Category: Information for Mothers and Midwives

Active Birth Pools sponsored these educational videos for All4 Maternity to help midwives gain knowledge and understanding about the use of water for labour and birth.

The benefits of using water for labour and birth are well known…

Here are the facts…

1. Relaxing in a deep pool of warm water can be a wonderful aid in labour. It’s worth having a pool mainly for this reason.
2. Using a birth pool helps mothers to manage pain in labour and considerably reduces the need for medical pain relief.
3. The buoyancy of the water supports the mothers body weight allowing her to relax more easily and deeply. They can cope better with contractions and also rest more comfortably in between them.
4. It’s easier to use upright or squatting positions and move freely from one position to another, than it is on land.
5. Being in a birth pool gives mothers an increased feeling of privacy and security. This enhances the secretion of hormones which stimulate uterine contractions and act as natural pain killers and relaxants.
6. Studies show that labours tend to be shorter overall when a woman enters the pool at around 5cms. dilation.
7. Fewer women need the help of obstetric interventions.

Women who receive less medical intervention generally stay in hospital for a shorter period of time.

The combination of an intervention free birth – with a short hospital stay result in a better experience for mother and baby.

Hospital staff and resources can be employed more efficiently.

Importantly – this results in significant financial savings!

A birth pool is a simple, inexpensive piece of equipment that has a major impact on the the quality of care and cost of having a baby.

Click here to learn more about our water birth pools and find out how they will deliver for you.

Studies have shown that upright labour positions are associated with a reduced second stage, fewer episiotomies or instrumental intervention in contrast to mothers labouring on their backs.

Many women also feel empowered in an upright position, and experience a sense of control over their labour.

On land women need to contend with the force of gravity that limits their ability to assume upright postures especially as labour progresses and they feel tired.

Many women do not have the fitness or stamina to maintain upright postures for lengths of time.

The transition from the land to water helps revive and energise the mother giving her a new lease on life and sense of purpose.

The buoyancy of water supports the mother reducing her relative weight by approx. 33% (Archimedes Principle) allowing her to easily explore the full range of beneficial upright positions in comfort and move in ways that were not possible on land.

The space, depth and design features of Active Birth Pools allow women to move freely to find and be supported in the upright positions that are most comfortable and beneficial for a physiological labour to unfold.

SaveSave

Bridge to Health –  Sian Smith

When considering their birth plan, more and more women are choosing to include the use of water at some stage.

In fact, around 30% of women now plan to use this method either for birthing their baby or as a natural way to reduce some of the intense sensations (pain!) associated with labour.

Here are some of the reasons why:

Water is relaxing!

Being able to bob around in a large pool of warm water is the perfect environment to help you stay calm and relaxed, in a situation most would normally consider pretty stressful.

For many, sliding into a warm bath is the ‘go to’ choice of relaxation after a hard day, so what better way to help you through one of the most physically demanding and memorable experiences of your life?

Additionally, a calmer birth may be less stressful for your baby, as moving from an environment of warm amniotic fluid to one of warm water is a gentle way of introducing them to their new surroundings.

Water is a natural pain reliever

The relaxing effects of water help encourage the body to produce its own pain-fighting substances.

This is beneficial both for Mum and baby; for Mum staying relaxed helps stimulate her natural production of oxytocin (the’ love hormone’ that helps the uterus contract) and endorphins, the ‘feelgood’ hormones that help work as a natural pain reliever.

For baby, a happy and relaxed Mum is more likely to birth quickly with a reduced need for medical intervention.

It reduces stress and anxiety

It is not just the water that helps to relax you. With a waterbirth, often the entire surroundings are altered to create a calming ambience e.g. dimmed lights and hushed voices.

This enables you to go into your own world much more easily than if in a harshly lit room with strange people popping in and out.

Additionally, this type of relaxation helps encourage deep abdominal breathing, preventing you from becoming tense which may make contractions feel more intense.

It reduces the risk of perineal tearing

The warmth of the water helps to promote increased blood flow to the vagina and perineum (the area between the vagina and anus that is susceptible to tearing during childbirth).

This increases flexibility of the tissues and can reduce the likelihood of tearing when birthing the baby’s head.

It allows you to adopt a more ‘active’ birth position

A reason that some women choose a water birth is that it allows you to retain some control throughout the labour process –being aware of the contractions and sensations your body is experiencing, with a reduced chance of medical intervention.

Additionally, the sensation of ‘weightlessness’ that being in the water provides, enables you to move around much more freely than your body has allowed you to for a while!

You are free to adopt almost any position that feels comfortable for you.

The classic image of a labouring woman is that of her laying on her back with her legs in stirrups.

Whilst this is the case for many, it is actually a fairly difficult way to birth your baby as you have to work against gravity to push the baby’s head UP and over the lowest part of the spine – the coccyx.

The best way to counteract this is to work with gravity and adopt a more ‘active’ squatting or modified squatting position.

Being in the water allows you to stay in these positions for longer, as you can lean against the side of the birthing pool for support.

