Home births, natural or foolish?
Posted
October 22, 2006 at
10:29 am by
Jessica
I stumbled upon a story this morning about a woman who chose to give birth in her Sydney Australia home and within minutes of giving birth, the outer body, beautiful and natural experience became seriously life threatening. The baby was also under severe duress while the mother lay bleeding to death. The midwife called in the emergency and a medevac helicopter arrived, taking 30 minutes to stabilize the pair and flew them to the nearest hospital where they are both doing fine after proactive medical intervention.
It leaves me to wonder, this small, yet growing sub-culture that engages in hating medical intervention (a sub-culture that has become so self-loathing and hateful towards progress itself or “intervention”), isn’t it selfish to denounce the medical community, only to call upon it to save one’s life when it’s needed? It’s one thing if one’s life is in danger dure to an accident, but is it wrong to secretly wish this woman gets a $25,000 bill for the medivac, as I secrety do (which I’m sure is only a fraction of the cost)? After all, valuable resources were taken away for a knowingly risky choice. In my opinion, she knowingly put her and her baby in harms way.
A Physician wrote about his thoughts on the matter in this letter to the editor of The Border Mail in Australia:
I REPLY to the letter from Janet Fraser, national convenor Joyous Birth (The Border Mail September16), which demonstrates perfectly the misinformation this minority group puts forward as “evidence-based” facts.
This group has some dangerous ideas, convincing anxious expectant mothers that a home birth is safe.
The evidence-based facts are that it is at least three times more dangerous to have a baby born at home than in a hospital, because when something does go wrong, often without warning as in about 30 per cent of all births, there is not the expertise and immediate assistance from a team of professionals, including midwives, obstetricians, paediatricians and anaesthetists.
None of the obstetricians in Albury-Wodonga support home birth, and no sensible experienced midwife would agree to deliver a woman at home when the alternative is to offer a safe delivery in hospital with immediate support available.
When a person works for 35 years doing high-risk obstetrics, seeing perfectly healthy women suddenly have a complication that is a risk to their lives as well as their baby, is it any wonder that I feel saddened by the ignorance of home birth groups which are trying to take us back to the dark ages.
The data measured by the Victorian Government proves the Wodonga obstetric team has one of the best outcomes for women and their babies.
Rural women and the dedicated team of midwives and doctors do not need to be insulted by a city based group of ideologists, telling us what is safe in our environment.
— DR PIETER MOURIK,
Wodonga
Admittedly, it is difficult to get accurate data. Those opposed to home births often cite a much higher risk than those that support it, although even in home birthing organizations, I have read that home birthing is safe in about 90% of the cases (and given they have an agenda, I take that percentage with a grain of salt).
The most common argument for homebirth is that of the feminist who believes that the male dominated medical community is trying to suppress women and rip their babies out of them to establish their dominance and to demean women. I say this is a major crock. There are plenty of female gyne’s out there and to assume that male doctors generally have a hatred of women is paranoid and delusional. Their job is keep you and your baby healthy and while some misjudgements can and do occur (nobody’s infallible), I cannot buy that it is all part of a vast conspiracy to keep women down. In fact, I think women are so self-absorbed with their own victimization, that they lack reason sometimes. I’m sure there are some male doctors that hate women, I’m sure there are a lot of female doctors that hate men, but all of them love their paychecks and common sense would dictate that they put their personal feelings aside to thwart off malpractice suits.
Generally, I think those that choose to become physicians, do so because they’re smart enough, have a “God-complex” and want to make a lot of money. The way to do that, is to be a good doctor and minimize mistakes. I actually would rather have a doctor with a “God-complex” than an indecisive ninny that based his or her decisions on political correctness or sappy emotional baggage.
Another point to consider is that many midwives are practising without licenses and the more disturbing trend, the one of “unassisted” birth where no person of expertise or birthing experience is present, except one’s family, only furthers concern. In some states, unlicensed midwives are being prosecuted, and why shouldn’t they be? The New York times reports:
Midwives see it differently. They say the ability of women to choose to give birth at home is under assault from a medical establishment dominated by men who, for reasons of money and status, resent a centuries-old tradition that long ago anticipated the concerns of modern feminism.
Chloe Hendrix-Petry’s birth has not given rise to criminal charges, but a prosecution against another midwife, Jennifer Williams, is pending in Shelbyville, Ind. It was prompted by the death of a baby named Oliver Meredith that Ms. Williams delivered in June. But she is not charged with causing or contributing to Oliver’s death.
