<link>

Those of you who've been pregnant -- what did the doctors and pregnancy books warn you about? (i.e., things you shouldn't eat, drink, or do for fear of miscarriage, premature birth, etc.) I'm thinking of writing a longer piece on this. I'm curious about whether the docs and/or books tend to overwarn or underwarn.

I'm currently pregnant, and while my doctor doesn't do this, books and websites definitely overwarn. Don't drink alcohol, don't eat unpasteurized cheese, don't eat deli meat, don't eat raw or rare meat of fish, don't lie on your back, don't let your heart rate get above 140 while exercising, take prenatal vitamins and fish oil, no secondary smoke, don't shine a bright light onto your belly, don't take hot baths, stay off your feet, get on your feet, don't exercise when you're tired, exercising when you're tired helps, don't take any drug except tylenol and benadryl, don't change cat litter. I think it's overwarning not because one should do these things, but because they don't tell you what the real risks are associated with any of these activities -- they just tell you not to do them. It's very easy if you slip up and eat bleu cheese to freak out. I've worried I've damaged my baby at least 50 times during the pregnancy. Another things is epidurals. Many books tell you that you should try for natural (i.e. drug-free) childbirth (it's ideal, they say) but don't be afraid to ask for drugs if you need them. I've tried to find an argument for even the preference for natural birth, and there's very little evidence about any harm to mother or baby. So why warn people against epidurals? I'd love it if you wrote about it -- it's such a loaded topic, and everyone comes at it with an agenda.

I am currently pregnant (about to enter month 5), and the list can be downright scary:

Stay away from cat litter, don't sleep on your back, don't drink too much coffee, don't eat ANY rare meat of any kind, don't work in the garden, don't drink fresh apple cider, don't eat lunchmeat or other processed meats unless they've been thoroughly heated, don't eat sushi, don't eat certain TYPES of fish (cooked) due to mercury, don't touch pets that have been outside, don't eat unpasteurized cheese, don't use certain face creams or lotions (due to retinols and other chemicals), don't eat eggs that are runny, don't take any medications except for Tylenol for anything, don't not exercise, don't exercise too much or too hard, don't gain too much weight, don't gain too little weight, don't eat too many processed foods, be careful when eating raw vegetables, etc., etc....but most importantly, don't get stressed out!

What's also difficult is how different doctors/medical experts will sometimes tell a person different things based on what can seem to be personal opinion, not medical fact...for example, the differing views on alcohol during pregnancy. The FDA says you should never have alcohol during pregnancy due to risks of fetal alcohol syndrome. As a test, I asked 3 different doctors in my medical facility about drinking during pregnancy (specifically, can I drink a glass of wine?), and the answers were: (a) no, absolutely not, never; (b) sure! Just keep it to a glass or two a week, the FDA is overstating the case for banning alcohol during pregnancy - doctors used to prescribe a drink a day for health; and (c) "a sip of champagne at a toast for a wedding MIGHT be OK, but really, don't go down that road." If one looks on the web, it seems the only country who uses this blanket ban is the USA; the UK and Europe is a little looser (with limitations on alcohol, of course; I don't mean to say all pregnant woment should drink all they want, all the time). It can get quite confusing, especially when what you hear can depend on the individual you speak to.

Finally, it's been fascinating and a bit frustrating to hear all the dire warnings but then, when asking about them, to be told to "just relax". RELAX?! How??? There are so many cautions out there that it's surprising anyone over the millenia ever reproduced, if everything is so potentially dangerous!

It is easy enough to get caught up in the fear & hysteria when pregnant. My wife got a few copies of a magazine during her first pregancy (name escapes me) the damn thing was a monthly littany of all the horrible things that can go wrong. She stopped reading them.

I personally feel that the fear mongering in pregancy is simply the extreme place on the fear & powerlessness spectrum that has permeated everything. From natural disasters to terrorism to lead paint in toys to bird flu to ..... if you enter pregancy susceptible to this stuff, you can get carried away for sure. Don't watch Fox news when you are pregnant or have a newborn - the daily parade of abducted children and crack babies will turn you into a sobbing mess (and that's the fathers).

Add to this recipe the Doctors, who have institutional incentives to warn you of everything and test everything and preempt every convceivable adverse outcome no matter how remote.

Add to this nothers who have become alienated from their bodies and are taught to view theirs and babies' bodies as inherently flawed (see your own story about pain killer overuse, not to mention antidepressant overuse and the out of control vaccination industry).

You ought to write about the pregnancy-industrial complex, an industry that views pregnancy as a dangerous disease to be increasingly surgically resolved or at least numbed by the use of pain killers.

The toughest thing is to remember that life can be tough, pregnancy is tough, things hurt sometimes, sometimes you get sick....