Remaining fit, healthy and active will also help you have as smooth a pregnancy as possible.

Your Osteopath can advise you on exercises that are suitable throughout pregnancy, specifically core, pelvic and lower limb strengthening exercises that will help you be able to adopt active birth positions and use the correct muscles to birth your baby as efficiently as possible.

It is safe!

Of course, water births are not suitable for everyone – the main criteria is that Mum and baby must be healthy, the baby must be in a head-down position, and the pregnancy must be between 37 and 42 weeks.

But as the majority of pregnancies are healthy, a water birth can offer a natural and more in control option to the labour choices a woman has.

And finally, one of the most frequently asked questions regarding waterbirths appears to be ‘will my baby drown underwater?’… to which the answer is no!

The baby receives all of its oxygen via the placenta and hormones circulating through the baby ensure this occurs until the baby is lifted out of the water.

It is also known as the ‘foetal dive reflex’ and allows babies to be underwater for short periods of time up until around 6 months old.

Excerpt from article published by Big Birtha who provides information and support for bigger mums and mums to be.

All women are more buoyant and supported by water, it’s one of the reasons swimming and aqua aerobics are particularly good forms of exercise while pregnant.

But the benefit is likely to be greater for obese women, as fatter bodies are naturally more buoyant.

The buoyancy and support provided by water eases movement, which may make both maintaining an active labour and facilitating access for monitoring easier.

On land, it is cumbersome and difficult for a heavily pregnant woman of any size to quickly move between kneeling, reclining, sitting, leaning, crouching, turning from front to back etc.

In water, it is simple and easy to shift to whatever position is most comfortable/convenient, even midway through contractions.

Being in water also promotes positions which are more agreeable for birthing. Lying flat on your back on a bed is one of the worst positions to be in during labour.

When you are on your back you are working against gravity; actually trying to push the baby out uphill.

It’s only a slight incline, but it’s there.

To add to the problem, when lying down, your body weight is also resting on your coccyx (tailbone), forcing it into the pelvic cavity and reducing space for the baby.

In water, even if you were to float on your back, you wouldn’t be putting the same pressure on your tailbone, and you are far more likely to take an upright position, crouching or kneeling, for instance; positions which on land are uncomfortable to maintain, but not in water.

This frees up your coccyx to keep out of the way.

It is well documented that warm water reduces pain felt by labouring women, and decreases the use of other pain relief.

Given the issues with providing epidural anaesthesia to obese women, it seems sensible that using water; an effective non-pharmaceutical intervention to help with pain should be an attractive alternative?

Obese women are at increased risk of having longer labours, and of moving on to instrumental delivery and caesarean sections for ‘failure to progress’.

Yet immersion in water has been shown to significantly reduce the length of labour in ‘normal’ sized women.

It doesn’t take much of a leap of imagination to consider that water might help to address this problem, at least in some obese women?

BigBirtha.co.uk...

Active Birth Pools are specially designed for to accomodate bigger mothers enabling them to move and benefit from the positions natural to labour and birth.

Various means of entry and exit from the pool as well as emergency evacuation have been considered and designed for to safeguard  over weight mothers and the midwives who care for them.

Michel Odent’s groundbreaking report “Birth Under Water” that was published in the Lancet in December 1983 is widely regarded as the seminal moment in time when the use of water for labour and birth entered our consciousness.

I’d personally like to thank Michel for being the inspiration that led me to begin to create and develop water birth pools in 1987 and for facilitating the birth of my son Theo at home in 1988.

Keith Brainin – Founder & Director Active Birth Pools

Birth under water – Michel Odent

Originally published in the Lancet: 1983

Centre Hospitalier Général de Pithiviers, PIthiviers 45300, France

The 100th birth under water in our hospital in June provided my team with an opportunity to summarise our experience of the use of water in an obstetric unit.

Since a report on birth under water in 1805,1 the subject has been rarely broached in the medical literature.

In Pithiviers, a hospital which is, in other respects, a conventional state hospital,2 a small pool has been installed close to the homely birthing room.

This pool is large enough (2m in diameter) and deep enough (about 0.7m) to make it easy for a woman in it to change her posture.

Many parturients feel and irresistible attraction to water. We don’t advise women to try the pool; we simply offer the pool as a possibility.

The water is ordinary mains tap water, at a temperature of 37 °C. The water is not sterilized, and contains no chemicals or additives on any sort.

We tend to reserve the pool for women who are experiencing especially painful contractions (lumbar pains, in particular), and where the dilation of the cervix is not progressing beyond about 5cm. In these circumstances, there is commonly a strong demand for drugs.

In most cases, the cervix becomes fully dilated within 1 or 2 hours of immersion in the pool, especially if the lights are dimmed.

It is possible to check the fetal heartbeat regularly with a small ultrasound stethoscope or with a traditional obstetrical stethoscope. Most women choose to leave the water in the second stage.