Instead, to hear the county prosecutor tell it, the case against Ms. Williams is not unlike one against a trucker caught driving without a license. Read the rest…
Unlicensed midwives, like other unlicensed individuals acting under the guise of legitimacy, ought to be held to the same standards as anybody else. Nobody is above the law.
It is my opinion that people should be allowed to make their own choices, even foolish ones. My hope is that people are completely informed of the risks involved in home births and not just risking the lives of their babies for their own political agendas and hatred of progress that has done far more good and has extended millions of people’s lives. I feel that having a home birth is an unecessary risk that I wouldn’t want to be a part of, however, there are thousands of women who think otherwise and as empowering as they might think that makes them, I think it makes them just foolish people that got lucky.
Tags: feminists, home-birth, homebirth, midwives, natural-birth, Parenting, unassisted-birth |
118 Responses to “Home births, natural or foolish?”
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately in an effort to remove commercial messages, irrelevancies, excessive foul language, racist/sexist/hateful comments, spoofed/cloaked IPs and/or personal attacks and will be edited/deleted at our discretion. Thank you for your patience.
91. earthshoes said:
December 2, 2006 @ 10:07 pm
[quote]This conjecture only proves my point that the homebirthing movement bases their decisions on ideology rather than science. What more is there to argue?[/quote]
How many women do you suppose make the decision to have their children in the hospital based on science? I’ll lay you odds that most of them do it because that’s just how you do it, or because they’re too afraid to consider any other option. Because their spouse isn’t comfortable with it or because their insurance won’t cover anything outside of a hospital delivery. Do they base their decision on scientific knowledge? Yeah right.
Take the segment of the population who chooses to birth at home. Do we do it because that’s just how it’s done? Hardly. I can’t speak for all homebirthers, just for the twenty or so I’ve known over the years. However, I can tell you that by and large we are a better informed population than average who’ve decided to look outside the box with the red cross on it for our answers.
92. Jessica Carlson said:
December 2, 2006 @ 10:13 pm
[/quote]
First of all, if it makes you feel better to personally attack me, then go right ahead, but let me make one thing clear — I don’t care if you are in love with birthing el naturale and you want to run through the streets, shout it to the roof-tops and wave your homebirthing flag. It is your right to do so. It is my right to question it’s safety and ideology.
I composed this blog post as an opinion based on the scientific evidence that is readily available. I was very clear about that. Although coincidentally, I think Dr. Amy has provided an ample amount of evidence that supports such a position.
I’m not even sure what you are protesting here. You don’t need Dr. Amy’s or my approval, or do you?
Let me ask you another question, do you think it’s perfectly fine that the majority of women feel safer birthing in a hospital environment?? Do you fully respect that decision?
93. Freebirther said:
December 2, 2006 @ 10:16 pm
It is your right to question it’s safety and idealogy, but you did more than that; you went so far as to call homebirthers foolish, and stating that it was rude is not a personal attack just as stating the fact that you have provided little evidence, making you seem quite ignorant, was not a personal ttack.
I think Dr. Amy has provided an ample amount of evidence that would support such a position if she filled in a few more holes.
Yes, I think it is perfectly fine that the majority of women feel afer birthing in a hospital. I do not think it is perfectly fine that half-truths, lies, and exaggerations are used to keep them feeling that way.
94. Jessica Carlson said:
December 2, 2006 @ 10:31 pm
Yes, I think it is perfectly fine that the majority of women feel afer birthing in a hospital. I do not think it is perfectly fine that half-truths, lies, and exaggerations are used to keep them feeling that way.[/quote]
LOL. Yeah, well the problem is that most women don’t subscribe to your suggestions and claims that a medically supervised birth is superior to homebirth because of lies and half-truths. So that’s not really accepting or respecting most women’s decisions, is it?
95. Freebirther said:
December 2, 2006 @ 10:42 pm
Believing that the tactics used by OBs and other pro-hospital advocates are not acceptable and that many of the things they present as ‘facts’ are not completely true does not mean that I don’t respect a woman’s opinion about which birth is superior. Whether or not people subscribe to my opinion about that has nothing to do with whether or not I respect them. As I said, my problem is with anyone who uses half-truths, lies, or exaggerations to keep someone feeling a certain way; I have no issue with the people who are kept feeling that way as a result of those tactics. I have the same opinion of anyone using such tactics to advocate homebirth. Women have various reasons for birthing in hospitals or in homes, and disapproving of certain methods to try to sway a woman to believe one thing or another does not mean I do not respect a woman’s choice. I fail to recognize how disagreeing with deception as a method to persuasion is the same as not accepting or respecting a woman’s choice, considering not every woman is convinced because of deceit and that whether a woman believes what I do or not has nothing to do with whether or not I respect her choice. You are really reaching now. Are you done word twisting now, or do we have to continue debating whether or not I mean what I say, whether you know me better than myself, and other completely irrelevent topics that have absolutely nothing to do with the actual debate? Can we get back to the real issue?
96. Prescott said:
December 2, 2006 @ 10:44 pm
[quote comment="11005"]Do you not realize that two people can see the same statistics and interpret them differently based on your feelings?[/quote]
No, I don’t, and you completely reveal your lack of knowledge about science by saying so. Two people can certainly choose to react differently based on those statistics, but there is no different interpretation. Scientific studies, when properly conducted, are meant to eliminate “feelings” or bias (i.e., double blind). Either they conclusively show that home birthing is safer, or they don’t. Period.
[quote]I didn’t Google or cyberstalk anyone, sweety.[/quote]
I clicked over to her blog as well. How from there you deducted she posted comments on others “personal” blogs I don’t know, I guess I didn’t take the time to fully peruse the site.
Don’t lecture me on how to debate, honey. Apparently your debating style is to make confusing, contradictory, and completely ignorant statements in an effort to get folks to concede after the blood loss from all the brick wall head banging. I should remember it, because it appears to be effective. You’ve officially bored me, I’m done.
97. Amy Tuteur, MD said:
December 2, 2006 @ 10:45 pm
Freebirther:
“rather than trying to sway the minds of people who will probably never agree with you.”
I’m not trying to change the minds of homebirth advocates. I deal in facts and committed idealogues are not swayed by facts. I write for the vast majority of women who are looking for scientific facts in order to make their own, informed decisions. I write to counteract the avalanche of myths and lies that comprise the bulk of homebirth advocacy.
“I have seen several studies that show the exact opposite result”
Clearly you have not, because no such studies exist. I suspect that you have not read even a single study in its entirety, so there is no way to know the studies actually say.
For example, the study you mentioned, the Johnson and Daviss study in the BMJ in 2005, claims to show that homebirth is as safe as hospital birth, but does not use the appropriate control group. The death rate in the homebirth group was 2/1000 and the death rate for babies of low risk white women in the hospital for the very same year was 1/1000. Johnson and Daviss conveniently left that part out.
Furthermore, Johnson and Daviss did not offer complete disclosure of their own conflicts of interest. In the paper, Johnson describes his professional position as “senior epidemiologist, Surveillance and Risk Assessment Division, Centre for Chronic Disease Prevention and Control, Public Health Agency of Canada”, but he neglected to mention that he held another position: head of the MANA (Midwives Alliance of North America) Statistics and Research Committee. In fact, Johnson and Daviss have been passionate homebirth advocates for many years, long before they embarked on the study. Daviss, who is Johnson’s wife, is a homebirth midwife. Furthermore, the study was not funded by an academic institution or a government agency. Rather, it was funded by Foundation for the Advancement of Midwifery, a homebirth advocacy group. The study itself was commissioned by NARM (the North American Registry of Midwives).
So using money from a homebirth advocacy group, NARM, a homebirth advocacy group, hired homebirth advocates Johnson and Daviss to produce a study on homebirth. The conclusion appears to be predetermined. When an industry hires known allies to do a study about that industry, the results are going to be favorable.
98. Jessica Carlson said:
December 2, 2006 @ 10:52 pm
Good to know that you respect a woman’s right to choose to give birth in the safety of a hospital and/or with qualified physicans.
99. Freebirther said:
December 3, 2006 @ 12:51 am
Prescott, I’m done as well, as you continue to demonstrate your ignorance with your unwillingness to back-up your claims and your close-minded personality with your unwillingness to accept that two people based on their dispositions, ideology, and personalities can interpret the same data in two different ways. Rather than own up to any flaws on your part, you simply deflect away from yourself and attempt to pick apart the statements of others, twisting and turning the words until you find a way to make the writer appear to be a hypocrit, calling people cyberstalkers for taking a few moments to read a blog. I’ve had enough of this elementary school playground argument. When you’re ready to come inside from recess, I’ll be happy to engage you.