Yes mothers, pregnancy and delivery are tough as hell. Blame Darwin. Blame God. Blame men. But for christsakes, don't fight it. I know plenty of moms who perceptibly fight and resent the entire thing. Such a shame.

It is hard to say about the doctors in our own experience because we entered as educated self-advocates and skeptics. We found the docs generally open to us evaluating the risks and making our own judgements and choices, but then, we live in a comparably enlightened place.

I don't think the doctors have to overwarn because most parents have already heard and read plenty of horror stories before they arrive at their second appointment.

We had an ultrasound at one point and the doc said she saw something she didn't like. Probabably nothing, but SHE WANTED TO BE SURE. So we hustled off to the hospital for a high resolution version. Stressful as hell for mom. Expensive for me (insurance doesnt cover the extra tests). What could I do? I sat silently for a moment and decided everything would be fine, and if not. So be it. Everything was fine.

She miscarried once after number one. Miscarriages may be the most common experiences in life that no one ever talks about. There's your life lesson right there - it was not meant to be. Period. Mom grieved as she needed to, but there it is - you are stuck with the mystery. There will be no concrete explanation. Ever. Despite the most advanced medical system in the hystory of the world, we still must accept the risk and pain and unknown possibilities.

One of the most interesting medical tests is the placental "quad screen". A procedure not without risks. But the key questions is, what would you do with the answer? If you were told that the test says "maybe" there's a problem. Then what? Abort on a "maybe" halfway through? No thanks, sometimes ignorance is bliss.

We have been led to believe that we can remove risk from life. When pregnancy comes around, people come face to face with reality. Women, who may have been shielded and relatively pampered up to that point, and subjected to the self-hatred of the beuty-fashion-industry, are evn more susceptible to the shock of a uncertain emotioanlly charged future, carrying every day a growing kicking reminder that they cannot control everyting and eliminate all risks.

This medical industry of ours is a blessing and a curse. We know what it can do at its best. But the costs in overuse, too much information, marginal risk/reward curves, and unrealistic expectations are placing an increasing weight on us all.

Since one is now in Iraq and the other off to her sophomore year at University, I really have to dig hard. Actually, not really, I came from a Medical/Science family. I read William's Obstetrics and Gynecology well before the age of ten and had by then seen every medical anomaly in a jar of formalin.

I had two miscarriages for unknown reasons other than it just happens, prior to my son and really took everyone’s advice and shoved it out through the other side of my head. The only concerns I considered valuable were ones that could be validated via ultrasound and blood work. I still had my glass of wine with dinner, I still rode my horse/bike and worked around the stable and in the lab while hubby was studying for his DVM, I still went to my classes at University, I didn’t participate in recreational drugs and had an average healthy diet with plenty of fresh milk from the cow. I went to Lamaz classes worked with the Le Leche league and considered alternatives to birthing in a hospital. Both children came surprisingly quick, no drugs with hardly any labor and no problems. It was like getting an A on an exam. I breast fed one until two and the last until five. I will agree that some things you do have to pay attention to but so much more is just stuff and nonsense. I actually quit associating with other women who were preggers because of their susceptibility to the stuff and nonsense. Its like dealing with a religious fanatic. In my case it was mind over matter. Freaking out, even over real issues, is bad for you as the mother and the baby. Informed concern is a better option.

.

My parent's generation drank a fair amount during pregancy, smoked a bit, ate TV dinners, and drove around without seatbelts. The population continued to expand regardless.

We took a more conservative path; followed more of the advice available these days, but didn't become obsessive about it.

As for "natural births", the answer is two-fold: the precautionary principle, and faith.

The precautionary principle tells us to challenge the introduction of outside forces into an existing process. That most certainly includes outside chemicals. The question is not: "how much will the introduction of a painkiller to mommy's blood harm the baby?" The correct question is: "why take the risk?" What benefit outwieghs the unknown risk? It's your comfort versus an unknown risk.

Do we know what really happens to the baby when that painkiller slides into your blood during delivery? Really know? No, it is unknowable. They can test direct chemical transference I suppose. But what else happens? What undetectable signals are sent between mommy and baby at that magic moment? Mommy and baby have been attached by a direct live wire cable for nine months, then suddenly, just moments before the connection is naturally severed, you pull the plug. Does the baby "know"? Does it have an effect? There it is heading into the world and it loses its conection. Am I being dramatic? The answer is: we don't know. The precautionary principle tells us, therefore, to proceed with caution.

Allow for magic and mystery in this process. The price is risk. The benefit is joy.

And there is the faith part. Life remains a lottery. Embrace that; don't fight it. Take reasonable precautions, don't do anything overtly stupid, then relax and enjoy the mystery.

Pain may came. Joy may came. Maybe both. The only thing you can control is whether you fight it.

