So I realized how absolutely pathetic I sound. I blog about my pets. Man I need a life.
Nah, I love my pets. Last night, I was laying on the couch trying to finish a book I have been reading since Christmas and Nick comes to cuddle up with me. Apparently it caught his attention, because he stopped me as I tried to turn the page and told me to wait for him. So for the next hour or more, we sat there reading the last few chapters.
Afterwards, both confused and frustrated, we started arguing about the author's point in writing the book. Like it's predecessor, the sequel offered no closure or ending. Not to mention it is along the same lines as the Hunger Games which involves the torment of children. It's called The Scorch Trials, the sequel to The Maze Runner. Nick couldn't tell if the author was for or against Utilitarianism, and neither could I. It's not clear, but it seems like a bunch of children are being tested (in horrific scenarios which sometimes involve painful and gruesome death) to try and save a world in turmoil. Nick says it's wrong to torture a bunch of kids to death to save the human race. I say, but they agreed to it and unless it's done (according to the book that is), mankind will end.
So he cooks up another scenario. Say a terrorist plants a bomb that would kill 2 million innocent people, but will not talk. The opposing government tries all sorts of ways to get him to talk, but no matter how much torture he goes through, he would rather die than tell. Now, if he dies, all hope to find out where the bomb is is lost. But! He has a wife and two year old daughter. Do you torture them in the hopes that he will talk? Two million innocent people to die at the hands of an evil bomber who will meet his just reward in the end, or! An innocent woman and child exploited and tortured for the "greater good". Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?
I agree, it would be wrong to torture innocent people. But I also can't get over the fact that 2 million people could die. So I'm caught in the middle. Maybe, they could "pretend" to torture them and get the guy to talk. Ah, philosophical nonsense. And this is why I got a technical degree......
Now, my other thought for the day. On my way to work, I always pass by the hospital where I'm going to deliver. And I have a little more anxiety about it every time I drive by. Here's the thing, you're going to come out of it with a baby no matter what, so epidural or no epidural? Act like a complete witch for a few hours (unmedicated sounds a little painful and I'll probably embarrass myself to no end), or get the large needle in my back, feel nothing, be a wimpy pusher but save myself the embarrassment. Wow, I really have no idea. Good thing I still have a few months to decide.
I'll probably pretend to be brave and tough, but cave an hour or two in. Haha, that would be pathetic. But as my good friend says, "next time you go to the dentist for a root canal, ask to go "unmedicated". Sounds pretty awful huh? Birth is traumatic". But my other good friend says its an "amazing experience to be in control of the situation, to let your body do what it was designed to do. Birth is not traumatic". Pretty darn funny to listen to them argue their points. Like I said, we'll see in a few short months.
My aunt always went into the hospital with her mind set to deliver naturally. She always opted for the medication when the pain started in earnest. My mother always demanded drugs the moment she entered the hospital. I have no idea what I'm going to do yet either. Let me know how it goes :)
ReplyDeleteI had an epidural with both Xander and Jaxon (obviously not with Maddox) and while I will never regret getting one with Xander (I was induced), I did regret getting one with Jaxon. I think there is absolutely nothing wrong with getting an epidural, but don't give up on the notion of trying for a natural birth..you just have to go into it determined to do it, otherwise you'll cave for the epidural. It really is an empowering experience. I really wish I could have done a water birth with the boys, but that was never an option for me...though Maddox was born in the shower..so I guess I got one after all...lol
ReplyDelete-Eryn
Here's my take: I've done it both ways -- two with, two without. In all fairness, the two without were not planned to be without. I have really short labors, so it wasn't like I was suffering for hours (I think Faith's first was like 24+ hours) . . . Anyway, I think that if you want to go natural, it's completely doable. But you have to have a plan before and do a lot of research on natural birth. You can't just go in there and do it, especially when it's your first and you have no idea how your body is going to cope with labor. And I also think that even if you choose to go naturally, you have to be open to the fact that you have no idea what it's going to feel like and may want an epidural after all. Getting an epidural does not mean faliure. My dr. told me to imagine that you are standing on the edge of a pool -- whether you jump in or are pushed, the end result is still the same: you get wet.
ReplyDeletejust an FYI: I was also induced on one of the unmedicated labor and it wasn't any more difficult or painful than the un-induced labor.
Bottom line: a lot of women go in with an idea of what THEY want, and disregard what the doctor says. I say -- if you trust your doctor (and you should) -- then listen to him/her. The dr. has delivered more babies than you, they know more than you, they can read the situation better than you. So talk to your dr. Ask for advice from the professional.