There are many committed iealogues who deal in facts, and don’t pretend that you yourself do not have any ideology.
Earthshoes just posted one such study and one was released in response to an ACOG study published recently. I have read them both in their entirety, contrary to what you suspect. You can continue to discredit them, but I can find just as many flaws in pro-hospital birth studies.
As for your point about obstetrics helping cases of labor obstruction and birth injuries, let me also point out that up even into the 1900s many women wore corsets, which caused their bodyes including their pelvises to change shape resulting in narrow passageways for birthing. That women no longer wear them, IMO, has a lot more to do with fewer instances of death from obstructed labor and the lower instance of obstructed labor as well as the fewer instances of birth injuries, which often occur from obstructed labor.
Jessica, yes, I do respect a woman’s right to give birth in the safety of a hospital and/or with qualified physicians, just as I respect a woman’s right to give birth in the safety of her home, houseboat, or backyard with or without attendants.
100. Freebirther said:
December 3, 2006 @ 12:52 am
It is unfortunate, however, that you do not have the same respect, as is apparent from your comments here and this article.
101. Jessica said:
December 3, 2006 @ 8:40 am
I said in the OP, “It is my opinion that people should be allowed to make their own choices, even foolish ones.” I definitely respect woman’s right to choose, even if it isn’t the same choice I would make.
102. Freebirther said:
December 3, 2006 @ 12:40 pm
And you went on to say that homebirthers were just ‘foolish people who got lucky’ (despite the fact that in the vast majority of births, nothing goes wrong, making them normal not lucky). That doesn’t send a message of respect. Respecting that someone has the RIGHT to do something isn’t the same as respecting the choice the woman makes, which you obviously do not.
103. Freebirther said:
December 3, 2006 @ 12:52 pm
“My beef is with the women that decry the medical establishment and then use them when something goes wrong. It’s hypocrisy.”
A homebirther who choses not to receive medical care, when she does not need it, but accept it when she does is a hypocrit, in your words. That doesn’t sound very respectful.
“I probably should have said that I think their decisions are foolish and not the people themselves”
“I believe that if every woman gave birth at home, we would be throwing women back to the dark ages”
” It’s ideology based on junk science”
These statements don’t sound very respectful of a woman’s choice, belief, etc. when it comes to homebirthing. Sure, you respect a woman’s RIGHT to chose and don’t want to take it away, but you don’t seem to respect the choices homebirthers are making one bit. If you do you have a funny way of showing it.
I found another one of your fallacies:
my guess is the reason there are more complications with c-sections is because c-sections usually (not always, but usually) are done in emergency situations or situations where the mother or baby are in danger
The reason there are more complications with C-sections is because you are cutting open a woman’s stomach to pull out the baby and placenta, robbing the baby of the benefits of the contractions that help prepare his lungs for birth and causing a higher instance of hemorrhage for the mother as well as side effects from the epidural. Even in healthy women electing a C-section or having one scheduled simply because their baby is big, in which case no one is danger, instance of complication is much higher than for vaginal birth. Obviously, there are some complications of C-section that are associated with high risk situations, but there is no denying that C-section in and of itself carries quite a risk of complication. I’d like to avoid that. I’m much less likely to be scheduled for a C-section for “big baby syndrome” if I have refused an ultrasound to guesstimate the child’s weight or to be given one for “failure for labor to progress” if I labor at home, even if it takes 3 days.
104. Freebirther said:
December 3, 2006 @ 1:00 pm
Oh, you also called the homebirther in the article selfish and accused her of denouncing the medical community, when you really had no clue what her reasons for birthing at home were, and insinuated that she is neglectful, by suggesting she put her baby in harm’s way. I don’t think it’s hard to understand why you come off as not having any respect for a woman who choses to home birth or her decision, though that too is understandable given your lack of insight into the many reasons why people homebirth.
105. Amy Tuteur, MD said:
December 3, 2006 @ 2:03 pm
Freebirther:
“you respect a woman’s RIGHT to choose and don’t want to take it away, but you don’t seem to respect the choices homebirthers are making one bit.”
Respecting the right to choose does not mean that all possible choices are respectable, admirable or even based on factual information.
Women have a right to choose to give birth at home, but that doesn’t make it a safe choice or a good choice. The bottom line is that homebirth carries an increased risk of preventable neonatal death. You may decide that the risk is acceptable to you, since it is a small risk. However, that would certainly mean that you are not in a position to criticize women who choose the hospital since the hospital is clearly safer for the baby.