I can't think of another medical procedure where we try to convince people to just live with the pain anymore. I'm not sure why birth should be an exception. Why is it expected that I get novocaine for a tooth-pulling but nothing for a hugely painful experience?

There might be something harmful -- but there really, really doesn't seem to be. Again, I think this is an overwarning case.

i DEFinitely don't want them now. i never liked the idea of the discomfort, the morning sickness, the hemorrhoids. but all these other concerns ratchet it up to a whole new level. i've never been the maternal type but i kept in the back of my head that maybe i would change my mind one day if the right circumstances came around. well, count me out. who needs all this paranoia on top of the discomfort? who needs people telling you what you should and shouldnt do with YOUR body, when it's mostly old wives tales anyhow. (seriously, why should you have to stay away from cat litter? are pregnant women not allowed to own cats?!?!) many of the things that are supposedly on the no-list according to the fray seem to be things that are common sense precautions we should all take. in which case, why aren't we stressing the health of all people instead of putting undue pressure on pregnant women? i.e. the mercury in fish. or lead. i understand the young and old are more susceptible to certain things, but it can't be good for the rest of us either, right? so why not fix the problem instead of making pregnant women have to take "special precautions"?

epicciuto, i love the novocaine analogy. it really irks that so many people want to tell others about how they should deal with the actual birth and birth pains. worry about yourself is what i say. if you think you can handle the pain and you want to go for it just cause or because you're worried about some imagined (and i say this b/c there IS no proof at this point) hurt to your child, then go natural. if someone else doesn't want to, that's on them. we don't need to justify our own actions through the actions of others.

There is a human being on the other end of those pliers.

That is my main complaint with our medical establishment, detached Cartesians that they are, they have reduced our bodies and our mind/body interactions into a clinical detached affiar, to be observed from behind sterile glass, and prodded with this or that device and drug like so many mindless lab rats on dissecting tables.

We have reduced the relationship between mom and baby to a purely clinical one. And come to view the most amazing and magical day in the world to a minefield of fear to be preempted and pain to be avoided.

I suppose that in a world where eastern european nannies are doing a lot of the mothering and mexican maids doing the diapering, in should not bother us that moms are numbed from the waste down and neck up staring on day zero.

I don't mean to be harsh with you. Your choice is your choice. But your framing in evaluating this question strikes me as sadly impersonal, clinical, and based on a premise (or so it sounds from reading) that this little alien inside of mothers is an inconvenience to mitigated unless there is documented proof that it will harm it.

The clinical answer to the epidural question is easy: there is currently no widely accepted proof that numbing your spine harms to baby in any directly traceable physical way, with the exception of the generally known statistical risks to the mother of the procedure itself.

Comforting?

My wife was diagnosed with Celiac disease two years ago, and has followed a gluten-free diet ever since. We're now 4 months pregnant and it's incredibly difficult to find food to meet the nutrient requirements for pregnancy and still have no wheat.

So we try to find whatever conveniences we can get, including dining at local restaurants that offer gluten free food. Problem is, human nature being what it is, just today at the restaurant we often frequent, they screwed up and slipped some wheat into the food. So now we're both anxious that it will screw up the nutrition of the child and prevent absorption of critical nutrients like Folic Acid.

And of course, since celiac disease has only recently become more widely diagnosed, there is precious little information out there to either calm us or scare us about this problem.

My OB is pretty laid back.

She switched me to another antihistamine rather than having me quit cold turkey like the pharmacist suggested. Since I was already on two stomach medicines before getting pregnant, she told me to continue taking them rather than quitting cold turkey like the pharmacist suggested. Taking my medicine was the only way I was going to be able to eat right. As for lunch meat, she said not to eat it every day, since I don't need extra salt and don't eat anything of questionable quality.

Making pregnant women sick and miserable for their entire pregnancies can't be good for the baby. Sleep depravation and bad nutrition are not theraputic. For example, doctors are split on letting pregnant women take Zantac for heartburn. Do you have any idea how common it is for a pregnant woman to spend her last trimester not sleeping and not eating right because of some perfectly treatable heartburn? Stupid!

I really think many people discredity the fact that the human body is capable of withstanding quite a bit of pain without intervention chemically. As with the pain medication thread Mr. Saltan started, it is determining when pain intervention is necessary and when it is not. I live with chronic pain and very rarely take anything stronger than an Ibuprophen. I nearly severed my leg in an accident and continued to walk until I reached help. I still didn't acknowledge the pain until the radiologist started twisting it for the x-rays then I asked for mophine. Medically its called shock but it is still tied into the human pain morphology. Both births and both miscarriages were pain free. Uncomfortable but pain free.

