No! Both kids were C-sections. First one was horrible. Put on pit, labored all day. Pushed for 6 1/2 hours, baby was in major distress. Emergency C-section. DH said he thought I was going to die. He said there was blood dripping off the table, the doctor and nurses were standing in a puddle of blood. I started going into shock. Not pretty. Even recovery was long and painful.

Second baby was a scheduled C-section. No labor, no distress, no blood bath. Much easier and quicker recovery.

I would say no, for me it would have been too much trying to watch the kids and give birth! My husband was not even at the hospital for any of the four births. When my youngest daughter was ready to deliver, my son in law called and said she wanted me there. I had not planned on it as nothing was said, so I was taken to the hospital and was there when Alyssa was delivered. There was nothing bad about it, I saw nothing but the baby being held up and whatever they do to babies and the Mother, but there was no blood or anything that I saw. In the hospital the labor, delivery and recovery were all in the same room and it was a nice sized room. Meals could be had in the room too, just order and pay $5 for the meal. I did do that too. However I would not want my children there.

Sue

I expected more "no" answers, but didn't expect quite so much negativity. This is not a complaint. It sounds like many of you had unpleasant birth experiences--or, if you haven't actually given birth, you have a perception that childbirth is scary and traumatic. If I'm right, I'm sorry that's the case. The births of my children were the happiest events of my life.

My daughters were well prepared for sharing the experience. Even the younger one--two months shy of three years old--had seen birth films and a slew of birth pictures, including her own, which were used as a slide presentation teaching aid in local childbirth classes. In that delivery, I lifted my baby out myself at the suggestion of the nurse. That was a peak experience for sure.

I had long labors, and of course the contractions were painful, but I was well trained in Lamaze techniques and was fairly certain I wouldn't scream, cry, or be out of control in front of my daughters. We were not in a delivery room, nor even a hospital room like the one in which my second baby was born. We were in a bedroom in my doctor's office suite. My doctor, a wonderful man, was a pioneer in family-centered childbirth.

One of my friends was supposed to be present to take charge of the girls, but my labor was so long (28 hours) that she ended up going home to get some sleep, and when she arrived back I was in the shower and my husband was rocking the baby.

The experience certainly didn't scar my daughters for life--or even for a minute. I have pictures of them peering over my knee, watching their brother come into the world. Among the many memories I'll carry with me forever is the heart-melting image of my younger little girl reaching out to gently touch "him's little face."

Even with a history of normal and easy deliveries, things can and do go wrong. My third baby should have been my fastest and easiest delivery. She wasn't. My water broke and then I didn't go into labor. After several hours, I was given Pictocin to get the contractions started. Her heart rate kept dropping. Her head was positioned wrong. She had to be pulled out with the vacuum. My daughter had a ginormous bruise on her head when she came out. I was placed on oxygen and the anesthesiologist was called back into the room because we almost ended up with an emergency c-section. It was hard enough for us to be there and watch.

Children who are present at the birth are generally well prepared for the experience. They aren't just brought in without forethought. Also families I've known who have children present plan for the worst case scenario ahead of time. There is always an adult standing by to remove the older child or children and care for them if things get dodgy.

Childbirth is not a medical procedure. It is no more a medical procedure than the means by the child came to be. It only becomes that if and when complications occur. A lot of those complications could be avoided if there wasn't so much medical intervention in the first place. Too many unnecessary cesareans, to many induced labors, to many gadgets being used in hospitals for low risk births. Stressing our mothers to be with dire warnings about their weight, too low. too high, too slow too, fast the babes weight, too much morning sickness, not having morning sickness, their diet, their activity on and on. Then mothers are bullied into setting a date for the induction using additional fear mongering. At least now they (at least the good honest ones) are starting to step away from that due to the connection found with early induction and cesarean. No you don't need a fetal monitor on every mother, and you don't need to freak out about the size of the infant unless other factors are present. Nature does a wonderful job on its own if we allow it.

Seems I was typing while Allisande was posting. I wholeheartedly concur with everything she said.

And Alisande wholeheartedly concurs with everything Watchmelol said. :-)

Yes, normal childbirth is not a medical procedure! C-sections are, of course, but I wouldn't have included my children in a C-section. I have more to add, but need to take a break from looking at the monitor right now.