The real problem with homebirth advocacy is not the choice, but the fact that the choice is almost always made based on false and misleading information, since the bulk of the homebirth advocacy literature is false and misleading.
All women deserve accurate information in order to make an informed decision about what is best for them and their families.
106. Kris said:
December 3, 2006 @ 2:20 pm
Freebirther’s selections in the previous post show the lack of respect Jessica has for women’s choices, but like she said, it is her opinion.
This also disturbed me:
“…but is it wrong to secretly wish this woman gets a $25,000 bill for the medivac, as I secrety do (which I’m sure is only a fraction of the cost)?”
Why would you secretly wish this upon anyone? THAT seems disrespectful. I would not wish that on anyone. It’s like saying ‘well, she got what she deserved’. And maybe Jessica agrees with that.
In the same vein as ’she got what she deserved’ and ‘respect/disrespect’, would you say that to someone who was raped? Wouldn’t that be disrespectful?
[quote]I said in the OP, “It is my opinion that people should be allowed to make their own choices, even foolish ones.” I definitely respect woman’s right to choose, even if it isn’t the same choice I would make.[/quote]
“I think it makes them just foolish people that got lucky.”
Their choice makes them foolish people. That certainly dosen’t give off any hint of respect.
Alright.
107. Freebirther said:
December 3, 2006 @ 4:24 pm
Amy, I haven’t criticized anyone for chosing the hospital. I have criticized someone for making very rude, disrespectful remarks about people who chose homebirth. The bottom line is that people who chose homebirth do not believe that it carries an increased risk of preventable neonatal death, and many feel that the evidence shows that this is instead true of the hospital. This is an example of how two different people can see similar information and come to different conclusions. I happen to think that the choice to birth in a hospital is often made on false, misleading information, but you still have every right to birth there, believe that it is better, and have that choice be respected by me–just as we have the right to have our choices respected, despite the fact that you do not agree with our logic or cannot understand why we, upon seeing similar statistics, do not come to the same conclusion as you. It is not that homebirthers ONLY read pro-homebirth propaganda, have not done any research, or are stupid. We have read many studies, both for and against homebirth and other choices, and used our own brains to decide which chose is right for us. As many fallacies as you can find with homebirth advocacy literature, I can find with hospital birth literature. You have showed many statistics, but you have yet to fill in the holes in your research to make your claims truly valid. Yes, instances of death from obstructed labor have occurred; but you cannot prove that this is because of obstetrics, which were widespread long before you claim. You are not in a position to criticize women who chose to birth in the home, because you are not them, it is not your choice, you don’t know them or what they’ve read, and quite frankly it’s none of your business. You can deny the existance of valid studies proving homebirth is safer, but you cannot deny the anecdotal evidence; the vast majority of people who homebirth are glad that they did and have healthy babies to show for it. The studies I’ve seen showing that hospital birth is safer have been flawed as well, so if you want my opinion, the evidence doesn’t swing one way or another. I think you are scrutinizing the homebirth studies more closely than the hospital birth studies. When it comes to my way of thinking, I don’t even base mine on statistics but on what is common sense to me: that birth is natural, that our bodies know what they are doing, that intervening without necessity can only hinder the process, and that medical intervention is helpful–but when necessary. The point: while YOU and people like you interpret all of the evidence one way, others interpret it another–and neither side’s point of view is more or less valid than the other’s. Everyone thinks differently.
108. Freebirther said:
December 3, 2006 @ 4:26 pm
Amy obviously doesn’t respect women who chose to homebirth either. She even states that homebirth is not a respectable choice, though she respects their right to make it. I think the problem here is not that we cannot see eye to eye but that we cannot agree to disagree, understand that while we may each see things a different way, all of our choices and perspectives are valid. And by we, I mean they, for while I may think the same of the information given to support hospital birth as they do of homebirth, I still respect the woman, her right to chose, and her decision. Open your minds, and realize that just because you have provne something to yourself and like-minded individuals doesn’t mean that those who think differently are blind, misled, or stupid.
109. Jessica said:
December 3, 2006 @ 4:35 pm
“you respect a woman’s RIGHT to choose and don’t want to take it away, but you don’t seem to respect the choices homebirthers are making one bit.”
Respecting the right to choose does not mean that all possible choices are respectable, admirable or even based on factual information.
