My mom and I have been having a debate over whether it’s possible. I say it is, because it has happened. I read somewhere about a few cases of babies being born out the anus as opposed to the vagina. They said it was easy, with “easy removal of the placenta”. My mom says it can’t happen.
Who is right, and please, no jokes about how much about certain people this explains.
Not without quite literally tearing someone a new asshole. The anus is not connected to the uturus.
Um…not possible. Anatomically there is no connection between the anus and the uterus. If there was, septicema (right word?) would set in and the mother’s health would be in jeopardy.
They are right. This IS taking longer than we thought.
Even if it is possible (which I doubt), why would it even be considered over a C-section?
Bunk, I say.
Just because your father said that your mother “shit you out” does not mean that you were born via the anus.
Can you please post some cites as to these anal births that you said had happened.
Maybe this was how Jesus was born, being that Mary’s hymen was intact afterwards, or so say the Catholics.
I’ve heard of this. Apparently, there are odd cases where a birth defect results in a woman’s vaginal canal and colon being connected. When this happens, her children might end up exiting via the wrong door.
That would still involve massive trauma to the internal body structure. there are BONES in between there, you know. For this even to be possible, there’d have to be awesomely freaky changes in the body.
Are you pulling this out of your ass?
What you can get is endoscopic pregnancies, where the embyro acctaches itself outside the uterus. The pregancy is usually terminated for the mother’s safety, otherwise they are delivered by caesarean. Is this what you’re thinking of?
And smiling bandit, could you give a cite explaining what bones are in between the vaginal canal and colon? I thought it was only tissue separating the two. I agree that massive trauma would occur though, just a nitpick.
Actually, Rabid_Squirrel, what you’re thinking of is more commonly known as ectopic pregnancy. An endoscopic pregnancy would be a form of ectopic pregnancy so severe that the embryo attaches itself OUTSIDE the actual body, inside a medical instrument. Which I presume would have even more complications, particularly for the poor physician whose endoscope it is.
There ain’t no bones between my reproductive organs and the end of my digestive tract. They’re all nice and snug inside my pelvis…But maybe I’m just weird.
And the only way an embryo could end up attached to the bowel is if an ectopic pregnancy were to rupture the fallopian tubes, and ‘migrate’ to a different part of the lower pelvic region. Now, if you have a ruptured fallopian tube, you know ALL about it. You’d be a screaming mess in Emergency and being prepped for surgery before the embryo got any chance to adhere to another organ.
So, basically, no. There is no such thing as ‘anal childbirth’ and no, there are no bones between the vagina/uterus etc and the digestive tract.
“If you think you so great, just remember this –
All of us were born between shit and piss.”
–sage insight from my uncle’s Hustler collection
Oh come on! You folks have never heard this joke? A 10 year old boy says to his classmate “have you ever had pussy around your neck?”. Well, what a stupid question. Of course not. So the other kid says no. “Hahaha. You 're a butthole baby!!!”
Thinking about this some more, are you sure that your ‘cites’ aren’t recounting cases where the act of childbirth involves a massive tearing of the perineum (the muscle and tissue area between the vaginal entrance and the rectum)? In that instance, then I s’pose you COULD say (with a lot of imagination and a goodly measure of ignorance) that the baby was delivered per rectum.
Sort of.
At a pinch.
And stretching the bounds of credibility a lot too far.
Here I sit
Cheeks a flexin’
Giving birth to
Another Texan
I’d guess it’s happened before. There can be a fistula between the rectum and vagina, even if it shouldn’t be there. Old school OB-GYNs used to do rectal exams (not vaginal) to monitor progress during pregnancy!
Perhaps what TMWTGG is thinking of is an episiotomy.
elfbabe I was starting a post saying you were wrong till I reread what you were saying and realized that Rabid_Squirrel was using the wrong prefix… I thought you were saying it wasn’t possible!
I seem to recall that recently (like within the past month), in Toronto I believe, a baby was born that was attached to the outside of his mothers uterus. She’s wasn’t Canadian but she went into labor and they decided to do a c-section for some reason. They didn’t know the baby was outside the uterus until they cut her open and looked around. Apparently her doc back home hadn’t caught it even after several ultrasounds and such. She was lucky, and the baby was healthy too!
Cyn, OB/GYN RN checking in…
I’ll have to ask the docs when I get back from vacation, but I’ve heard stories of anal-vaginal fistulas rupturing and babies exploding through the vagina and tearing out the anus. I’ll ask if any of them have actually seen this happen and where it’s documented. The baby is traveling through the vagina, the vagina fails and the perineum fails and the rectum is breeched. The baby doesn’t travel throught the rectum: the uterus opens into the vagina.
