The gentlebirth.org website is provided courtesy of
Ronnie Falcao, LM MS, a homebirth midwife in Mountain View, CA

Epidurals Cause Physical Problems for Babies

 
Local-regional anesthesia during childbirth: effect on newborn behaviors.
Standley K, Soule AB 3d, Copans SA, Duchowny MS
Science 1974 Nov 15;186(4164):634-5

Abstract:  Administration of local-regional anesthesia during normal deliveries was correlated significantly with newborn behaviors as evaluated by the Brazelton Neonatal Assessment Scale.  Three days after birth, infants whose mothers received local-regional anesthesia were more irritable and motorically less mature than those infants whose mothers were not medicated.

That same year, Scanlon (Scanlon JW, Brown WU, Weiss JB, Alper MH. Anesthesiology 1974; 40:121.) found limited effects of epidural anesthesia on newborn behavior after epidural but used a control group in which spinal anesthesia, local anesthesia, and no anesthesia were all lumped together. Nor was the effect of analgesic drug administration (narcotics) controlled for.

Standley, et al.  found that local-regional anesthesia was correlated significantly with decreased motor maturity and greater irritability.  Jerky movements in small arcs, startles and tremulous motions, and frequent state changes and crying were more common in babies of mothers who received anesthesia.  Analgesia usage was significantly related to lower scores on motor maturity.

Medication effects were also correlated.  the most alert, least irritable, and motorically most mature behaviors were shown by those babies whose mothers had received no medication.  Anesthesia appeared to have more of an impact on the infant than analgesia.  When the effect of analgesia was controlled for by comparing babies whose mothers had received no analgesia, the anesthesia and no anesthesia groups were significantly different on irritability and motor maturity scores; the difference for alertness approached significance.  On the other hand, when the effect of anesthesia impact on the infant than analgesia.  When the effect of analgesia was controlled for by comparing babies whose mothers had received no analgesia, the anesthesia and no anesthesia groups were significantly different on irritability and motor maturity scores; the difference for alertness approached significance.  On the other hand, when the effect of anesthesia was controlled for by comparing the four groups of babies whose mothers received anesthesia and varying doses of analgesia,  no significant differences were found on the infant measures.  Product-moment correlations between analgesia and the three BNBAS clusters were nonsignificant when only those subjects who received anesthesia were included in the analysis.

The three Brazelton clusters did not correlate significantly with other factors related to the difficulty of delivery: length of labor, use of forceps (in the anesthetized group), Apgar scores, and infant birth weight.

The study was conducted on 60 first-born, full-term, healthy infants between 48 and 72 hours of age.  All were born of white, middle-class women who had received routine antenatal care and had medically uneventful pregnancies and deliveries.

The authors responded to criticism from the anesthesiology community (Hodgkinson R, Marx GF.  Local-regional anesthesia during childbirth and newborn behavior.  Science 1974; 189(4202):571-2.).  The critics could not believe the results because of lack of biochemical explanation.  At that time, it was not known that epidural anesthetics reached the fetal circulation.  The authors responded well to the small sample criticism, as well (Standley K, Klein RP, Soule AB., same reference):

They said, "We, too, wish that this group was larger; however, the small sample size works against finding significant differences because it reduces the power of the statistical tests (Cohen J.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.  New York: Academic Press, 1969, pp 1-16)."  The authors argued for larger studies, as everyone today should still continue to do.

I'll quote William Emerson here:

"Most parents and professionals consider it ordinary for infants to awaken during the night, cry for long periods, have gastrointestinal distress, or be irritable.  Few parents or professionals have seen trauma-free babies, so few have experienced babies who are symptom-free.  In addition, few have glimpsed the human potential that is possible when babies are freed from the bonds of early trauma."

The only study that I know of right now that looked at the epidural effects on the babies was done by a Sepkowski, where her first study showed that at one month follow up there were differences in development and responsiveness, and significant lower scores on the Brazelton Scale (he was a member of the study team).  She followed up these children for 5 years, and the same publication would not publish the paper. Apparently they felt that publishing these results "would scare mothers".  There is clearly a  great deal of pressure 'that" there  be no published data against epidural anesthesia in the US and abroad.   A great deal of biased studies however are being designed and carried out by Association of Anesthesiology and ACOG to support epidural use and decrease the support for doula/midwife one-on-one support. All of which have been released dramatically to the public to support the use of epidurals and the lack of need for labor support.    I want to close my note by asking if anyone had reference to the study that was posted on the midwifery list that was "being" analyzed as babies experiencing painful births had more trouble "later in life"-therefore Medications for pain were positive not only for mother but for baby?  We would like to critique that study.

I am consistently amazed at the studies done in the late 70's and early 80's on the effects of epidurals on newborn behavior.  The doses studied were well within the range of doses used today.  The conclusions were that newborn effects were not simple dose-response, and that even small doses could adversely affect some infants.  So why did studies suddenly stop.  Not a single one really after 1985.  Doris Haire has told us that one researcher at Harvard did a study showing adverse effects 5 years after an epidural and her job was threatened if she published it.  I suspect a conspiracy.

New data is emerging from Hollander at Mt. Sinai, that the combination of epidural and oxytocin predisposes to autism.  I can say that among my 16 autistic patients, every single child was born with epidural and oxytocin. This is not to imply causality, rather, predisposition.  I suspect the two agents produce subtle brain damage that later viruses and vaccinations exploit to produce devastating neurodevelopment effects.

Epidurals and Other Drugs and Bonding and Birth Trauma