We believe that the warm pool facilitates the first stage of labour because of the reduction of the secretion of nor-adrenaline and other catecholamines; the reduction of sensory stimulation when the ears are under water; the reduction of the effects of gravity; the alteration of nervous conduction; the direct muscular stretching action; and peripheral vascular action.

Other factors, however, are difficult to rationalise. We have found, for example, that the mere sight of water and the sound of it filling the pool are sometimes sufficient stimuli to release inhibitions so that a birth may occur before the pool is full.

We have observed that water seems to help many parturients reach a certain state of consciousness where they become indifferent to what is going on around them.

Although nearly all the women who enter the pool leave it before birth, the process of delivery can sometimes be so extraordinarily fast under water, that some parturients do not leave the pool at the second stage.

Birth under water is therefore not exceptional in our unit, although it may not be intentional. During the second stage, immersion in warm water seems to help women to lose inhibitions. Most women cry out freely during the last contractions.

When the birth happens under water, the newborn infant is brought gently to the surface and placed in the mother’s arms. This is always done within seconds but without rushing (I am present at the pool for every underwater delivery).

Our experience confirms that the newborn’s first breathing is triggered by contact with the air and the sudden difference in temperature.

There is no risk of inhalation of water. It is useful to remember that in the human species carotid chemoreceptors are thought to be insensitive at birth, and very likely play no part at the time of the first cry. 3,4,5 Only 2 newborn infants out of 100 needed suction of the upper respiratory tract and a short period of manual ventilatory support.

At the time of first contact, most mothers are in a vertical position, kneeling in the water.  They hold the baby in their arms in such a way that skin-to-skin and eye-to-eye contact are as perfect as possible.

An early demonstration of the rooting reflex is almost the rule, and a first sucking 20 min after the birth is common.

Water seems to facilitate the development of the mother-infant relationship. We cut the umbilical cord and help the mother leave the pool just before expulsion of the placenta.

We consider that there might be a risk of water embolism if the mother were to stay in the pool after this time. In 100 underwater deliveries there were 2 manual removals of placenta (our general rate is less than 1%).

All the presentations were cephalic. In breech presentations, our strategy is to use the first stage as a test before deciding on either a vaginal delivery or a caesarian section: in these cases we prefer not to interfere with drugs or with a bath.

Among the 100 women who gave birth underwater, there were 43 primipara, 37 secundiparas, 14 para 3, 2 para 4, one para 5, one para 6, and one para 7.

The youngest was 19 and the oldest was 43. The average age was 28. The lowest birth weight was 2.15kg and the highest was 4.40 kg, we did not perform any episiotomies.

All the tears (of which there were 29) were first degree. We had no infectious complications, even where the membranes were already broken.

There were no perinatal deaths. One infant was transferred to a paediatric unit one day after the birth with groaning and respiratory failure, symptoms which were diagnosed as subarachnoid haemorrhage after delivery in the posterior position at 37 weeks.

Only one infant was jaundiced and required phototherapy (15mg/dl bilirubin on the second day). One of the infants born under water died suddenly some weeks later, although it was previously considered to be perfectly healthy.

We have found no risk attached either to labour or to birth under water, and in any hospital where a pool is in daily use, a birth under water is bound to happen now and then.

Compared with the supported squatting position in the birthing room, we have found that the end of the second stage of labour can be more difficult under water, particularly for primipara, but immersion during the second half of the first stage of labour is helpful, particularly for parturients having painful and insufficient contractions.

It should be possible for any conventional hospital to have a pool situated close to the birthing room and operating theatre.

The use of warm water during labour requires further research, but we hope that other experience would confirm that immersion in warm water is an efficient, easy, and economical way to reduce the use of drugs and the rate of intervention in parturition.

REFERENCES

1. Embry M. Observation sur un accouchement terminé dans le bain. Ann Soc Méd Prat Montpellier 1805; 5: 13.

2. Gillett J. Chilbirth in Pithiviers, France. Lancet 1979; ii: 894-96.

3. Girard F, Lacaisse A, Dejours P. Lestimulus O 2 ventilatoire à la période néonatale chez l’homme. J Physiol (Paris) 1960; 52: 108-09.

4.  Purves MJ. The effects of hypoxia in the newborn lamb before and after denervation of the carotid chemoreceptors. J Physiol 1966; 185: 60-77.

5.  Purves MJ. Chemoreceptors and their reflexes with special reference to the fetus and newborn. J Devl Physiol 1981;  3: 21-57.

Originally published December 11, 2014

World-renowned social anthropologist and birth activist Sheila Kitzinger (1929-2015) was a strong advocate for birth in water, known as waterbirth.

A voice for the ability for every woman to choose, Sheila believed that waterbirth should be an option in mainstream maternity care.

In this piece for Birth Institute, Sheila outlined some of the myths surrounding the birth method, and provides evidence that, in fact, waterbirth is a safe, effective and empowering birthing option.

Learn how to support women through labor and delivery in water. Become a midwife!

Waterbirth is often discussed as if it were a novelty – and a dangerous one at that. It has been assumed to be something that “dropouts” and “weirdoes” choose, or that it is just a recent, passing phenomenon.

In truth, birthing in water is a safe and widespread practice among hospitals in the UK and Western Europe – including Switzerland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Malta, Denmark, Norway and Finland.

Furthermore, most practices aren’t as new as we think (the Ostend Aquanatal Centre in Belgium has been going strong since the late 80s), and waterbirth practices are here to stay.

Birth in water is safe and effective

Swiss study reveals that when using a pool women require less analgesia, have a lower incidence of perineal trauma, and reduced blood loss at delivery.

NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) concludes that waterbirth ‘provides the safest form of pain relief’.

There is evidence that being in water improves uterine contractility and speeds dilatation.  So, awoman giving birth in water is less exposed to interventions, including artificial augmentation of uterine activity, and is more likely to feel happy about her birth experience afterwards.

Yet that may not only be due to the water.  Labouring women who give birth in water have more one-to-one care from a midwife they have come to know.

This, combined with a relaxed environment in which the pool is used, contributes to the positive results. More first time mothers have spontaneous births in a freestanding midwifery center or at home than those in hospital.

In the UK, the NHS (National Health Service) states that women should be able to use a pool if they wish, and recommends one be available for every thousand women.

This option has become part of mainstream maternity care, and approximately 75% of all hospitals in the UK have installed birthing tubs.

Many community midwives are eager to raise the homebirth rate, and portable pools, designed to be used by just one woman (to avoid cross-infection), are selling well.

Complicated waterbirthing pools are not necessary.

Chairs, stools and other contraptions restrict movement, and when a woman is immobilized she is more likely to need obstetric intervention.

Francoise Freedman of Birthlight in Cambridge suggests using a pool at home to explore yoga movements during pregnancy.

These include hip-openers, kneeling stretches, and those to prevent and ease back pain, and others for ribcage expansion and pelvic floor toning.

The warm water acting as a cushion also makes a comfortable space to practice perineal massage.

Waterbirth is here to stay

Midwives keen on home birth and waterbirth were once seen as dissidents and mavericks.

This has changed now – so much that in the UK, it is common to encourage women to choose to labour, and perhaps give birth, in water and in their own home.  Pregnant women and midwives are being empowered now.

Every midwife-run and staffed birth center for low risk women offers pools, and midwives are beginning to develop the skills to use them. There is a feast of research from which midwives can learn more.

Ethel Burns, Waterbirth Practitioner, Research Midwife and Midwifery Teacher, and I have drawn up recommendations for practice in a paper available from Oxford Brookes University (read it here).

Sheila Kitzinger (1929-2015) was a social anthropologist of birth and an advocate of home births.  She believed that women have the right to decide the place of birth and kind of care they prefer, and to make an informed choice, based on research and their own values.

Women suffering post-traumatic stress after birth would ring her for help, seeking the confidence to deal with it.  For years she worked with mothers and babies in prison and asylum centers.  She lectured all over the world and her books are published in 23 languages.

Exploring movements in Water

Sheila was a keen proponent of water birth.

Her wonderful article gives us examples of the type and range of movements natural to labour and birth that mothers explore in water.

The pool in the photos is an original Oval Portable Water Birth Pool circa 1987  – to my knowledge the first specially designed portable water birth pool ever produced.

Please click here for a copy of Exploring movements in water:

I wrote this article a few years ago.

It seems particularly relevant now.

Recent news has highlighted the restrictive financial environment that maternity units will be expected to operate in.

Yet, at the same time midwives are charged with the important task of improving the quality of care and services.

David Cameron has said, “The whole aim of these NHS reforms is to make sure we get the value for the money we put in.”[1]

In the same article, Stephen Dorrell, former Health Secretary commented that, “In real terms, the NHS budget was being broadly maintained, but we’re having to find ways of doing more with the same amount of money.”[2]

The only way of improving maternity services is by optimising facilities, saving money wherever practical and normalising childbirth to a far greater extent.

Studies have shown that women who are supported during labour need to have fewer painkillers, experience fewer interventions and give birth to stronger babies.

After their babies are born, supported women feel better about themselves, their labour and their babies.

A focus on normalising birth results in better quality, safer care for mothers and their babies with an improved experience.

Increasing normal births is associated with shorter (or no) hospital stays, fewer adverse incidents and admissions to neonatal units and better health outcomes for mothers.

It is also associated with higher rates of successful breastfeeding and a more positive birth experience.

These changes benefit not only women and their families but also maternity staff.  Midwives are able to spend less time on non-clinical tasks and more on caring for women and their babies.

Psychologically speaking, and in particular for first time mothers, the less intervention and a more hands on approach with one-to-one support means that mothers will leave hospital feeling held and therefore far better prepared for motherhood.

This again has a domino effect, not just on the welfare of the infant, but also circumventing the need for costly government and LA interventionist approaches in particular for younger mothers post-partum.

What increases the likelihood of normal births?

