To think free birthing should be entirely banned

This is probably the most ridiculous thing I have read on here in a long time

Childbirth killed many more women and children centuries ago. Are you not aware of that? Neither of mine would have made it into the world safely without expert medical intervention. You are basically saying that as long as some women manage to give birth with no assistance the rest of us can be sacrificed.

I would hardly call todays maternity services "top notch healthcare"! There are regular threads on here of women detailing their traumatic experiences of giving birth on the NHS, and then you have the Ockendon review too...

You just can't save some people from themselves. And it's awful an innocent baby gets caught up in it, but while they're still in utero it's the woman's body and choice.

There are endless resources online showing how dangerous freebirthing is, if someone chooses to freebirth then they've either not bothered to research it or think they know better than trained medics. Either way, it's their choice.

It's bonkers to me that someone would happily eschew top notch healthcare they can access free at the point of use in order to roll the dice but people make stupid unwise decisions all the time.

How would you ban it? You cannot force a woman into hospital to give birth?

@Laurmolonlabe Are you UK? Homebirth is absolutely not discouraged, why would it be? No idea where you got that from!
For subsequent low risk pregnancies the risks are no greater than in hospital. That's fact. Also look up the advantages. Do a bit lf looking around on the Internet if you like.

I think freebirthing is a terrible idea but I don't think it should be illegal because I don't trust the police not to go after some women who freebirthed by accident because they didn't get to hospital in time

To be honest I'm surprised because home birth is still discouraged and if the extra risks were zero l doubt that would be the case,lack of midwives wanting to work this way could explain it however.

I don’t think silencing people helps. It doesn’t work. For many people reactions like that simply add weight to the idea that these idiots are ‘truth tellers’ being hounded by the medical establishment.

People are entitled to be as stupid and gullible as they wish. Once the baby is born, if it survives, there are (some) limits to the extent to what parents can prioritise their own right to be stupid over their child’s safety,

It remains the case that many parents harm their children due to their misguided faith in their own intelligence. I’ll never forget the conversations I’ve had with parents who didn’t vaccinate their child and lived with the consequences forever. I think of one unvaccinated child on ecmo everytime there’s a thread about the flu vaccine. In this, as in antenatal care, punishments and banning just drive unscrupulous non-evidence-based practitioners underground where they gain even more fame to those determined to be fools.

@Laurmolonlabe There are no increased risks for home birth for subsequent, low risk pregnancies.
And many, many advantages.
It's worth looking at the research on this.
As someone who had two hospital births (NHS) and then a homebirth with an IM, I know that my planned home birth was by far the safest.
With NHS maternity services how they are currently, I personally wouldn't want a hospital birth unless of course there was justification as to why e.g. no longer in the low risk category.

You can't force medical services on someone, if someone decides to not take advantage of them I don't think suing the NHS for not forcing you could work. In the case of home birth I think you do have to sign to accept the increased risks.

Informed autonomy is crucial. But ask any home birther about some of the many (misinformed) comments they have inevitably received.

Thats the way it works though- a woman’s autonomy does come before the baby until it is born.

I do get your viewpoint but trying to impose anything different could be a really slippery slope for women.

My stepsons 2nd child arrived too fast for a midwife assisted home birth so was effectively free birthed. Luckily mum and baby were ok

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/jun/18/freebirth-death-melbourne-influencer-phone-evidence-inquest-ntwnfb

".In her evidence on Tuesday, Lal told the inquest that although she had been paid to support Warnecke, her role was primarily that of a supportive friend, that she was not clinically trained, and that it was not her responsibility to make Warnecke’s birth safer, or to call an ambulance unless specifically asked.

She said she never gave Warnecke medical advice, and only shared her own experiences of freebirthing her own children.

Lal also told the inquest that she no longer had access to texts Warnecke sent to her alerting her that she had gone into labour on 26 September, or any texts after that...."

How dreadful that she lost her phone that could help shed light on why her client died. Oh noes

https://mol.im/a/15358949 excuse the source (daily fail) but I saw this and remembered this thread.

What if they refuse to sign anything?

I think pp’s friend did know the baby was breech, presumably from scans, hence the husband begging her to have a c-section.

Victorian women had a 1 in 20 lifetime risk of dying in childbirth. Plenty survived (19 in 20) so no chance of extinction but I would imagine those 1 in 20 women who died would have appreciated medical intervention, don’t you?. Intervention free births are totally appropriate for lots of women but for a minority of women, interventions save their lives and the lives of their babies.

How long ago was this? I had my babies 9 and 11 years ago and I had scan at around 37/38 weeks or so to make sure the baby wasn't breech? I thought it was common practise?

( asking because I'm curious )

When my friend was having a breech birth, her husband a doctor who had seen breech births go bad really fast, begged her to have a c-section. She decided on a trial of labour which culminated in the consultant not waiting for a porter running with her trolley screaming for the staff to get a theatre ready when he found a troubling amount of meconium in her waters. So really, I wouldn't be that keen for a midwife to manage a breech birth. I had a prolapsed cord - I was lucky my child survived and he survived because I was in a hospital with specialists with nice sharp scalpels and midwives would have been near useless. My child would in all likelihood have died or been severely brain damaged in a home birth. Still I suppose this is Darwinism in action.

Well she went into labour at home and it must have been fast it wasn't a slammed free birth. But having a breech birth with midwives there should be fine.

I agree. Choice and autonomy is important - but only if that is a fully informed choice. Childbirth is dangerous and we are at risk of forgetting this. Some will argue that the undesirable outcomes are all because of hospitals and ‘unnecessary interventions’. As though hospitals intervene for the hell of it.

A natural ‘breathe the baby out’ birth is sold as the ultimate aim for everyone. And if you have any drugs, or help you have failed.

For some people birthing is always going to be tricky. I have a retroverted uterus, which meant despite me not lying down for 40 hours and trying to achieve an ‘active birth’ it was a back to back 40 hour labour. I actually think the attempted water birth slowed me down.

Many women are better off in hospital. The free birth groups are dangerous but so is the NCT and its constant ‘cascade of intervention’ talk being rammed down your throat.

I’m willing to guess that there’s much more to each of your stories, but it suits your “we must all give birth in hospital or every mother and baby will DiE” narrative.

My narrative is more "dont give birth fuck knows where without any medical help as it might cost you dearly". But of course you know better what I meant.

Baby was deprived of oxygen as cord was tightly wrapped around its neck, twice. It was a very short time but enough to cause brain damage. Its a real story, but apparently it doesn't matter as it never happens.

I said in my earlier posts that women should be listened to, and allowed to make choices. They should be educated and supported, they should give birth the way they want - but should be aware of the potential risks. Your posts just support my view that these extreme points of view are pretty much a cult, where no other point of view is allowed and alternative opinion is mocked as rubbish.

Nowhere in the article does it mention the problem where the cord is around the neck and the baby can't put his/ her chin down enough to easily come out so gets stuck....

This wasn't realised until the final end pushing stage, so the dr used a ventouse and baby came out quickly.
There wasn't any messing about with cutting the cord or trying to feel what was going on.

Personally, I was happy to have a qualified team on hand, including a paediatrician, but each to their own.

That is untrue that 'nuchal cords don't deprive of oxygen'.

Nuchal cords do not usually deprive the baby of oxygen, but they certainly CAN.

https://www.bila.ca/umbilical-cord-around-neck/#:~:text=also%20be%20helpful.-,Brain%20Damage,%2Dterm%20effects%2C%20such%20as: