To think free birthing should be entirely banned

That really is so sad.

Well yes there is because abortion is not allowed past 24 weeks as at that point the baby could survive outside the mother although with a lot of help needed. Not saying I agree with abortion either but someone having an abortion at 6 weeks is very different to someone having one past 30 weeks when by then they coukd just wait a few weeks and give birth to a healthy baby.
You say abortion is what they effectively did but they didnt as abortion is when you intentionally kill the baby. They didnt set out for the baby to die even if their decisions might have led to it it wasn't their intention.

I find it interesting to note that since this article was published, the instagram pages of both ES and YNC have gone very quiet.

I think all Mums to be should have the choice how they want to give birth. However, I do think all Mums should be more educated on what can go wrong during birth & encourage them to seek advice from their midwife if they have any concerns or questions. I definitely think Mums should have a choice of treatment & give consent to what they do & don't want done during their birthing experiences. Doing a C Section to suit the medical Team & not the Mum is wrong as is doing procedures like an episiotomy without consent. Mums should be in control & if she or her baby are in danger then they need the options available to them asap. It's also very important for birthing partners to be aware of what the Mum wants before the birth starts so they can speak up for them if they're not able to decide because they're having to be anaesthetised etc. I'm sure a lot of women have had a wonderful free birth experience but to promote it as the only way it should be is wrong on so many levels.

No, free birthing should not be banned. There’s no way to enforce it. I was in labour and the local hospital was on divert so I was faced with an hour’s drive to the next hospital. I thought it would be safer to have the baby at home rather than on the side of the motorway. In the end I was accepted to my local hospital (just in the nick of time!). In your proposed scenario I would have been committing a crime for trying to keep my baby and I safe by staying home.

The issue is the medical misinformation and general ignorance. It boggles my mind that some women think that childbirth is anything other than extremely dangerous for both mother and baby.

I don’t think it should be banned. But I do think if a woman wants to free-birth, or even home birth, they need to sign a waiver that they are aware of the risks and will not seek compensation/blame NHS services if things go tits up.

women considered high risk who are advised against free or home births should sign a form to say they are being negligent and if anything goes wrong they risk being investigated by SS.

I don’t think free birthing itself should be banned but these people peddling disinformation should be banned for sure it’s disgusting what they are getting away with. I would never have a free birth the idea horrifies me . I think it would be against human rights to ban people from doing it though.

This is the Cruz of the matter. Excellent post

I do agree with this, but I also sincerely believe if obstetric care was made much better then only an even tinier proportion of pregnant women would choose to attempt freebirth.

It still shouldn't be 'banned'. Nothing good comes of banning stuff like this.

It also sort of suggests the medical emergency itself is the fault of the mother choosing to freebirth, which is highly unlikely. Many of the obstetric emergencies that occur do so regardless of where you're birthing (e.g. baby in distress, cord prolapse, postpartum haemorrhage). So while an argument can be made that it's better to be close to life saving facilities, in the majority of cases the emergency would happen wherever the birth occurs so 'should not necessarily expect to flip back to the NHS because your free birth hasn’t progressed as hoped' is completely ludicrous.

Also, would we really turn away dying mothers and babies because the mother made a risky choice for her birth?? How would you account for accidental freebirths?

I still think freebirthing is risky and not a good decision but some of the rhetoric around it is silly and callous.

That's a ludicrous thing to say. You could attach the same logic to anyone who drives a car, takes part is sport, etc etc.

I had a seriously dehumanising experience with my first hospital birth (and postnatal time). I am grateful that we're both still alive but it came at such an enormous cost. My child is only still alive because myself and my husband advocated for him constantly throughout. A decade later I still get nightmares about it. I can understand why some women would never go back to a hospital birth.

I don’t know the exact statistics, however I’m prepared to bet that the risk of not having a medically supervised birth is significantly higher than otherwise. If the worst happens in hospital there are records, debriefs and investigations and accountability. I bet the cult weirdo’s who essentially harmed the baby in the article got off scot free and are still advocating their insanity.

No you are not being unreasonable- if an individual wants to put themselves at risk that is their choice, but in the case of birth the child has to be considered.
In a country with free healthcare the burden such individuals are putting on the system and other taxpayers has to be considered also.
As to you not being able to grow a baby you can't birth hundreds of years of statistics and maternal and child deaths call this out as a dammed lie- it is perfectly natural for one in five of labouring mothers to die within 2 weeks of the labour, and somewhat greater proportion of the babies, these are not good odds.

The problem we've got, to put it bluntly, is that that exact scenario can and does happen in hospital with trained medics attending.

Babies suffer unnecessary irreversible brain damage in hospital with medical staff attending. The NHS pays out millions of pounds a year in damages to families where this has occurred. So it shouldn't be at all surprising that some women don't view hospitals as a safe haven, or trust doctors, or are willing to put the health of their baby in the hands of a stranger they've only just met and know nothing about, even if he is an obstetrician.

What have I just read! A baby being asphyxiated to the point of irreversible brain damage while a bunch of thick idiots tell the mother ‘you are a queen’ and ‘you are safe’!!!! While this could have been prevented if there was a medically trained clinician present. Yes you might survive and even have a good birth on your own or with whichever lunatics you choose to accompany you, but you might not, how is it ever worth the risk???

I understand. I'm sorry you had to go through that. Your feelings aren't silly either. You feel how you feel, and that's okay.

To be fair, home births are very very low in the UK. In reality hardly anyone does it. I have, but I don't know anyone else who has. I know one person who tried but in the end went to hospital for pain relief (not in an emergency) because her labour was very long. I am in an area with higher than average home birthing and it's a measly 7%.

I don't understand why it makes women who haven't and would never have one so angry. No-one is trying to make you do it. You'd prefer a hospital environment? Great! It's freely available for you on the NHS. Have at it.

I was prepared to lock myself in the bathroom and refuse to come out. I knew I could call a paramedic as a backup. Looking back, that's obviously very silly, but it's a reflection of just how traumatised I was by the previous hospital birth. There was no way I was letting another obstetrician get within 10 feet of me.

Can you link the stats that say free births have better outcomes than hospital births please? I can’t find anything reputable that says this.

Home births attended by midwives, with hospital transfers available when necessary, are fine for low-risk pregnancies. But remember that the fact that hospitals take all the high-risk mothers in the first place in itself skews the stats.

I agree that over-intervention is an issue that should be addressed though. There is certainly room for improvement. However, in general, giving birth is now much safer than it was and this is because of the increased medical care available before, during and after birth.

My DIL had pre-eclamsia which was picked up at her antenatal check ups and ended up having an emergency caesarian at 32 weeks, her consultant told her she was very likely to have it again during her next pregnancy and would definitely need another section.
Despite this, during her second pregnancy her midwives kept telling her she was down for a normal vaginal delivery. Of course she was very ill towards the end of her pregnancy, I was staying with her at home because we all felt that she should not be alone during the day, and was taking her to hospital daily for a BP check - why not a community midwife coming to visit her?
At 34 weeks they had to admit her, to a large antenatal ward with just one midwife who was two hours over her normal shift with no replacement in sight and no doctor in attendance for the three hours we waited there. Fortunately a doctor did appear then and she had her CS immediately. Problems in hospital are often due to long-term lack of money which has led to insufficient staff and possibly insufficient training.
However she was better off in hospital, even with these problems. Things can go wrong anywhere, often due to staff mistakes coupled to simple mischance, but if she had been at home (and had received no antenatal care) she would quite definitely have died.