Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think if my home birth service is suspended, i should be allowed to transfer to another home birth team?

76 replies

rednosedreindeerhead · 07/12/2011 14:43

My hospital has just announced it's suspended it's home birth service. I hate hospitals and was quite definitely and massively up for a home birth in 6 weeks time....

Prior to this, seeing how my hospital was struggling, I already enquired at another hospital nearby whether I might transfer to their home birth team, but they said no on postcode grounds, which I totally understand. But if a service is actually then suspended for sure is it unreasonable to suggest that the tiny amount of women who would like to give birth at home in that time frame be allowed to transfer to another home birth team?

If a hospital nearby had the capability, and the space to at least say that they would try and send someone to my house, shouldn't that be allowed, maybe by law? I feel pretty strongly that it is my right to give birth in my own home....

OP posts:
NinkyNonker · 07/12/2011 15:04

Difficult ground. Legally you have the right to a home birth, legally they have to be attended. To say you can have one but we don't have the staff to attend would put everyone on dodgy ground.

Original poster
rednosedreindeerhead · 07/12/2011 15:05

yeah, I'm not massively up for free-birthing it!!!

OP posts:
rabbitfeet · 07/12/2011 15:05

If planned homebirths cost less because of fewer compliations, it would surely be cheaper for these 'low risk' women to all give birth in hospital so that a midwife can be shared among four women rather than just given to one.

Flisspaps · 07/12/2011 15:06

slavetofilofax We do contribute to the costs of births via tax. And homebirths are cheaper by quite a considerable margin (shown in the BirthPlace Study recently released) so you could argue that actually, if it's about money, then more women should give birth at home.

rabbitfeet I don't think it's unfair that a woman birthing at home should expect a midwife to herself. I think it's a bloody disgrace that women birthing in hospital are expected to share a midwife with up to three other women in the first place and we should all EXPECT one to one care (and that's not the midwives fault either!)

SantasENormaSnob · 07/12/2011 15:06

Have you considered a midwifery led unit/birthsuite?

bemybebe · 07/12/2011 15:06

Sorry, but no "dodgy grounds" here, if your hospital is aware of your decision to have home birth they can employ additional staff to accommodate as they do in busy times. It is not anything new.

rabbitfeet · 07/12/2011 15:07

Plus it is all still NHS resources. There is only a finite amount of money - funds used in one area obviously then can't be used in another. If they didn't have a 'homebirth midwife' they would have a 'hospital midwife' who would see more patients in the same time and thus save money.

rabbitfeet · 07/12/2011 15:09

Flisspaps I agree in principal, but given this is how the NHS is structured, wanting to use a midwife for one birth rather than four is selfish. If births are done in hospital, the same resource can be shared rather than one woman having it all to herself at home!

Camerondiazepam · 07/12/2011 15:10

My DD2 is only 2 but my local trust was encouraging and supporting homebirths at the time - as someone upthread said, homebirths are statistically less likely to lead to intervention and are therefore, presumably, cheaper for the NHS. I did have a 1:1 midwife plus a couple of students but they only arrived after I couldn't manage the pain any more about two hours after actually but that's another story.

Doesn't help you out obviously but I'm really surprised there's been such a change in the thinking in such a short space of time...

I also agree with diddl - my DD1 was born in hospital and I was amazed at the "service" if you like, I thought pretty much everyone I encountered was professional, caring, thoughtful, considerate etc, and I had a midwife to myself for 12h+ then as well.

bemybebe · 07/12/2011 15:10

rabbit you clearly do not understand that one busy midwife that sets off the chain of unnecessary interventions in four labouring women is an EXPENSIVE option as are four people, who also occupy four hospital beds... Also overworked mw that misses vital signs of distress, complications etc.

Original poster
rednosedreindeerhead · 07/12/2011 15:11

santas i think that might be my best option after I've tried a few more avenues.... like your name by the way Grin

OP posts:
bemybebe · 07/12/2011 15:11

incidentally, there is nothing "selfish" in demanding a good service for oneself or one's baby...

rabbitfeet · 07/12/2011 15:12

principle

Oh the shame!

diddl · 07/12/2011 15:12

"it would surely be cheaper for these 'low risk' women to all give birth in hospital so that a midwife can be shared among four women rather than just given to one."

But how would that work if the women are actually giving birth at the same time?

I had 2 with me for the 2hrs that I was in the delivery room.

Original poster
rednosedreindeerhead · 07/12/2011 15:12

exactly, bemybebe, it actually makes no sense... but if there literally aren't any midwives at the hospital any more because they're all pissed off and overworked and gone to jobs elsewhere, then...

OP posts:
bemybebe · 07/12/2011 15:16

red hospitals have lists of agency staff that is recruited as and when is needed, so there is a mechanism to cover for shortages.

there is no fucking way i would be going to the hospital with known mw shortages, I would be demanding homebirth, to have 1-1 care which i am entitled to

organiccarrotcake · 07/12/2011 15:19

There should be two midwives per birthing mother - one for the baby and one for the mother. Two lives, two health care professionals.