Whether one considers birth a "medical" procedure or not, it is still a potentially fatal process, so I'm not sure I'd want children around to witness or be frightened by when/if things go badly.

Did you look at the maternal mortality rates of other countries, Annie? The U.S. numbers are way higher than many, including Canada, Singapore, Kuwait, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and most (perhaps all) of Europe. America's numbers are shamefully high (newborn deaths too), thanks in large part to the OB medical profession trying its best to turn childbirth into a medical procedure.

Many of us fought--hard--in the 1970s to restore childbirth to the natural process it should be. We didn't want the "knock 'em out and drag 'em out" deliveries that were standard when I was born. We didn't want our babies whisked away to be dumped upside down in an isolette immediately after they were born. We didn't want our memories erased with scopolamine or some other drug. We didn't want to be in an altered state; we wanted to be awake and aware.

And what a fight it was. In the end hospitals' bottom lines were the deciding factor. If couples were going elsewhere to have their babies, a hospital had to change its birth practices to lure them back. But some problems remain. Watchmelol and I were given Pitocin to speed up labor with our first births. The contractions caused by this drug are brutal, but it's still used routinely. C-sections are still performed unnecessarily. And the list goes on.

This was my doctor, a truly remarkable man. After a late retirement he spent several years in Pakistan helping refugee mothers from Afghanistan.

About Dr. Hazlett

I wouldn't disagree that there are ways to make childbirth more natural and comfortable and I think midwives are wonderful.

However, I would never do what our neighbor did...she chose to have her daughter at home. Thank goodness it all worked out well. However she lives at least a 25 min drive from the nearest hospital and 10 min away from an ambulance. Had something gone wrong and she started hemorrhaging, her risks of not surviving would've gone up dramatically.

A gal I know recently had a baby and all went well until the baby aspirated meconium, turned blue, and required immediate suctioning and ended up spending several days in the NICU until she was able to breathe unassisted.

I think this is the case of where usually nothing goes wrong, but if it does, you want to have the help you need nearby to ensure a positive outcome for Mom and baby. So if not in the hospital, then certainly very near one.

And to get back to your original question, if there is an emergency, I wouldn't want to expose children to the confusion and trauma, or have them in the way, need tending, and be a distracting factor when all else is breaking loose. Clearly you disagree, and I'm glad that it worked out well for you and your family. But you asked, so I answered.

While I agree that childbirth is not a medical procedure, it can become one. The baby can die. The mother can die. What's the point of having a child witness Mama struggle with pain in even an uncomplicated birth? What difference if a child meets Baby minutes after the birth rather than as it emerges?

The 'old fashioned way' isn't always 'better'. Most of our ancestors lived in a single space -- one family or several -- where witnessing the 'making' and the 'birthing' were unavoidable. As soon as we could, we progressed from living in such close quarters.

I have no objection to allowing a child to watch a film of *someone else* giving birth, with Mama present to answer questions.

Although I understand what you are saying Alisande.

I still don't understand the 'why' of having a young child witness a birth.

Ask any adult if they think they missed something by not being present at the birth of a sibling and I bet you will receive a high amount of 'heck no' answers.

maybe a question for another thread? :)

I was 16 or 17 when I happened across a copy of Childbirth Without Fear. I was so impressed I decided then and there to do everything in my power to experience childbirth my way when the time came. It was almost 8 years when I had DD in 1976, Yes it was a fight. I was fortunate to find a great doctor who supported me and respected my desires. What I found was hospital nurses who weren't on board. They acted like I'd grown a 3rd head because I opted for a pressure episiotomy. Ended up not needing one. That was the plan. It was the only way to prevent the routine cut at the time. One kept trying to push drugs on me, another had to stopped by my doctor from giving me a shot of delestrogen (thought at the time to help the uterus contract and dry up milk) even though I had stated I was going to breastfeed. I r Not "try" to breastfeed, was going to. I remember him barking at her. Don't, she's breastfeeding! Two years later it was bit easier but I did have to yell at one nurse who tried to give my son a bottle of water. I used no supplements no bottles at all. Breast to cup. It was a time where we were still being made to feel like we were odd for not partaking of the "miracles of modern medicine". Later it was a crazy pediatrician I had to drop. Every visit it was "she's doing so well, add cereal". I would remind him I was breastfeeding. Good job, "add fruit". I'm breast feeding. "time to add veggies". I'm breastfeeding. Sigh. Then there was the advice to stop breastfeeding when I got milk fever. That side of my body looked twice as big as the other. I spent 24 hours vomiting into a bucket, burning within delirium but I followed the advice I'd read in Breastfeeding Your Baby or a Mother's Guide To Breastfeeding before hand so I didn't listen to the "expert" advice that would have probably ended my breastfeeding days with DD. Lactation specialists were rare and I had no family support in my decision other than DH so those books were my bibles. LOL Just kept crying out DH to help my DD latch on to the swollen breast. And bring the bucket back. LOL Babe and I pulled through just fine.