It is also known that some factors help to facilitate straightforward birth without evidence of additional risks, including one-to-one support, immersion in water for low-risk women, planning for a home birth, care from known midwives, more extensive training of junior doctors, employment of consultant midwives focusing on normality, and support on the labour ward from consultant obstetricians[3].

How can midwives make a case for purchasing birth pools?

The need for more water birth facilities is evident.  The problem is that financial controllers are under pressure to save money.

They will not be easily convinced of the necessity unless you clearly stress that purchasing pools should not be viewed as a cost but rather to make the case that they are a valuable investment and will enable your unit to optimise resources, improve the quality of care and yield a return of significant financial savings.

A birth pool is a simple, inexpensive piece of medical equipment that can have a major impact on the quality of care and cost of having a baby.

The bed is no longer the primary focus of the room: having birth pools in hospitals and delivery suites facilitates pain relief encourages relaxation and therefore confidence and promotes mobility along with soft furnishings such as beanbags.

Importantly, this results in significant financial savings! 

Our cost study has revealed that savings of up to £700.00 per birth can be achieved.

For example, St Richards Hospital in Chichester has three of our birth pools as well as our soft furnishings.

They recently reported their first successful VBAC in the pool for a woman who had previously had twins by c-section.

Depending on complications, a c-section costs between £1,370 and £1,879 in contrast to a normal delivery that is usually between £735 and £1,097.[4]

The experience of hospitals that have birth pools demonstrates that the cost of installing a pool is soon recouped by the savings achieved through reduced use of medical methods of pain relief and shorter hospital stays.

Wherever possible, women should have the opportunity to labour in water, as this is often far more comfortable.

The NHS has advised hospitals to ensure facilities are in place for this: three pools for 1,000 births a year is seen as adequate provision[5].

[1] BBC: 19/01/11
[2] BBC 19/01/11 taken from BBC Radio 4 Today programme
[3] Hodnett ED, Gates S, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C.  Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD003766. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003766.pub2
[4] NHS Institute, 2009
[5] NHS Guidelines on Childbirth 26 September 2007

Water birth pools play a vital role in helping mothers experience physiological labour and natural birth.

Nothing helps mothers cope with pain more effectively.

If mothers are not going be reliant on analgesia for pain relief they need other options.

Mothers who enter a pool of warm water in established labour find that they are better able to cope with the pain.

Immersion in warm water has been unequivocally proven to be of great benefit both physiologically and psychologically.

Women have a greater sense of fulfillment and accomplishment and babies experience a non-traumatic birth.

Aside from the obvious benefits to mothers and babies, midwives experience greater job satisfaction and hospitals save money & optimise resources.

Nearly a third of women benefited from the use of a water birth pool in the UK in 2014 (National Maternity Survey 2014).

With up to 60% of mothers open to natural birth now is the time to consider making this safe, effective, low cost option more widely available.

On land mothers contend with the force of gravity which limits movement as labour progresses and they tire.

Many women do not have the fitness to maintain upright postures for lengths of time. (Gupta JK, Hofmeyr GJ, Smyth R 2007).

Mothers who are overweight or obese are often unable to cope with the physical demands.

The transition from the land to water helps revive & energise mothers giving them a new lease on life and sense of purpose.

The buoyancy of water supports the mother reducing her relative weight by approx. 33% (Archimedes Principle).

This allows her to move in ways not possible on land.

To explore and benefit from the postures natural to labour & birth .

The calming, relaxing effect of the warm water promotes the flow of oxytocin.

This powerful hormone plays a huge role in childbirth.

It causes the uterus to contract and triggers the ‘fetal ejection reflex’.

Immersion in water has a beneficial physiological effect on hormone secretion, including oxytocin surges which can advance dilation and stimulate contractions (Odent 2014).

Health Times: Karen Keast

Water is a life force in more ways than one – it covers more than 70 per cent of our earth and we drink it to survive.

When it comes to using water for childbirth, water birth is still a contentious issue that divides healthcare professionals and organisations alike.

The fact that it’s contentious at all surprises some of Australia’s leading midwives, writes Karen Keast.

There are legends of Egyptian pharaohs being born in water and of South Pacific women giving birth in shallow seas.

The first written report of a water birth in the western world occurred in France in 1803, when a mother experiencing a long and difficult labour was helped to give birth in a tub of warm water.

In the 1970s, Igor Tjarkovsky, a boat builder, investigated the therapeutic benefits of water and installed a glass tank in his home for women to use for childbirth.

French obstetrician Michel Odent went on to pave the future of water birth.

After a mother, using water to ease the pain of her labour, accidentally gave birth in the water, he went on to install a plastic paddling pool in a hospital so more women could enjoy the benefits of water birth while reducing their need for painkillers.

Only a small proportion of women in Australia choose to give birth in water each year although the exact number of water births is not known.

Griffith University Professor Jenny Gamble, a practising midwife of 30 years, says water births have come a long way in Australia but there is still a long way to go.

Professor Gamble recalls when a new maternity wing opened up at a Brisbane hospital, the then director general who was touring the facility instructed the plugs from the tubs to be removed.

