LittleGravitasIndeed t1_izrud7t wrote
This is interesting! I’ve already let my husband know that I’m relying on him to honestly communicate the amount of physical violence I will visit upon someone who tries a “husband stitch” on me. His fast talking will keep their body whole.
NoHandBananaNo t1_izrzamb wrote
It's medical malpractice so you should also mention the lawsuits and complaints to licensing board that you will visit upon them as well.
LittleGravitasIndeed t1_izs2p5c wrote
Fair, but they have lawyers and money is fungible. Your meat suit bits are much less so.
Dr_D-R-E t1_izuvqz2 wrote
Speaking from the USA perspective:
Don’t threaten the person operating on you for something they won’t do anyway
NoHandBananaNo t1_izuztyy wrote
Speaking from the reads American women's experiences on reddit and facebook perspective:
I don't think pre emptive threats are the way to go either but it's definitely still a thing in places over there.
If I was a woman giving birth I would want to specifically mention it to the obstetrician to feel them out and make my stance on it super clear. Why leave something like that up to chance.
Dr_D-R-E t1_izv3wvy wrote
Speaking as an obgyn who trained in an extraordinary diverse set of regions:
This practice has been long abandoned in the United States so much so that just about every obgyn and midwife knows the comeback, “sir, how small do I need to make it for you to fit?”
Where does this practice still happen? Certain geographic parts of the world where women’s rights are largely suppressed and where women are overwhelmingly exposed from the medical profession.
The moment you bring up legal threats with your obgyn, what you can expect is:
-
The possibility of them rightfully dismissing you from their practice as there is an assumed hostile patient-physician relationship which impairs their ability to treat you with an objective and standardized quality of care
-
Increased risk that they and other medical personnel will limit their exposure to you for fear of being implicated into your threats. In lay terms: you will get less contact with the medical team because they are scared of you making them in a law suit
-
Damaged rapport which can have any other number of fallout impacts even if as small as a less amicable relationship
-
Any threat of physical violence will also, often, but you a one way escort by security out of the hospital and ban from L&D and post partum. I have been punched, tackled, but, had patients try to stab me and nurses get that even more than doctors. I don’t screw around with safety and neither should any other medical personnel.
Obgyn cases account for 7 out of the 10 highest lawsuit payouts in US history. We all get sued and it’s often for tongs that are not in or control.
A simple: “please no husband stitch” will get you all the reassurance and care you need, and this can be addressed on your first visit, last visit, or any of the ten months of contract between conception and delivery.
NoHandBananaNo t1_izy9x4o wrote
Like I just said, I don't think pre emptive threats are the way to go either
While I appreciate your comment I think it would be more productively directed at the woman upthread who is talking about actually PHYSICALLY threatening her obstetrician before she gives birth.
I'm an old Australian man living in Australia so Im not part of this situation. I was just trying to point out to her that malpractice is generally illegal since it keeps happening to redditors.
Come to think of it not sure what country she's from either.
[deleted] t1_iztrwrj wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_izs601j wrote
[removed]
GiraffePolka t1_izs9m37 wrote
Usually a husband stitch means painful sex for the woman, sometimes to the point where they can no longer have sex or enjoy it.
BatRayz t1_izslzet wrote
I thought it was made up.
GiraffePolka t1_izsn115 wrote
Unfortunately, no. Here's an article about it
BatRayz t1_izv0s7j wrote
> There are no scientific studies that show how many women have been affected, nor is there a clear method for evaluating how prevalent the husband stitch truly is in obstetrics.
MsTerious1 t1_izsxpm8 wrote
No, it's not made up. I requested one when I gave birth vaginally, and I would request it again. It did hurt for the first month or two after we resumed sex but it wasn't so painful that it prevented my enjoyment.
My doctor told me it's also called a crown stitch and described it to me before doing it. Instead of just stitching the "right" portion of the vaginal entry at the perineum, the crown stitch also stitches a little of the vaginal wall and brings it up to that "ring." (I don't know the name of the sphincter there.) Maybe I got lucky, but I would not hesitate to do the same thing if I were having a baby again.
actively_eating t1_izsyfsx wrote
can you explain why? you said it hurt. what are the pros?
[deleted] t1_izte0uc wrote
[removed]
candornotsmoke t1_iztrpr4 wrote
What's right for you isn't right for anyone. Also, the literature doesn't support husband stitched as it messes with the way the vagina unfolds during sex.
Secondly, husbands would ask for this when their wife was under andI and couldn't consent to the "procedure". The entire basis for the "husband stitch" is misogynistic.
It is just as barbaric as FGM.
MsTerious1 t1_izuxg7n wrote
- Where did I say it was right for everyone or even encourage ANYone to get one? Yet here you are, being hypocritical by chastising me for something I had every right to do simply because I didn't have a bad experience with it.
- I'm a woman. Please do not tell me that I am being misogynistic. That's as bad as women who don't allow men to hold doors open because it devalues a woman's ability to open her own door. Sometimes people can choose to do things for someone else for reasons that have NOTHING to do with with their "value" as a person.
candornotsmoke t1_izv66hs wrote
I didn't, actually. I just said what I was thinking and how I equated the procedure to other commonly done "procedures ". It wasn't a personal attack.
[deleted] t1_izw5oub wrote
[removed]
superspiffyusername t1_izs86qv wrote
Was it better for her, though?
MorrowPlotting t1_izsadev wrote
Like I said — and the downvoters seem to have missed it — this probably didn’t really happen, and if it did, I’m as appalled as you all are.