Just recalled something else. The whispers about me being "the rooming in mother". That and going home the next morning with DD and that same evening with DS.

One thing DD got was 100% support for her decision to breastfeed. Her DD did the breast crawl right out of the womb. Just beautiful.

Her DD asked to be at the birth. She allowed it. Why not is the real question. The child was prepared and she wanted to be there.

We don't call it pain. We call it labor. The child would be told there would be blood, smells and mommy would be making strange sounds but it was the process of getting the baby out, not pain. There is also the option of having the child present for the actual birth but not the labor.

Alisande, Dr. Hazlett sounds like he was such a wonderful man! As I mentioned above, my own birth experiences weren't suitable situations. But if a sibling truly expresses a desire to see the new baby's birth, and is old enough to understand what the birth process entails, there's no reason they should be denied, if their parents and doctor are comfortable with their presence.

My mother was the 2nd youngest in a family of 11 children. Her 5 older sisters and her 7 year old brother wanted to see her birth, which was at home. Her 3 year old brother was too young and her 9 and 10 year old brothers had no interest, so they did not witness her birth. My mother was 6 years older than her only younger sibling, and says watching his birth was thrilling for her, as she'd seen their dog give birth, but had never seen 'a real baby be born!'

Of course children brought in for a birth need to understand that their mother might get really red in the face and sweaty and be making painful grunts or moans, but that isn't abnormal and will end when the baby is born. They need to know that they might see blood, and should not come in if that will upset them. The child should be told that sometimes the doctor has to spend extra time helping the baby come out, so someone might have to go wait outside the room with them, but Daddy will bring them back in as soon as the baby is out and ready to meet everyone.

If a child is not persuaded, but expresses a strong interest and is well aware of what Mom might sound/look like, (and that they may not be able to stay the whole time) I think it can be a wonderful bonding experience for a family to share!

Edited to add that although I'd happily allow siblings to view a birth (in the situations I described) I personally feel childbirth should take place at a hospital, as even minutes can make the difference, in an unforeseen medical emergency. Our parents might not have had the option of a nearby hospital, but that isn't usually a problem for most subsequent generations.

That's the first time I ever heard of labor not being pain...

Annie, Look at it this way. When you call it pain you make it medical. You get through hard labor by encouragement from those around you.

Not helpful: Are you in pain? I'm sorry you are in pain. Do you want something for the pain? It won't hurt much longer. Does it hurt bad? I hate seeing you like this. I wish I could take away your pain.

Helpful: You're having a hard labor but you are doing great. Do want more pressure on your back? Would you,like to change position? Do you want some ice or a washcloth. You're in transition now. The hard part is almost over. Great job. Soon you will have your baby in your arms and the labor and hard work will be behind you.

Now which is better? Which is emotionally uplifting versus negativity laced with hopelessness?

"Her DD asked to be at the birth. She allowed it. Why not is the real question. The child was prepared and she wanted to be there."

I understand this, and do not have a problem with her decision.

The question of this thread is " would you let your children watch you give birth". I am asking for what reason do you let a small child watch.

Does a child who watch their mother give birth have a healthier attitude towards the birth process?

Is there more love towards a sibling if their birth was seen by the older sib?

Do you let them watch the birth so they can always say that they were there when their sibling was born?

is it a photo opt?