“In his own way, he was saying water births might be a bad thing,” she says.

“Those days are gone. Water has become more accessible to women. There’s quite a lot of evidence to say that water is safe for women.

“More and more hospitals are putting in big tubs and there’s a range of deep tubs. It’s coming but it’s all too slow.”

Advocates of water birth say its benefits include the relaxing effect of warm water and feelings of weightlessness, buoyancy and ease of movement which help to alleviate pain naturally.

Western Sydney University Professor Hannah Dahlen, a privately practising midwife and spokesperson for the Australian College of Midwives, says evidence shows water immersion may also help improve blood flow in the uterus, lower blood pressure, provide less painful contractions and result in shorter labours and fewer interventions.

Professor Dahlen last year published a study in the Journal of Midwifery examining the outcomes of 6144 Australian women who had normal vaginal births in a birth centre over a 12-year period.

Her research compared women giving birth in water with those who gave birth in six other positions out of the water – kneeling or all fours, squatting, side lying, using a birth stool, standing and, the most common birth position in the country – semi-seated.

Professor Dahlen found those who gave birth on a birth stool had almost a one-and-a-half time’s higher rate of major perineal trauma and more than twice the rate of haemorrhage after delivery compared with water birth.

There was no difference in major perineal trauma and haemorrhage after delivery between women who gave birth in water and those who had a semi-seated position.

While those babies born in a semi-seated position had a four-and-a-half time’s higher incidence of five minute APGAR scores less than seven.

APGAR scores, which rate the newborn’s breathing effort, heart rate, muscle tone, reflexes and skin colour, of less than seven at five minutes after birth indicate medical intervention was needed to resuscitate the baby.

“Some studies have shown better outcomes but basically I found no difference to other birth positions,” she says.

“There was no evidence of harm. We want to do more research in Australia.

“We have no evidence to date that it’s harmful but we need more and more evidence to show it’s safe.”

Professor Dahlen says a water birth also provides women with a sense of protected space.

“They talk about how they felt there was a barrier; they felt it was a cocoon where they could feel safe,” she says.

Professor Dahlen says one common concern about water births is that the baby could drown but she says babies are born with a diving reflex, or bradycardic response, that causes them to hold their breath under water.

Professor Dahlen says despite mounting evidence proving the benefits of water birth, they still remain contentious in Australia.

“I have never understood it. I find it fascinating that water is so scary.”

Professor Gamble agrees.

“We’re talking about water, just water – not epidurals, not heavy duty drugs,” she says.

“Thank goodness hospitals are moving towards increasing their remodelling of their maternity suites to include tubs but quite frankly it’s a lot of fuss for something as simple as warm water.”

Professor Gamble says water births are common practice at planned home births, and are used during labour or active birth.

“Some women want to get in and get out for birth, some want to labour in the water and some hop in just for the birth – anything goes.”

Perhaps, most importantly, Professor Dahlen says water births are not about the baby.

“That’s what people get wrong,” she says.

“It’s about the mother and if you have a really happy and relaxed and stress free mother you actually have a baby that’s advantaged – they are born and very placid.

“They don’t often cry – they come up and blink.

“They are breathing fine. They come up all lovely and warm and then go to their mother’s chest.

“I really love water births.”

SaveSave

There have been accounts of women labouring and giving birth in water mostly amongst peoples living near a source of shallow warm water such as the South Pacific islanders.

In most traditional societies the rituals and practices of childbirth have, until recent times, been a matter of secrecy and handed down through generations of women.

There are oral traditions of similar practices among the Maori, the Indians of Central America, and the Ancient Greeks and Egyptians.

In 1805, the first account the use of water in Europe was documented.

A French woman, who had laboured for two days before being encouraged to get into a warm bath by her enlightened doctor then progressed to give birth to a healthy baby within an hour.

Sadly, for millions of women at the time there was no recognition of the importance of this event.

Aside from this, there are no accounts of a tradition of childbirth in water in Europe or other northerly regions.

The reason for this may be a simple matter of climate and plumbing.

Only with the widespread availability of artificially heated water and portable and installed birthing pools in comparatively recent times, has giving birth in water become a real option for women anywhere in the world.

Waterbirth was pioneered in the 1960’s by the Russian researcher Igor Tjarkovsky.

Using a large aquarium he installed a glass tank in his own home in Moscow in which many mothers gave birth .

Stunning photographs of these extraordinary births were published in the west and inspired the first water births.

For today’s generation of mothers, the key figure in the use of water for labour and birth is the French obstetrician Michel Odent.

In 1977 Odent installed a pool in the hospital at Pithiviers , not with the idea of promoting birth in water, but primarily as an additional option for pain relief and rest during long or difficult labours.

He has said ‘the reason for the birthing pool is not to have the baby born in water but to facilitate the birth process and to reduce the need for drugs and other interventions.’

Odent published his findings in the Lancet and his recommendations in this article provided the basis for the first midwifery guidelines for waterbirths.