I don't think anyone is asking you to justify your actions for a pain killer when you take one but to actually assess and gauge if you REALLY need it for comfort in child birth. I think we as a thrid to sixth generation of the humanity of morphine in child birth, to readily accept the removal of pain from a process that is essentially natural otherwise.

Regarding "Proof" about the harmeful affects of Anesthsia on the fetus during the birht process - I suggest you scour the AJObGyn, Lancet and JAMA for tons of peer reviewd published papers on the topic. You may find it quite eye opening. Especially in such a litigenous and causality enviroment.

Actually, no one is telling women what to do, except the medical and pharmaceutical industries.

In an effort to offset that pressure, some people try and offer women alternate ways to think about what to do.

The standard being applied in the thread above regarding the question of taking an epidural appeared to be based solely on some level of research into scientifically proven possible harmful side effects. A matter that the "conventional wisdom" has allegedly been determined by the people who do these procedures is that they are not all that risky.

It is my judgment that this standard for making such an important decision - the lack of popularly acknowledged existence of scientific proof of harm -- is too low. I believe that it is, in fact, a cop out. But one that is easy to take in this environment of professional pressure to intervene chemically and surgically.

We should hold childbirth to the highest standard of caution in terms of interventions. Which means not settling for what may be scientifically proven at any point in time as determined by informal research.

In the end, it's the mother's decision. But just remember, what is proven today, does not always stay proven. The one thing that has not changed is that women have had babies for generations and generations, enduring the pain, and increasing the population despite it all.

There was a time when seeing a doctor for childbirth actually increased the risk of infant/maternal mortality. Of course, that was the time back when doctors insisted that hand washing was unnecessary. Back in that era, midwives had a better track record than doctors. So the doctors, of course, tried to get midwifery outlawed. Look it up.

In terms of what is "proven." Think about these concepts: it was less than thirty years ago that a cigarette maker could stand up before Congress and swear that smoking was not "proven" to be harmful. It was only two years ago that the President of the United States denied the proof of global warming. Even as I write this, there are thousands of chemicals pumped into our environment that are not proven to be carcinogenic. But I would rather not ingest them all the same.

Disclaimer: I have no kids. The Boy and I decided long ago that it wasn't our path to take, and now the decision is out of our hands.

That being said, I am now the "cool aunt" of a five month old girl. Her mother had panic attacks throughout the entire pregnancy about every stupid new warning to come along. One free magazine that one sees in doctor's offices advised that pregnant women not drive cars after the start of the third trimester and never eat packaged cereals because they might contain "bug parts".

The truth is, our mothers heeded none of these warnings, indeed, they never even knew about them. They lived their lives as normally as they could throughout their pregnancies, recovered, and carried on as usual. I don't know a lot of people that were hideously deformed or became axe murderers because their moms had a craving for rare filet while they were pregnant.

To be fair, my generation was the one afflicted by Thalidomide and there were a few kids in my school that showed the classic birth defects, but not many. We were lucky, Canada was one of the first countries to ban the drug. Now, no one is even familiar with the name of that drug.All that aside, with all of the nonsense and mythology surrounding pregnancy at this time, one is forced to wonder how humanity has made it this far at all.

Go ahead and write the article. It would be a lot of fun to do a decade by decade survey of warnings and strictures placed on pregnant women in the 20th century.

(For example, Milk Stout, a lower alcohol beer, was sold to pregnant women after the WW1 as a valuable source of B vitamins in a time of scarcity....)

Having 2 kids in the past 3 years, I have experienced my share of medically induced moments of panic. One came right at the birth of my first when the monitor indicated the baby's heart was depressed. I was delivering at a hospital, though with a midwife. The midwife was not "qualified" to use forceps or a vacuum suction device, so she called for the ob on the floor when the monitor began beeping and indicating our baby was in distress. In those few minutes before the ob arrived on the scened, I managed to deliver my daughter - thankfully. No one stopped to think that perhaps the machine monitoring the baby's heart may have temporarily lost the signal since my baby was passing thru the birth canal. Everyone in the room immediately went to panic mode. Was this because they feared something might be going wrong with my baby or because they feared a lawsuit if something were to go wrong. Our baby was in perfect health. Was this medical intervention (the heart monitor) necessary for us - nope. Did we have a choice about its use? It didn't seem as if we did at the time. I think the scariest part is putting yourself and your baby at the mercy of the medical establishment during a time when you are very vulnerable and have very little time to make decisions.

Women die every day in every part of the world during childbirth, leading cause of death of women in the birthing age range - so pregnancy is no trival matter. But in this country, I think the books and docs warn you about all the wrong things. You spend so much time worrying during your pregnancy about all these inconsequential things (deli meat, soft cheese, mercury in fish, cat litter) time you should spend sleeping, reading and going out with friends (all things that are in woefully short supply once the babe arrives).