amazes me that when men are pushed to their
physical and emotional limits, possibly involving significant
injury, we call that sport and charge boatloads for people
(including children) to see it and cheer for it and label it
the American dream. When women face something similar, some
call it child abuse to have the children witness the normal
way children enter the world. Those are some screwed up
priorities, in my book.

Best wishes,
Ericka



Birth is a messy medical procedure no matter how much we
women choose to glorify it. My husband was present for both
my births but I suspect he, an engineer, would have been
much less at ease if he didn't have the fetal monitor
display to play with. I watched my daughter give birth and
it was difficult for me to watch, emotionally.

Yes, we watch sports but I've never heard a woman ask to be
present in the OR when her husband has a colonoscopy, his
appendix or gall bladder removed, prostate surgery or even a
knee replacement.

I can't imagine any reaction but trauma for a child watching
her mother give birth.

gloria p

"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
. ..
It always amazes me that when men are pushed to their
physical and emotional limits, possibly involving significant
injury, we call that sport and charge boatloads for people
(including children) to see it and cheer for it and label it
the American dream. When women face something similar, some
call it child abuse to have the children witness the normal
way children enter the world. Those are some screwed up
priorities, in my book.

I never said it is child abuse. It just occurs to me that if it can be
traumatic for a grown man, it can be traumatic to a young child who doesn't
quite comprehend everything that is going on. Yes, it could be that it is
not a traumatic but a very enriching experience; but if it is a traumatic
experience, that experience cannot be erased.

As for sports that push med to their physical and emotional limits, I
personally cannot stand them and would not pay a penny for the experience.
You couldn't drag me there. However, you don't normally see people in
sports who look like they are about to die. If you are talking boxing or
other such violent sport, I think they ought to be banned, but then that is
a whole other thread. If it is a sport that has a high rate of gory
injuries, I wouldn't take my kids to those.

Maybe someone else may call sports the American dream, but I don't. I
wouldn't compare giving birth to a sport, either. It isn't a sport and
doesn't need to be witnessed as a sport. It is one thing to have it
witnessed unplanned, but planning for the kids to be there is another matter
and I am just giving my two cents on that. Yes, it can be fulfilling; but
if it is traumatic, then what?

toypup wrote:


"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
. ..
It always amazes me that when men are pushed to their
physical and emotional limits, possibly involving significant
injury, we call that sport and charge boatloads for people
(including children) to see it and cheer for it and label it
the American dream. When women face something similar, some
call it child abuse to have the children witness the normal
way children enter the world. Those are some screwed up
priorities, in my book.

I never said it is child abuse.

I know you didn't--but others have.

It just occurs to me that if it can be
traumatic for a grown man, it can be traumatic to a young child who
doesn't quite comprehend everything that is going on. Yes, it could be
that it is not a traumatic but a very enriching experience; but if it is
a traumatic experience, that experience cannot be erased.

But it's very rare that the situation flips instantaneously
from fine to traumatic. There's usually plenty of warning for
the responsible adult to take the child off somewhere else. Also,
people self-select into this situation. The parent of a child
likely to struggle with a normal birth isn't likely to look into
this option.

Maybe someone else may call sports the American dream, but I don't. I
wouldn't compare giving birth to a sport, either. It isn't a sport and
doesn't need to be witnessed as a sport. It is one thing to have it
witnessed unplanned, but planning for the kids to be there is another
matter and I am just giving my two cents on that. Yes, it can be
fulfilling; but if it is traumatic, then what?

A well prepared child is unlikely to find a normal
birth traumatic. If he is likely to find it traumatic, then
you'll likely find out during the process of preparation. If
something about the birth becomes abnormal, it typically does
so with plenty of time to remove the child (which is why you
have an adult detailed solely to the child's care and comfort).
Yes, it's possible that things will happen too quickly, but
that's very rare--just as with other rare events that are
always a possibility in our lives that we hope not to have to
deal with.
I'm not for a minute suggesting that you or any other
individual should choose this option. I'm simply saying that
with proper planning the risk of trauma is very small--and
much of it is in the attitude of the people involved, which
is something that you're in control of (or at least have
enough awareness of to account for).

Best wishes,
Ericka