I will go on the record to say that I also don't 'get' having in-laws or other adults in the birthing room either. Fine if a husband wants to be there, but I do not think there is less of a bond between the newborn and other relatives because they are not there to watch the birth.

..and Labor hurts for most people. Sure the pain is worth it, but there is pain.

If anyone would be with me for childbirth, I'd want them there with the thought that they'd be there as comfort factor. That precludes a dependent child. Besides, even if one has always given birth easily, it doesn't guarantee the one you bring your earlier kids in on will follow the same course. (Moot for me anyway.)

If they want to know what birth is like, I'm sure I could find them videos.

Watchmel you can call it labor and you can call it pain. I'm not sure a small child will distinguish the difference, if I can't, especially in an average birthing situation.

This thread has been a trip down memory lane, recalling many thoughts and points of view we heard some decades ago when we were in our child-production years. A flashback to the many sincerely held but what we felt to be unsupported and even dangerous points of view of skeptics of modern childbirth practices. Yes, a few comments even brought back some face palm moments.

Elmer -- You posted a beautiful note some time ago about not wanting children until you wife 'convinced' you -- and how glad you are that she did.

Yes, I'm touched that you would remember something like that. It's true, they're a highlight of our lives. We have great relationships with them and they with one another. We (and they) have been very fortunate but we all work at maintaining things on the best of terms.

You may not have understood what I said just above. A face palm moment is a reaction to hearing or seeing something incredulous or astonishing. A photo like this captures my thoughts about many opinions and practices I've heard from others on matters relating to child birth:

No, childbirth is not a medical procedure, but if it turns to that, I for one, was eternally grateful that I was in the hospital and was helped. My son and I would have died. He was stuck! He was not coming out naturally, no matter how long or hard I pushed.

I also think many doctor's are quick to give meds and do C-sections as a result of so many lawsuits. If anything happens to a mother and/or child the doctor will be sued. Someone has to pay, someone has to be responsible.

Alisande, re infant mortality: "thanks in large part to the OB medical profession trying its best to turn childbirth into a medical procedure."

The data would suggest otherwise. The high US infant mortality rate is highest among the poor and the higher death rate occurs after the child leaves the hospital, not during the hospital stay. See "Why American Babies Die".

...much of the high U.S. rate can be attributed to babies who die months after they leave the hospital. When the researchers broke the statistics down by age, they discovered that neonatal deaths were actually less frequent in the U.S. than in Austria and Finland. (“Neonatal” refers to infants up to a month old, while “postneonatal” includes those between one month and one year.) In other words, American babies are mostly fine while they’re in the hospital and during their first days at home—but over time, that changes.

Oh my, I missed those comments, a gross misinterpretation of the data. Thanks Annie. Alisande, you're such a careful and thoughtful person but you sometimes want to hitch your wagon to the wrong horses.

Thank you, Alisande, watchmelol, and many others, for paving the way
for my children's much more natural births in 1984-1990 (except for an
emergency C-section that was necessary to save my life, but I
won't go into details). Lamaze classes prepared us ahead of time, and I
was given many more choices--extra support people,
rooming-in, and sibling visits were taken for granted. A lactation
consultant was on staff, and parenting classes were available after we
came home. We were moved to a different room with the first birth--the delivery room was still fairly 'clinical' in those days, but by the time
the last one was born, we stayed in the same room the whole time.

maddielee,
I enjoyed being with my daughter for her first labor, but I was there
for her, not necessarily to see the baby born, and I'm happy I was
there. As soon as they took the baby to clean him up, (ex)son-in-law
went with the nurse to take pics and help, so I stayed with my daughter.
The baby was a few weeks early, and considered high risk, so he didn't
spend as much time with her initially as we'd have liked. She would have
been fine without me, but I think she was relieved to have me beside
her. Her ex-MIL was also present, and she followed and stayed with the
baby, while ex-SIL kept walking back and forth between my DD and the
baby, giving progress reports. Lol, actually, he appeared to be floating
a foot off the ground, he was so happy :). During their divorce, when
he'd act like a PITA, I'd think of that, and I'd feel a little more
kindly toward him.