Odent, M.  Birth under water.  The Lancet. December 24/31, 1983. pp 1476-1477

Inspired by news of what was happening in Moscow and France, the earliest waterbirths in the West took place at home in pools that were often improvised by the couples themselves and attended by independent midwives.

The parents created birthing pools using any large waterproof container they could find – including refuse skips, cattle troughs, inflatable paddling pools or garden ponds lined with a plastic sheet.

This happened simultaneously in several parts of the world and began to cause ripples in the world of obstetrics.

When reports and images of the first waterbirths were published, the world looked on in amazement.

The women who chose this way of birthing and their attendants were variously regarded as crazy, deluded, foolhardy or inspired.

The medical establishment rallied to condemn or at least call the practice into question, citing theoretical risks of infection and fears of the baby drowning.

Such fears have been largely appeased by the work of Dr Paul Johnson, neonatal physiologist at the John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford.

His research on the mechanisms that trigger breathing in the newborn provided scientific confirmation of the safety of birth underwater at body temperature for babies who are not at risk.

He described how the baby is protected against the possibility of breathing while underwater in the few seconds between emerging from the birth canal and being lifted out of the water.

This response is known as the ‘dive reflex’.

Johnson, P.  Birth under water – to breathe or not to breathe. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, vol 103, no 3, March 1996. pp 202-208

In 1999 Ruth E. Gilbert and Pat A. Tookey of the Institute of Child Health, London, published a hugely important study in the BMJ that effectively provided the ‘green light’ for labour and delivery in water.

It was a study of the outcomes for all babies born in water in the UK in a two-year period between 1994 and 1996.

A total of 4,032 waterbirths were included in the study (about 0.6 per cent of all deliveries).

All 1500 consultant paediatricians in the British Isles were asked if they knew of cases of perinatal death or admission to special care within 48 hours of labour or delivery in water.

The study showed that there was no increased risk to health for babies born in water as compared with babies born to other low-risk women on land.

Since then a burgeoning of interest in the use of water in labour in the UK has led to the development of a unique concentration of knowledge and expertise within the mainstream maternity system.

Positive encouragement to the use of water in labour and childbirth has come from the Royal College of Midwives, which recommends that midwives should develop the knowledge and skills to assist women at a waterbirth .

Water labour and birth is an option which is limited to ‘low risk’ women having an uncomplicated birth following a healthy pregnancy.

In the UK the issues of safe practice have been addressed by the health authorities, Royal College of Midwives, midwifery supervisors and one or two obstetricians.

A significant body of research studies and several important surveys have been undertaken.

Development has been more carefully and diligently monitored than many of the obstetric procedures that are widely used.

Against this backdrop, more of the managers of maternity services in the UK are increasingly being persuaded that the option of using water in labour and for birth should be available to all women.

The extent of the use of birth pools in the UK increased.

Pools are now used in hospitals as well as independent birth centres, some of which specialize in waterbirths, and in the community at home births with both independent and NHS midwives.

The Edgware Birth Centre in North London is an example of a new type of forward-thinking NHS birth unit.

Typically 70 per cent of women who give birth at the centre use water during labour and 50 per cent give birth in water.

Since it’s inception outcomes show far fewer interventions than for low-risk births at a conventional hospital birth unit.

This is a model of care which would transform our maternity services if widely adopted.

In October 2000 the UK’s Royal College of Midwives estimated that 50 per cent of maternity units provided facilities for labour or birth in water.

The usage of pool varied between 15 and 60 per cent, which may be an indicator of the significance of the role of the midwife in supporting and encouraging women to consider the use of water.

Since then the number of UK hospitals and birth centres with installed pools has risen to closer to 60 per cent.

However, that does not necessarily mean that the pools are being fully or enthusiastically utilized or that the pool is always available.

It’s not uncommon for women to be discouraged from using them or to be told that trained midwives are not available.

Sometimes stringent protocols around the use of a pool can limit it’s usefulness and frustrate both mothers and midwives.

Women who want to use a pool are often also told that this may not be possible if the pool is already in use.

It’s time for such problems to be addressed and for all women to have the possibility of using a birth pool wherever they choose to give birth.

Water birth is one of the greatest innovations in childbirth of our times and can no longer be regarded as a passing fad.

The use of epidurals today has reached epidemic proportions and contributes significantly to the high caesarean and intervention rate and is also very costly, requiring a high level of expert attendance.

The simple expedient of a pool of warm water is by now a proven way to confine the use of epidurals to those women who really need them and improve safety and quality of the birth experience.

SaveSave

McKenna JA; Symon AG, (2014). Midwifery , vol 30, no 1, January 2014, e20-5.

BACKGROUND: although Vaginal Birth After Caesarean section (VBAC) has been promoted successfully as one means of reducing the caesarean section rate, the practice of VBAC using water immersion (Water VBAC) is restricted.

Very little valid, reliable research evidence is available on this birth method, although initial small-scale audits indicate that Water VBAC has no adverse effect on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

METHOD: in-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of eight women who had undergone Water VBAC in one midwife-led unit.