Women have a right to choose to give birth at home, but that doesn’t make it a safe choice or a good choice. The bottom line is that homebirth carries an increased risk of preventable neonatal death. You may decide that the risk is acceptable to you, since it is a small risk. However, that would certainly mean that you are not in a position to criticize women who choose the hospital since the hospital is clearly safer for the baby.
The real problem with homebirth advocacy is not the choice, but the fact that the choice is almost always made based on false and misleading information, since the bulk of the homebirth advocacy literature is false and misleading.
All women deserve accurate information in order to make an informed decision about what is best for them and their families.[/quote]
Exactly, exactly and exactly!
Nuff said.
110. MamaRuth said:
December 4, 2006 @ 12:44 am
Hello. I just found this little stream, and thought I’d jump in for a splash.
I have both given birth at hospitals and in a birth center with midwives. In the first hospital, my dignity and unseen needs were the last thought on anyone’s mind. My (second birth, same hospital) twin delivery was horrifying in that aspect. They weren’t entirely unprofessional, just entirely jaded and somewhat lax. At the birth center, I was included in all the information about my health, carefully and thoroughly informed, and well cared for. That birth center has a streamlined arrangement with the nearby hospital, and emergencies are expediently and professionally handled. The midwives there are also very well trained as well as very experienced, mine also worked as a L&D nurse for 20 years. The difference was astounding. She was able to help me in ways I didn’t know was possible. She knew how gauge how to move me to help that baby move. I did bond with that child much better than with the previous children. I held him for the first hour of his outward life. They did the necessary checks while I held him. He nursed well in that time. I rested better knowing he was the center of everyone’s attention, and that the staff were coming alongside of me rather than me being expected to follow their program. I got much more service for my insurance money with the midwives. My last child was born in a hospital, because I had moved and in this state the midwife system doesn’t have the same level of respect. I considered it a gift of God, however, when I found a lady doctor who said to me “85% of women don’t need a doctor’s assistance”. She also had the mindset to come alongside of me. She read and approved my birth plan, which I wrote with the hospital staff in mind. She went as far as to send it to the hospital with her records. The hospital is new and comfy and friendly to mothers, I was free to move, and even use a tub with jets. I was assigned to a very experienced nurse who was happy to come along side of me, and very positive. I was much stronger after this last birth compared to the first two - in fact, I was able to keep my mind and joke around even in the worst of it. Again, they let me hold my dear daughter for a long while, keeping the lights down, and she was able to begin nursing within 5 minutes. They checked her for the apgar scores and everything else right in my arms. It was a magical time, only interrupted by my doctor sewing my little tear(ouch!). Once they did take her just at the hour to weigh her and so on, I got up and used the rest room and even took my shower right then! After that, I gave her her first bath myself. I was really strong enough to stand up and do that! And I was a lot more gentle than that nurse who had already begun. My doctor was so impressed that she suggested my birthing plan to other expecting women.
I’m blessed to have a healthy and strong body, and blessed to have learned to respect my body’s natural birthing process.
Arguing details won’t fix the individual experiences of anyone. Doctors and staff need to keep a careful watch on the “God-complex” issue for the purpose of preserving the individual dignity of women, their families, and the incredible significance of any birth to the future of that family. Individual women do need to inform and protect themselves, but also give due respect to the experts who are able to deal most adequately with the unfortunate reality of life-threatening, time-sensitive complications. From what I know, most birth complications are both. I, for one, am glad for doctors, but happier with minimal interference.
The last thing I have to say is this - too many husbands are secretly unfaithful, and I believe it is not a risk worth taking to assume there aren’t any STD’s that could seriously threaten a newly born baby. I have known families in which the truth came out too late for the babies to be properly protected, because the mom had faith in the husband and wanted to avoid unnecessary procedures, and the man allowed the danger to keep his lie…
Life as we know it will never be entirely ideal, expecting the ideal is a tiny bit insane. The question is, do we treat ourselves and others with dignity?