But, yes, my wife thinks better sex is better. (She credits the deepened emotional bond of sharing parenthood together. Which is totally probably the answer.)
Dankestgoldenfries t1_izsicee wrote
The downvotes are probably because you said that a husband stitch would make sex better if it had happened. That’s patently untrue for both parties
daveescaped t1_izsf3me wrote
We were in the Middle East during this particular birth (Abu Dhabi) but the surgeon literally said out loud, “and one stitch for your husband”. I was ignorant to the concept. It was much later when I realized what he meant. By then it creeped me out.
[deleted] t1_izs6g1h wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_izs7jq8 wrote
[removed]
POTUSBrown t1_izsh5at wrote
I heard from multiple women, that sex is better after baby, not sure what the reason is for this.
Botryllus t1_izstugs wrote
It is not from a husband stitch if that's what you're implying.
Skyblacker t1_iztagfn wrote
Husband stitches are an urban legend. If sex hurts after childbearing, it's more likely to be vaginismus or some other pelvic PTSD. Postpartum physical therapy can often resolve it.
swisspea t1_iztpipz wrote
Untrue. I was stitched “too close” after I had my first, and it was only a first degree tear to begin with. While I absolutely believe this was not an intentional “husband stitch”, it was observed by my postpartum midwife and I needed some massage to break up the scar tissue from that botched job. Luckily I’m fine now, and have had two uncomplicated births and easy recoveries since the .
sfcnmone t1_iztrd1h wrote
The classic (but I’ve never seen it in 25 years of L&D work) “husband stitch” was put deep into the underlying muscle. A 1st degree tear is so shallow that it doesn’t effect the muscle.
Someone could tie a first degree tear stitch too tight, for sure, in an attempt to make the woman’s vulva “look right”, whatever that means.
Skyblacker t1_izttbzu wrote
Or maybe the vulva is just so swollen and torn right after birth that stitching it back into place is more of an art than a science.
sfcnmone t1_izu7hcl wrote
Oh well yes I’ve done “some” stitching and yes it is absolutely an art. In fact, deciding whether to put any stitches at all into shallow tears is an art. Midwives tend not to sew shallow tears (1st degree) as long as they aren’t bleeding, because the stitches are often much more uncomfortable than unsutured “skid marks“. Not to say that vulval tears are particularly pleasant no matter what!
This doesn’t really work well for deeper tears, where the muscle or small sphincter are torn. That’s really the point of OP’s question.
My observation, from delivering a couple of thousand babies, is that first time teenagers almost never have deep tears, and first time 35 year olds almost always have tears, and so probably there were fewer tears hundreds of years ago.
Skyblacker t1_izubiqq wrote
I've also read that pushes during natural birth tend to be shorter (less than 10 seconds each) than when coached through an epidural, and it's long pushes that increase the odds of pelvic dysfunction afterwards.
I actually ran that experiment myself during my last birth. While coached, I watched the clock behind my doctor and deliberately did not go over 10 seconds per push. It made a difference!
After a previous birth, I fainted. But after this one, I still had enough energy to be hungry and demolish a cheeseburger from hospital room service. After another previous birth, I had hemmeroids that felt like continuous contractions. But this time when the epidural wore off, I was just sore like I'd overdone squats at the gym.
Were there other factors? Maybe. And I admit that this is anecdotal. But I do believe that shorter pushes made the difference between fainting from exhaustion and screaming in pain, to being merely worn out and sore.
And up until the advent of the epidural (which I love overall, don't get me wrong), shorter pushes were the norm.
sfcnmone t1_izupxtc wrote
Yes I absolutely agree. Sometimes women without epidurals even sleep right through a “pushing” contraction.
Sounds like you’ve got this thing figured out. I had a patient once who said “I think I’ve found my sport!”.
swisspea t1_iztwlb3 wrote
Oh gosh, that sounds so horrendous. I know more now.
Skyblacker t1_iztquhs wrote
So the issue was scar tissue. That's what I attributed my pelvic pain to after my first childbirth, until a pelvic floor therapist diagnosed vaginismus instead. She assigned pelvic relaxation exercises that might have been adjacent to massage.
I just think the phrase "husband stitch" is reductive and fails to acknowledge the complexity of pelvic floor dysfunction and treatment.
candornotsmoke t1_iztrv0l wrote
Source?
Skyblacker t1_iztsnu4 wrote
I was speaking from personal experience, but here's an OB's take:
https://blogs.webmd.com/womens-health/20180316/an-ob-weighs-in-on-the-husband-stitch
candornotsmoke t1_izttt85 wrote
A blog on web MD is an opinion not a fact. Secondly, you're speaking of anecdotal evidence. One perspective among millions of perspectives on the topic.
That's not statistically significant and, quite frankly, it's disturbing that you think those are valid sources.
Skyblacker t1_iztvwx8 wrote
I guess I just bristle at the phrase "husband stitch" because it's reductive of a biological system that does not get nearly enough attention in medicine. Sex can hurt for five gagillion reasons after childbirth and more doctors need to recognize that, screen for it, and treat it.
jewelmovement t1_izucwcn wrote
Well I’m an OBGYN and I’ve worked in tens of hospitals with hundreds of other obstetric doctors and none of us do it. It’s an urban myth, a bad joke.
onehotdrwife t1_izuzfg8 wrote
Thank you for saying this! Glad to hear it’s not being done. I hope that is reassuring to people reading this and worrying about it.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments