Holy Hormones Journal: This is what medicalization is – other than in a ‘life-saving’ situation, of course. When we interfere with the natural process of birth – including using synthetic hormones to induce labor – we disrupt the body’s natural process. C-sections prevent the last vaginal immune boost a baby needs. Both mother and child’s hormones are become disrupted and traumatized.
Do C-sections increase the risk of autism? What kind of trauma does an infant go through?
I posted another article not too long ago about the rise in autoimmune disorders and how the maternal body is now rejecting the fetal body – resulting in an emergency C-section.
When women lose the ability go have and enjoy (i.e., not be traumatized) a natural birth – we lose our greatest gift of all. Humankind will suffer an even greater loss as we move into cloning and designer babies.
Creating designer babies who are free from disease and super athletic or smart may finally be around the corner.
But American society hasn’t fully thought out the ethical implications for the future of baby making or policies to regulate these techniques, an ethicist argues in an article published today (March 13) in the journal Science.
“We’re on the cusp of having much more information, and the appearance of having much greater discretion, in choosing the traits of our children,” said article author Thomas H. Murray, a bioethicist at the Hastings Center, a nonprofit research center in Garrison, N.Y. People also need to think about what parents and doctors will do with the technology, he said. “What use will they make of it, and should there be limits?” ~The Ethics Of ‘Designer Babies’
Women risk losing ability to give birth naturally
A leading obstetrician has claimed women are at risk of being unable to give birth naturally in the future
By Rozina Sabur
12:13PM BST 24 May 2015
French doctor Michel Odent has suggested women risk being unable to give birth naturally or even breastfeed their babies in the future because of modern aids.
The 84-year-old, who pioneered the use of birthing pools in hospitals, has argued in his new book Do We Need Midwives? that childbirth has become medicalised to the extent that women are at risk of losing their ability to give birth unaided.
Mr Odent pointed to evidence that women are taking longer in labour than 50 years ago, with huge numbers of pregnant women provided with drugs and surgery in labour.
The medic cited research showing that women giving birth between 2002 and 2008 took two and a half hours longer in the first stage of labour than those who gave birth between 1959 and 1966.
“To me it demonstrates the obvious – that women are losing the capacity to give birth,” he said. “That is the primary phenomenon . . . the number of women who give birth to babies naturally is becoming insignificant.”
Odent is critical of the rise in caesarean sections. In England, 166,081 births – more than a quarter – were by caesarean section between 2013 and 2014, a slight increase on the previous year.
Odent has also criticised the use of drips of synthetic oxytocin on women in labour. He suggested that it was reducing women’s ability to produce the hormone naturally.
The oxytocin hormone initiates labour and plays a crucial role in breastfeeding. But evolution will erase physiological functions that are underused, said Odent, warning that future generations of women may not produce it.
“I believe that the human oxytocin system – oxytocin being the hormone of love, fundamental to birth and bonding, even in adulthood – is growing weaker. The future of the human capacity to give birth is at risk,” he said in a contribution to Antonella Gambotto-Burk’s new book, Mama: Love, Motherhood and Revolution.