111. Freebirther said:
December 4, 2006 @ 12:55 pm
Lucky for me my trust in my husband isn’t based solely on my faith, but on the fact that he doesn’t have time to be having an affair. He gets home the appropriate amount of time after his shift and leaves the appropriate amount of time in advance in the morning. I’m a light sleeper, having a nursing toddler in my bed, and I’ve never woken to find him missing. Anytime he’s ever come home late he’s called from work to let me know and then still been reachable at work. He’s a real homebody who prefers to be at home when he’s not at work and rarely leaves the house without me, except for a quick 10-minute trip to Blockbuster. He’s always reachable on his cell phone, and there’s just no way he’s had time to have an affair, unless he’s having quickies with the gas station attendants on his way to work. He’s very family-oriented and when he’s not at work, he’s here with us. During both of his TDYs, when not at work, he’s been on the phone or internet with me or playing xbox with his buds and again is always reachable by phone or cell. Moreover, being that he’s a military man who has to be periodically tested, I’m sure he would know if he had contracted an STD somehow. Even if he did have time to have an affair I would still trust him, because I’ve known him since I was 15. I agree that many husbands are secretly unfaithful, but rather than routinely test everyone, we should still leave the choice up to them to evaluate their individual situation and decide if STD testing is necessary. In my case, it really isn’t, and my husband has already said he’d be more than happy to be tested instead of me and then return to the hospital to have the results announced to both of us together–not because he doesn’t know if he has any, as he last had a physical only a few weeks ago, but so I could hear it from the horse’s mouth. Of course I’ll probably now be told how my husband could still be deceiving me, that perhaps he’s getting it on at work with coworkers in the bathroom, etc. by people who have never met him and have no real clue what our lifestyles or schedules are like (which would be the main reason that people should be evaluated on a case by case basis, since they know themselves better than any doctor). This is one of my big problems with hospital birth: that everyone is treated the same, when we are all individuals.
112. Freebirther said:
December 6, 2006 @ 7:17 pm
Amy, you asked who the OB/GYNs and MDs in favor of homebirth were? I’m surprised you’d ask that question, considering your blog makes it clear you’ve read this which contains a statement by Charles Mahan, MD, a member of the ACOG, in favor of homebirth and against the ACOG’s policy statement. You already know that there are ob/gyns and MDs who are not opposed to homebirth–and already know the name of at LEAST one–so why would you ask, if not to appeal to the ignorance of my not knowing their names?
113. Emilia Liz said:
April 25, 2007 @ 11:06 am
Personally I would not have a home birth. I doubt any doctor would recommend me for one, given that I’m 38 years old and have never had children before. However, even if I were 25 and had three previous uncomplicated deliveries, I still would choose to deliver in hospital.
I have looked at studies about home births, not because I was considering one for myself but because I always find controversial topics interesting, and came to a few conclusions (not that my opinion is Gospel; it’s just that, my opinion). First, it seems that home birth CAN be safe, provided some conditions are met:
1.) the woman should not have any so-called risk factors (diabetes, carrying twins, previous cesarean, etc.)
2.) the midwife should be trained and licensed, not a “lay” midwife
3.) if anything should go wrong during the birth, there should be prompt access to an ambulance and the hospital.
The Netherlands, where about one third of women have home births, appears to have a low maternal and infant mortality rate by following these criteria. But again, even if I met all these conditions, I still would not choose a home birth.
Perhaps women who like the idea of a “natural” setting but not the idea of a home birth might choose a “happy medium,” i.e. a midwife delivery at a hospital just in case something goes awry. In fact, in some countries, like Sweden and the other Scandinavian nations, midwives conduct the majority of deliveries, most of which take place in hospitals, not at home, and there is a much lower rate of interventions like cesareans in these countries. But if something goes wrong, an obstetrician can intervene.
Unfortunately most other Western countries have not incorporated midwives into hospital care. One Canadian obstetrician herself said that midwives should handle normal deliveries; in her view, obstetricians should not “waste their time and training” on uncomplicated births and reserve them for the more difficult ones.
So that’s just my opinion!
114. Someone said:
April 25, 2007 @ 11:35 am
I agree that midwives should be incorporated into hospital care. This would lower rate of intervention and, as you said, create a happy medium. Other changes will have to take place before I will birth in a hospital. As for doctors recommending homebirth, very few doctors will recommend it for anyone–period. They are typically against it. Being 38 and having your first child is not a contraindiction to homebirth. Complications that develope as a result could be, but not necessarily–as many midwives are capable of handling such complications these days, despite what Amy Tuteur will tell you when she comments back.
115. Emilia Liz said:
April 25, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
Well, I support any woman’s right to choose a home birth, even though I would not do so myself. I would hope that she examines the situation carefully and if, for example, she is told she might be at high risk (ex. she has diabetes, is carrying twins) she would perhaps reconsider it. But in the end, it’s her choice.