The interviews aimed to explore their reasons for requesting this birthing method, and their experience of the process. An interpretative phenomenological analytical approach was adopted.

FINDINGS: the women pursued Water VBAC for two main reasons: in order to prevent a repeat of the obstetric events that previously led to a caesarean section, and to counteract their previous negative birth experiences.

The women reported improved physical and psychological outcomes from their Water VBAC experience when compared with their previous experience of caesarean section.

Three main themes emerged: ‘minimising’, ‘maximising’ and ‘managing’. Water VBAC entailed an attempt to minimise the medicalisation of the women’s childbirth experience.

This was achieved by limiting medical staff input in favour of midwife-led care, which was believed to minimise negative physical and psychological experiences.

Correspondingly, Water VBAC was perceived as maximising physical and psychological benefits, and as a means of allowing women to obtain choice and assert control over their labour and birth.

The women planning a Water VBAC believed they had to manage the potential risks associated with Water VBAC, as well as manage the expectations and behaviour of friends, family and the health care professionals involved in their care.

CONCLUSIONS: for the women participating in this research, actively pursuing Water VBAC constituted a means of asserting their autonomy over the childbirth process.

The value accorded to being able to exercise choice and control over their childbearing experience was high.

These women’s accounts indicated that information-giving and shared decision-making require improvement, and that inconsistencies in the attitudes of health care professionals need to be addressed.

Australian College of Midwives – 2013

This position statement should be read in conjunction with the Australian College of Midwives’ (ACM) position statement for midwives caring for women who make choices outside professional advice.

The ACM supports the choice of women to have the opportunity to access water immersion for labour and/or birth. The ACM identifies six key principles for the safe use of water immersion for labour and birth.

Key principles

1. Warm water immersion has been used for relieving the intensity of pain associated with labour. Warm water and buoyancy elevates the release of endorphins and facilitates relaxation.

2. There are many benefits of using immersion in water during labour, including increasing women’s feelings of control and satisfaction, less painful contractions and less need for pharmacological analgesia, shorter labour, less need for augmentation, with no known adverse effects for the woman herself.

3. Women should be provided with unbiased evidence-based information during pregnancy about their options for labour and birth, including water immersion in labour and/or birth, in order to make informed choices.

4. Informed decision-making, informed consent, and right of refusal are accepted principles in Australia. Each and every woman has the right to make informed decisions, including consent or refusal of any aspect of her care. Women must be respected in the choices that they make.

5. Midwives have a primary responsibility to ensure that their decisions, recommendations and practices are focused on the needs and safety of the woman and her baby/babies.

6. There is no evidence of significant increases in perinatal mortality or morbidity although there are some reports of rare complications. There is limited research on the safety of birth in water and most of the evidence that does exist, is restricted to healthy women with uncomplicated pregnancies.

Achieving best practice

To achieve best practice in the use of water immersion for labour and birth, it is necessary for consumers, professional colleges, education providers, health systems, Australian and State and Territory governments and policy makers to work together to:

• foster a culture of valuing physical, emotional, social, cultural and spiritual safety in all birth environments;
• provide women with access to water immersion in labour and/or birth;
• provide the preparation and education required to ensure that midwives are
  competent and confident to care for women who choose water immersion in
  labour and/or birth;
• ensure that midwives to work to their full scope of practice;
• develop evidence-based policies that reflect best practice;
• undertake more research on immersion in water during labour and birth. In
  particular, no trials have been identified that assess the effect of immersion in water during the third stage of labour.

Resources to guide practice

The ACM recommends the use of the following resources to guide midwives in their practice:

• Australian College of Midwives, National Midwifery Guidelines for Consultation and Referral, 2013. Australian College of Midwives, Canberra.
• Cluett, E.R., et al., Randomised controlled trial of labouring in water compared with standard of augmentation for management of dystocia in first stage of labour. BMJ, 2004. 328(7435): p. 314.
• Cluett ER, B.E., Immersion in water in labour and birth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD000111. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000111. pub3. , 2009.
• Hall, S.M., & Holloway, I. M. , Staying in control: Women’s experiences of labour in water. . Midwifery, 1998. 14: p. 30-36.
• Miller, Y., Thompson, R., Porter, J., Prosser, S., & Fletcher, R. , Findings from the Having a Baby in Queensland Pilot Survey 2009. 2010. Queensland Centre for Mothers & Babies, The University of Queensland.
• RCOG/Royal College of Midwives. Immersion in Water During Labour and Birth (Joint Statement No. 1), 2006. Available from: http://www.rcog.org.uk/womens- health/clinical-guidance/immersion-water-during-labour-and-birth
• Richmond, H., Women’s experience of waterbirth. The Practising Midwife, 2003. 6(3): p. 26-31.
• Zanetti-Daellenbach, R.A., et al., Maternal and neonatal infections and obstetrical outcome in water birth. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 2007. 134(1): p. 37-43.

Date of Issue; 30th May 2013
Date of Review; 29th May 2016