DD had the second baby, on his due date, in
a different hospital (the same hospital in which she was born :), and
the atmosphere was different--she held the baby on her chest while we
admired him for an hour before he was cleaned and weighed, and then the
bassinet was much closer to her bed, so she was more connected the whole
time. Her husband was allowed to bathe the baby, and they also stayed
in the same room. He stayed all night with her, and brought them home the next evening.

Whether we all agree, or not, this thread has sparked some sweet memories.

Unfortunately our infant mortality rate is tragically high but I can't agree that it's primarily due to the medical profession ( and for the sake of disclosure I will add that DH is a physician, however not an OB). As for statistics - In the US infant mortality includes deaths before the age of one - not all countries include the first year in their reporting.

However that is no excuse for these appalling numbers.

Our maternal mortality rate has also increased and that is largely due to obesity and its' related complications - diabetes, hypertension and lack of adequate health care, the increase in C sections, smoking and the fact that many women are now giving birth at a later age.

These statistics from the CDC point to the primary causes of infant mortality......

The top 5 leading causes of infant mortality account for about 57% of all infant deaths in the US in 2014.

http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/infantmortality.htm

Most of these babies die as a result of—

• Birth defects
• Preterm birth (birth before 37 weeks gestation) and low birth weight
• Maternal complications of pregnancy
• Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)
• Injuries (e.g., suffocation).

I almost died. Dr G pushed some button and suddenly a room full of activity.

My son told me he died when he was born. At the age of two, not as a baby ;) No one ever talked about it. At all. No one even said anything about close to death, much less death. So him saying it was shocking. His near death experience mirrors adults, even though he led a REALLY sheltered life. His father cared for him during the day, I at night. So no daycare. How he could've known was PURELY first hand. Couldn't be another way.

So was it was negative experience? Yes. It took me years to learn how to fall asleep after that. Feels a lot like slipping away forever.

I wouldn't chance my son seeing mommy die if there had been another birth. Call it negative, but you did wonder.

:)

Maire, thank you for providing those details. I think it's unfortunate that C-section rates are still high, and as I've stated at the KT before, I remain suspicious of the many prenatal ultrasounds that are done so routinely. Childbirth practices continue to evolve.

Like Watchmelol, I was inspired and encouraged by books: the one she mentioned, Suzanne Arms' Immaculate Deception, Ina May Gaskin's Spiritual Midwifery, and the groundbreaking Maternal-Infant Bonding. I will always have strong feelings about childbirth and breastfeeding. It was "my thing" for many years, and so it will remain.

Thank you to everyone for responding, and in some cases sharing your birth experiences. I've enjoyed thinking about this subject, and revisiting the best times of my life.

I know this is slightly off topic - but I just cannot comprehend how common 'elective C-sections' have become.

They're scheduled for convenience, or because the parents want a certain birthdate, or the doctor's going on vacation or school's starting....or the dog sitter can't make it......honestly it boggles my mind. This is surgery and not to be taken lightly. I understand there can be risk in vaginal childbirth too but to have a C section for non-medical reasons just seems frivolous. And the fact that it may be a contributing cause to maternal mortality just makes it wrong.

When I was pregnant with my kids my OBs only performed C-sections when necessary. My first 2 deliveries were ideal - short labor and an easy delivery. My third was an emergency C-section because I went into labor a day before my scheduled section. DD was a single-footling breech and she had been in the same position for 2 months. The major concern was that the cord would compress during delivery which might cause an oxygen deficiency. Even then they discussed the possibility that they might be able to maneuver her into the correct position while I was under anesthesia. It didn't work out that way since she decided to be born a day ahead of schedule.

The thing about vaginal birth is they're only beginning to understand how much immunity from the mother's microbiome the baby picks up on its way through the birth canal...something which doesn't happen during a c-section.

One recent study I found Annie had results suggesting that the passage at birth isn't where the microbiome transfer happens.

In all seriousness, we wanted our kid/s to be the first ones to meet/hold the new baby after daddy and I and that was exactly what happened. I didn't want anyone staring at my crotch though, including my husband. He was beside me, helping me breath and count.

Having crotch side seating or viewing via pictures and videos makes as much sense to me as staring at someone's anus while they poop.

Yes, it is natural, normal, and most of the time, uncomplicated but why do they need to see a vaginal canal stretched to the max and/or tearing to bond?