To each her own, so to speak.
116. Michael Gill said:
August 11, 2007 @ 5:20 am
Let me just get this right, our honourable doctor quoted: “because when something does go wrong, often without warning as in about 30 per cent of all births, there is not the expertise and immediate assistance from a team of professionals…”
So The maternity industry is admitting that in the case of the other 70 percent, most births are trouble-free and ‘normal’.
Why is it then that in certain private hospitals, especially in South Africa, that there’s a 98% Ceasar rate?
Why when a mother wants to have a ‘natural’ birth in hospital, in almost every case, there’s a ‘complication’… or physical trauma (epesiotomy, forceps delivery etc..)?
Obgyns can not be trusted, their profession is based in keeping parents in ignorance (some gynies don’t even suggest antenatal classes) because of course, ‘they can do it all for you…’.
Both my daughters were born at home, we were educated by an experienced midwife, in fact we were so empowered that we could’ve delivered our babies ourselves (although obviuosly not recommended). Friends ( x 2 couples) who were educated by the same midwife did in fact deliver their baby when the midwife was stuck in traffic on the way to the births (and no, it doesn’t happen often).
We did have a back up room in hospital booked in case things went pearshaped (a responsible choice on the part of both the midwife and us).
Also, were were thoroughly accessed when we first approached the midwife (who by the way has been doing home births for over 20 years), and it was made clear that with any history of diabetes, obesity, physical thrauma (broken bones in specific places) etc. would need to be policed in and babies had in hospital.
I don’t have a problem with modern obstetrics, yes in 30% of the cases it’s needed (in some countries less), but the psychological bull that gynies spin to parents to get them into facility, in order to control the outcome (preferably towards a ceasar = big money and use of expensive equipment that either needs to be paid off or used to increase bottom line profits).
If gynies were more honest and really cared about their mothers and babies, they’d start educating and providing ALL birthing options, not just their run-of-the-mill processes to make money.
Some Obgyns are doingover 10 ceasars a day…. -come on, if that’s not greed, then I don’t know.
I agree, birthing alone or without a qualified, experienced caregiver is dangerous and irresponsible, it’s also not a good idea to be too far away from a medical facility when birthing…
…but, until the maternity industry gets this production line mentality out of their closed minds, there’s going to be a greater resistance to birthing in hospital. And my wife and I will continue to convince parents to NOT take the hospital route, specifically for these reasons.
yes, the general populous will always be unaware and ignorant (a great convenience and market-share excersize for industry)
Most will spend 4-8 years getting a qualification to make money, but haven’t the brains to spend 9 months learning about a healthy manner in which to birth their children…. It’s madness and the more people are being shown the proof (healthy stress-free babies and mothers) the more the sheep trust doctors who have exceptionally high ceasar and trauma related stats)
wake up and put some effort and thought into your lives, NO ONE CAN DO IT FOR YOU, no matter how ‘Nice’ they seem and especially where there’s high prices involved. You’ve got to find out for yourself.
117. Michael Gill said:
August 11, 2007 @ 5:25 am
Oh and by the way, in South Africa, the transfer rate from home to hospital is generally 10% (in most cases for a ceasar, because it’s REALLY needed).
What excuse do hospitals have for their high trauma rates?
Welcome to a world of manipulation, domination and control…
over and out.
118. Petulant Pixie said:
August 11, 2007 @ 9:41 am
Actually, I’ve had three c/s and was told that the doctor gets paid the same amount of money for a vaginal birth or a c/s. At least here, they have no financial incentive to get a woman to have a c/s, so your entire post above does not apply.
Doctors here may push for a c/s for fear of being sued. If ANYTHING goes wrong during a vaginal birth and the baby dies, then the doctor can be sued. So can a midwife who does a homebirth. I’m absolutely sure from that angle that midwives are very careful about their patients abilities to complete a vaginal birth without complications.
My son had the cord prolapse and the c/s was an emergency to save his life. We wouldn’t have had time to get to a hopsital before he was born and he would have been asphyxiated. My next baby was breech. No midwife would have done a homebirth after c/s with a breech baby. My third baby was transverse, no midwife anywhere would do a homebirth after 2 c/s with a transverse baby.
I’m biased, I admit, but c/s saved my kids’ lives, and the OBs who took care of my prenatal care and did the c/s were wonderful. I’m in favor of hospital births based entirely on my experience.