LETTERS

In the February issue of What She Wants, Janna Dieckmann discussed the merits and some of the possible 'consequences she found in current techniques and theories of childbirth. She was most concerned over the emphasis on the infant born by the Leboyer method. This method, in her opinion, ignored the mother and her possible reactions to, or discomforts with, this strange way of handling childbirth.

She went on to comment that now that it is fashionable to allow the father to play an active role in the delivery room-from coach to even assisting in delivery-and, in some rare instances to allow relatives and children to witness the birth, there is a great danger that the focus on the woman in childbirth may become obscured.

While I can, if 1 try very hard, muster up, some sympathy for this view, it seems to me that, if anything, the presence of the father or a friend in the delivery room, the emphasis on the family or close friends of the mother and the realization that the environment in which the baby is born is crucial to the well-being of the mother and baby, rather than being something to worry about or guard against, is something we should do all we can to encourage.

Just the presence of other people besides (or instead of) the anesthesiologist, the nurses, and the doctor (I should say THE DOCTOR) is a step toward less controlled, less authoritarian delivery. It is a move away from the idea of the mother as a mere receptacle in which a small creature incapable of seeing, feeling, sensing anything is housed.

Women in general, women in the United States specifically, especially if they are pregnant (European women are generally delivered by midwives rather than physicians), are the most victimized of any patients who seek a doctor's care.

Pregnancy in this country is generally thought of as a disease. A woman's pregnancy is referred to as a period of confinement; she is encouraged to be overwhelmed by the intolerable pain of childbirth (both by the medical system and her cultural background); after anesthesia, she undergoes an "operation” in which a perfectly normal vaginal delivery is treated as major surgery. The drugs which she is given during labor and delivery cause her to spend the first 10 to 12 hours of her baby's life flat on her back-recovering. If she should so much as lift her head, much less sit up to hold and nurse her baby, she is guaranteed a severe headache which can last for days. After a few days of recuperation, she is allowed to leave the hospital, but only with the warning to take it easy. Essentially she is an invalid for the first few weeks after her baby's birth.

The picture is clear-the woman is a victim of our entire health care system as well as of our society in general. I haven't even mentioned the baby who, after the traumatic experience of birth, is whisked off to the nursery after a series of impersonally administered tests, to be bottlefed and changed by people other than its mother. After ten or more hours, the baby is given briefly to the mother on a specific schedule, convenient perhaps for the hospital staff, but certainly not convenient for the mother or her child.

The "new" developments in childbirth, "natural" childbirth, Lamaze, Leboyer, rooming in, bonding, etc., are certainly a far cry from a pleasant, comfortable home-like experience for all those concerned. The direction, however, is encouraging. To have a husband or friend with you, to have your friends, relatives and/or children nearby, is a step toward a relaxed, intimate, satisfying experience for all those present. To be able to hold, fondle, talk to, love your baby immediately after its birth is to experience something very special and something which is unfortunately rare in this day of sanitized, anesthetized, hospitalized child-removal.

There have been many studies done showing a definite relationship between the first few hours after

Page 2/What She Wants/March, 1979

child's birth and its subsequent development months and even years later. People such as Betsy Lozoff at University Hospitals, John Kennell and Marshall Klaus have been able to document considerable disparities in development between that child allowed to be held, nursed, talked to, immediately after birth, and the child who is isolated from those experiences. One study showed that as late as three years after the children were born, there were differences to be found in the tone, manner and type of language a mother used in communicating with her child. The mothers and children who were "bonded" spoke to each other in longer sentences using more adjectives and descriptive phrases, there were fewer commands spoken by the mothers and more demonstrative displays of affection in contrast to those who had been separated at birth.

Considering the high marks infants born by the Leboyer method seem to be making, I see those marks coming not from a process which takes place with the mother as a negligible part of a technique, but rather with the mother as the reason for her infant's success. By virtue of what is called scientific

The following letter was written on February 1, 1979 to Eleanor Smeal, President of the National Organization for Women, by the officers of the Youngstown Chapter of NOW:

As a chapter we have been increasingly disenchanted with National since 1976, when the expectation of more radical action by NOW which inspired the Philadelphia Convention fizzled into, again, mainstream politics. We were not pleased with National's decision to devote its time and money almost solely to the ERA and we svnracoad air minnisñman about ERA and position that w time we have n any extent. N D.C. Conventi

We are outri women's pape ward Kennedy Washington C country represe tion than this criminal code jeopardize dem hard to win. I what men do to refer you to Ma is amazing to could, first of feminist conve that you could

Our second issue of What Harris expressi of the release Harris says, th as an organizat

Last month's cerning the intr may have overl

early testing for

care.

There are sut spotty or non-c pregnancy. On period and a ne variety of medi requiring furth It's very easy to for a check-up

at home. You r

ways of signalli

method, but which is, in fact, the method used by most mammals, a mother is finally given the right to establish an important, irreplaceable bond between herself and her child, a bond which will only become stronger and thicker as she and her child create an environment together.

-Joy Marshall

[Ed. note: In her article, "Mother in the Dark, Too," Janna Dieckmann does not criticize the Leboyer method of childbirth per se. She specifically questions the attitude of Leboyer as reflected in the way he gathers his data for the purpose of research. Most women Involved in a Leboyer birth have prepared themselves for it after choosing this method and reading material about it. The mothers involved in the study reported not only received no preparation for a Leboyer birth, but were also denied any right to choose whether they would prefer this method. It is difficult to Imagine that the potential value of a Leboyer birth could be realized if the mothers did not understand why, how, and what would happen to them.]

image that we feel NOW should be working hard to change, not substantiate. We realize that the statement on Patricia Hearst was made by the local Los Angeles chapter, but until we and the women's media receive a dissenting opinion from National, we must assume this position is sanctioned by you and the Board. We wonder how much influence NOW had in President Carter's recent decision to pardon Hearst. The Youngstown Chapter will be voting at our February meeting whether or not to hold our Na-

*IOW

time

con-

that

:ssed

;ht it

that

el to

ning

Na-

but

and

ther

1 WC

o an

Buse

jod,

dent

tary

urer

ve a

ould

OUS.

with

n or

'cat-

step

elay

>hio

'ade

114