1 MW amongst 2, 3 or 4 birthing mothers is dangerous, poor practise and against NICE guidelines yet it's commonplace because women are not in a position to force the issue while in labour.

As another poster mentions, OP this is not about the rights or wrongs of how NHS resources are spent. This is about YOUR baby and YOUR body and it is very clear that a birthing woman needs to be in the right place for her for labour to work well and to avoid potentially dangerous interventions. Birth is not an illness, I couldn't agree more, and it is a choice but it's not a choice for the baby and they at least have the absolute right to receive the very best and safest care possible. That in itself is enough for me.

The NHS have been advised of your intention to birth at home. AIMS has a standard letter which works almost all the time which states that you have given fair notice of your intention to birth at home, that you intend to still do so, and if the MW does not attend then you hold the trust liable for any consequences.

I'm so sorry you have to go through this right now :(

Original poster
rednosedreindeerhead · 07/12/2011 15:20

oh, that's interesting.... I'm going to have to do some research i think. really don't want to have to change my plans now with 6 weeks to go. got my home birth box all sorted and everything, grrrr Angry

OP posts:
Original poster
rednosedreindeerhead · 07/12/2011 15:21

sorry x posted. will have a look at AIMS letter.

OP posts:
organiccarrotcake · 07/12/2011 15:21

Sorry, if the MidwiveS do not attend. You are entitled to TWO.

NinkyNonker · 07/12/2011 15:21

I had a midwife to myself in hospital, bet it all cost more than a home birth. I agree Bebe, I thought another poster was saying you only have the right to a home birth, not a midwife.

Am considering hb for dc2, I won't hear any criticism of that until the system provides great care as standard.

organiccarrotcake · 07/12/2011 15:26

Saying all that, I'm talking to a IM tonight about hiring her for the birth of DC3.

Having fought the good fight with my trust in 2004 with DS1 and eventually them sending out a MW who was hugely unsupportive of HBs we transferred because she was just dangerous. DS2 we chose a hospital birth at the last minute for medical reasons and this time I'm not taking any chances.

Bloody annoyed about it though. While we can afford it, it's not money we have spare - will come from severe cut backs elsewhere. Our choice, but it's going to be tough.

Sorry to be negative OP. It's just something I'm totally passionate about. I understand how labour works and what happens when it's interfered with and for f-ing little men in suits to push their mean little pencils and say "no" to home births because they can't be bothered to work out the maths properly makes me very, very Angry.

Every baby has the right to be born into a safe and gentle environment and for those mothers for whom safe means home, that's what that mother and baby needs.

dobeessneeze · 07/12/2011 15:51

I had a home birth in July, in an area that is generally really supportive of home births. For a few weeks before though, the midwives were heavily hinting at staff shortages and that it might not happen, except for one midwife who told me "If you refuse to go to the hospital, they have to send somebody, but I didn't tell you that".

As it happened, there were staff shortages, and a long debate between DP and the hospital about whether I should go to the hospital to labour in the waiting room with several other women. DP held firm though and in the end they managed to produce 3 midwives. (love lovely DP!)

(I do have a point and I'm coming to it now) - things really seemed to turn in our favour once DP mentioned that I had got into the birthing pool. I think it was something about it not being right to disturb a woman in established labour or something. But from that point onwards there was no more talk of going to the hospital and the discussion was very firmly on how/when the midwife would be here.

Afterwards, the midwives and I had quite a long chat about it as I felt hugely guilty that I had inconvenienced the NHS and individual midwives by making them come to me. They were absolutely adamant that we had done the right thing though as they said that it takes people to make a stand to get the service improved. If everyone just went along to the hospital when they were told to, there'd be no incentive to improve the HB service.

As an aside - it was a bit touch and go for a while as to whether I needed to be transferred to hospital, but the midwives knew their stuff and I managed to give birth to DD with no tearing or stitches or anything. They said afterwards that had I been in hospital, the most likely outcome would have been oxytocin drip, epidural, ventouse and episiotomy. (love the lovely midwives!)

It's definitely worth standing firm for a homebirth if you can get it! Good luck!

organiccarrotcake · 07/12/2011 16:05

dobeessneeze wishing that there was a [heart] emoticon.

Out of interest, would you be willing to share why it was touch and go for a while?

tanmu82 · 07/12/2011 16:07

I've had two hospital births in a home-from-home suite and one birth at a birthing centre, where I had first one, then two, then 3 midwives all to myself (I was the only patient). When I had my 2nd child the midwives were stretched and I hardly saw one except to check mine and babies heartbeat etc. But they were all lovely and professional despite the circumstances. In an ideal world women would have one to one care throughout labour and delivery, but with finite resources, I think we get a pretty good deal in this country. If you aren't happy with the thought of sharing a midwife, and the trust hasn't the resources to offer hb assistance, then I think you should be prepared to pay, if it is that important to you.

If you think it's bad here, try being pregnant and giving birth in the states where you pay for every midwife visit, blood test and pain relief etc.... the average birth there cost about $7,500. And hb and independent mw/birthing centres aren't even legal in 23 states. Things might not be perfect in the UK, but there is a lot of choice and an overall excellent standard of care, without worrying about cost. That's a privilege.