I certainly don't mean to offend anyone who has done this, it's just not something I understand.

I was fortunate to have a doctor who was very experienced in natural childbirth and all 4 of my deliveries went exactly the way I wanted.

To those who think labor is painful, with my first, I was tossing and turning all night, every time I would get close to falling asleep my stomach would tighten and wake me up. I was annoyed because I had a checkup with my ob in the morning and I was tired. It wasn't until almost 8am that I thought it might be labor so I woke up hubby, we packed our bags and drove to the hospital. I walked in the front doors and went up to the L&D department at 8:45 and told them it was my first and I thought I might be in labor. They took me to a small exam room and when the nurse inserted her fingers to check how dilated I was, she found me full dilated and her fingers broke my water. My daughter was born in that exam room at 9:16am, doctor literally walked in the room to catch her.

The rest of the day, I think every L&D nurse working came by my room to see "the first time mom who walked in fully dilated"

The reason I didn't realize I was in labor? I had always heard how painful it was and I had no pain, just pressure so I didn't think it was real labor. When I transitioned on the way to the hospital it was intense but even that I wouldn't call painful.

Crowning though, THAT was painful every single time and I tore every single time but each one of my kids took only one push for the head to be delivered.

I had no pitocin, no epidural, nothing. I asked for a Tylenol after dd1 was born but that's it.

I wish certified birthing centers were more common, I would have loved that option.

Since I didn't have it available, I chose to deliver at the hospital but I labored at home for as long as possible. Dd1 arrived 30 minutes after arriving at the hospital, dd2 was 3 hours and I felt like I should have stayed home longer, dd3 was about an hour and a half and dd4 was maybe 2 hours. Labor for each one lasted between 12 and 18 hours.

I knew I could do it on my own (in fact I did with dd4, no one was in the room when I birthed her but hubby and me, the nurse arrived after she had crowned, the doctor after she was out) but I could never live with myself if one of my babies needed immediate medical care and I wasn't at the hospital where they could receive it.

"Where did you come from, my darling, my dear?

Out of the nowhere, into the here?"

I have heard that if you ask a child under age three, he can remember. I've never figured out how to ask without 'leading', and I'm not sure how well I could parse what the child answered.

Rob, I believe your son did *know*.

We have pre-verbal memories. I panic when restrained. I can't tolerate a closed MRI. Spelunking would be my worst nightmare -- where you must wriggle through tight spaces.

I was a month late. My mother labored -- in hospital -- for two days. (Older mother; first birth.) I had surgery for pyloric stenosis at three weeks -- restrained, with no anesthesia beyond a sugar cube soaked in whiskey. Little was known about appropriate anesthesia for a neonate back then, and I was in poor condition. (No bikinis for me -- four inch scar. )

EJ Fudd, if not there, where? The study I saw showed a difference between v birth and c section...presumably everything else is about the same...

Researchers test microbe wipes...

I'm uncertain what you mean know chisue? He described an antechamber sort of room, one I'd never seen, ever. Being greeted at the door and being rocked. And the feelings he had there were some I've only heard in NDEs? Peace, love, and wasn't willing to come back, for instance. I'd heard little to nothing about dying and coming back at that time, and we weren't around anyone who talked about it?

ETA: I had to think about it. I try to avoid leading questions. I would've said something to the effect of can you tell me more about it? without saying dead, dying, afterlife. For instance, once he said he knocked on the door (he did say this, I remember), I said did you go in? Yes. He was met at the door. What did the person look like? What did you see when you went in? I'd have started from his first answer and made sure he was the one who picked the word. Not too leading, is it?

Actually, I was terrified of dying until he told me about it. I'm not even sure why he brought it up. We were outside in the garden. A lot of life and death out there, to be certain, but even that doesn't jog my memory as to why. Any way, I was terrified of death, I'd try to drift off to sleep every night envisioning what it'd be like to be dead and in a coffin, six feet under. Terrified, with no good explanation as to why, except aging, I guess. But I quit when he told me about his experience. I let go then. Haven't had that problem since. I think it was that childhood innocence that brought me what I could find to be a real truth of how it could be like.

I'm grasping here to come up with how he could've known beyond his experience, and willing to hear how you think he knew? Truly, but very perplexed.

On another note, I am greatly sorry to hear of your mother's/your tribulations. It sounds awful. (((chisue)))

Annie, that's an interesting article. I wonder about the effect of an antibiotic on the microbiome, but I'm sure they know what they're doing.

I was brought up short by this quote:

" . . . some of the diseases that we know are associated with having been born by C-section . . . "

So they know C-sections put babies at risk for a number of diseases (I didn't realize this), and still elective C-sections are performed.

It was a study that involved neutralizing the mother's microbiome before birth. The newborns none the less had bacterially populated digestive systems.

This is a new area for study, especially as it affects the immune system. Like most everyday citizens, I'm completely ignorant about this area. I won't profess anything more than a zero level of knowledge. In my view, snippets from Google searches are just that and nothing more. Easy to misunderstand or misconstrue in any event. Especially easy to read these things superficially and come to the wrong conclusion, because of a lack of deep knowledge in the area and because research is still in the early stages. I know someone involved in this specific area and they will be the first to admit that findings about the immune system and the gut are very interesting but little is known or understood. It's early days.

Wait. Do you mean he knew he died? He did.

When I said there was no way he could've known, I meant no way he could've been influenced by other people "telling him" what he experienced. If that makes sense.

rob333 -- Yes. I was agreeing that he DID remember -- just as I believe my 'irrational' panic stems from pre-verbal experience. I also believe that being removed from my mother for the surgery and hospitalization made me more able to understand adoptee trauma. Babies can't distinguish between Self and Mother for several months. Separation is traumatic.

Our DIL gave birth to our DGD in hospital, in a birthing room -- DS with her and sleeping over in the room. The next morning, DS brought DGS to the hospital to meet his sister. DIL was holding the baby in her lap, facing away from the door. The instant DGS spoke, the baby's eyes opened wide as she 'alerted' to the sound of his voice -- a voice she *knew*.

Babies can't distinguish between Self and Mother for several months

****

Very interesting. On what data is this based upon?

Ah ha. I really didn't get it, but it hit me after I posted. Yes. I fully see what you're saying.

Ah, I see, EJ Fudd...I wasn't thinking about gut bacteria per se but all bacteria. The human biome exists in our skin and our eyes, nasal and ear passages, etc.

I remember reading about the guy who had a chronic ear infection in one ear and no matter what the doc did, it didn't improve. Finally he went to the doc and it was all clear. Doc asked what he did. He said he took ear wax from the good ear and put it in the bad ear and it cleared it up.

Babies do recognize voices when they are born. My little brother looked at me and my two other brothers individually when he was brought home from the hospital. My fil walked into the delivery room after my first son was in the baby warmer. He was crying a little. My fil said "Hi my son's name." My son stopped crying and looked at fil.

minipadv -- The symbiosis of child with mother is recognized as existing until around the fourth month. The neonate mental state is autistic. Separation from the mother then is experienced by the child as the loss of a part of oneself.

It's not The End of the World as long as other needs are met, but it's not optimum, and it affects different babies to a greater or lesser extent. We know that absent early security, a child has a difficult time with trust -- and with claiming himself as a separate individual.

Sometimes adults only start noticing the self emerge when a child is mobile enough to venture away from Mother a few feet, then back again, then out further, back again, etc.

We all can *hear* the individuation process once the child can talk. We call it the Terrible Two's, when a child asserts and strengthens his self by opposing Mom.

Individuation goes on through life, even into adulthood.

Me....no. My daughter did watch a foal being born.

A friend from the UK sent me this today:

Texas has highest maternal mortality rate in the developed world

The high Texas mortality rate in Alisande's article most likely has something to do with illegals having their babies here. It's more of a third world country problem that has been shifted to to the US from across the Southern border. The article did not address that.

About the mother/child separation of identity thing. A day or two after the birth of my daughter, I looked over at her and thought "How sweet I am, aren't I adorable over there. OH, that's not "me," that's daughter!" It was a weird but funny thought (which never happened again, or else I'd have been a bit worried)!

Immigrant women have been having babies in Texas for a very long time, not just since the maternal mortality rate went up (although Texas always has had the worst record in the United States.

The key event for the increase in maternal deaths was the cutting of funding.