To wince at people who have homebirths?

[TheCatsMeow]

I never used to, I used to say that everyone should have the birth they want and mean it. But my birth went wrong and I ended up with a baby who would have died had it not been for NICU. If we had been at home, he wouldn't have survived and I may not have.

Every time I hear someone say they want a homebirth my head screams "YOU'RE BEING IRRESPONSIBLE". I get visions of myself and my son lying dead. It frightens me and every time I see a woman who is pregnant I think "I hope they both survive". I don't say any of this unless someone asks and then I just say that I ended up with complications so was greatful to not be at home.

But I feel like people are risking themselves and their babies and it makes me uncomfortable. I think IABU but don't know how to deal with my feelings on this. Please don't be harsh.

I also seriously considered a home birth - am so glad I didn't. I had a rare and unanticipated complication which required some very hi tech intervention to stop me bleeding (potentially) to death. I now say thank Christ for skilled surgeons. You never know.

Binkybix I know you're talking about low risk births. I'm still talking about the op which was about how she winces at the thought (very real to her) of something going wrong at home.

And to the poster who suggested I might be scaring mum's to be I think k they would be far more scared about a hospital birth after reading this thread, it's clear where the balance of opinion falls

Well we appear to have reached some element of truce. Yes I'm talking about UK system, don't know what you mean about either/or, I've had a friend transferred in during a hb so understand the system.

I don't think the NHS can provide the birth experiences we all want. It is a service stretched and underfunded so has to focus on saving lives rather than the niceties. I wish it weren't the case but sadly I don't think it can be sustained in current society and we will have to accept a private, or at least semi private service. Which hopefully would leave people feeling as if they had more choice and less forced into choosing a Cs or home birth as the only way to get focussed care.

And I chose a Cs with a higher risk of pph because I knew at least if I had a pph I would be in the care of a good obs consultant and would have the best chance of survival. Odd logic I agree but would not have risked the chances of having one at home with having to then rely on a paramedic, theatre and doctor to be available when I needed them!

The OP had some risk factors which would have made a home birth unadvisable. She didn't have a home birth, and wasn't considering one, as far as I can tell from this and other threads she is on. She had poor post-natal treatment in the hospital she was in. I wonder if she winces when she hears about women booking for that hospital? Perhaps she does, but she told us how she winced about something she didn't really know a lot about. Most of us have been trying to tell her that in practice, her fear about something which was never going to affect her was misplaced.

I wonder if she winces when she hears about women booking for that hospital?

This would be a more rational response. Instead when people have a shit experience the first thing that is said is 'I'm glad I went to that hospital and that I didn't have a homebirth, I'll make sure I go back for dc2'.

I wonder if she winces when she hears about women booking for that hospital?

Somewhat, because I found the care leading up to the birth completely dependent on how busy the ward was. So I do feel a bit uncomfortable when someone says they're going there

Regarding home birth having read this I can see some situations were completely different to mine in location to hospital, previous easy births and so on and so I see why to some people it might be appropriate. It still frightens me but anything to do with pregnancy does

I really am sorry you had such a bad experience cats

I don't think the NHS can provide the birth experiences we all want.

I naively assume that we all want a healthy mother and baby out of the experience, and I don't see why the NHS shouldn't aim for that.

It is a service stretched and underfunded so has to focus on saving lives rather than the niceties.

MLUs/homebirth have been shown to be safer for low risk mothers, and MLUs have been shown to be as safe for the baby for women of all parities, but despite that we continue to see health care trusts shutting down MLUs and suspending home birth services, even though they are cheaper. So I am not sure that you can say that they are focusing on saving lives. If they were they would be re-opening lots of MLUs, and attempting to do something about midwifery staffing. Yes, I do recall that before the 2010 election called for 5,000 more midwives, but he has been mighty silent about that ever since.

"There may be some poor outcomes more likely in hospital but I don't know what they are and why they would occur, do you? Other than infection?"

Labours in hospital are more likely to be prolonged than labours in our of hospital settings. For some babies this will be problematic, given that labour itself is the riskiest time for babies. I seem to remember from the birthplace study that hospital labours are on average an hour longer than those at home. This probably has something to do with the disruptive impact hospital environments can have on the normal hormonal cascade of labour.

Given also that women in hospital are more likely to have their waters broken (in an attempt to speed up labours which are slow) babies are more vulnerable to picking up infections in these settings.

By the way - nobody on this thread has discussed the additional risk imposed on mothers and babies in pregnancies and births following c/s. Given the very significant excess of emergency c/s in healthy women labouring in CLU's surely tits worth factoring in when assessing risk, unless you are not intending to have any more children.

I had a straightforward hospital birth with DD. It was however a classic fast second delivery and she was born an hour after I had phoned the hospital and been advised to stay at home for a bit longer.

If we had followed their advice or lived further away from the hospital, the main risk would have been giving birth in the car, possibly on the A3.

mini

you always regard hospital, intervention etc as the enemy,

many women like hospitals and at the most vulnerable they will ever ever be, they want medics, professionals around them with equipment on hand and drugs or whatever - to help them and reassure them.

sometimes I get the impression you think women go into hospital and are immedilaty traumatised leadiing to loger problematic labours etc

"you always regard hospital, intervention etc as the enemy,"

Um, I don't.

I think some people like to characterise those of us who make a strong case for out of hospital birth as seeing all intervention as 'the enemy' because it suits their argument, which isn't rooted in logic or evidence.

"many women like hospitals"

I agree. That's the inevitable result of women growing up in a culture where medicalised birth for healthy mothers has been held up as the only safe model.

" they want medics, professionals around them with equipment on hand and drugs or whatever - to help them and reassure them."

What are midwives? Are they not medical professionals? They also carry and use drugs and equipment in out of hospital settings you know.

"sometimes I get the impression you think women go into hospital and are immedilaty traumatised leadiing to loger problematic labours etc"

But that's because you're putting your own biased and distorted spin on what I've said.

Just to clarify - I've said the research shows that women in hospitals appear on average to have longer labours.

I've also said that women's labours are more likely to become problematic in hospital and require intervention.

I've said these things because the research suggests that this is so.

I've not said anywhere at any point that all intervention is wrong or unnecessary, or that women shouldn't have hospital births, or that all hospital births are difficult and traumatising. I've not said or implied it.

So it begs the question - what's going on in your head that you have read these non-existent things into my very reasonable and evidence based argument as to the benefits of out of hospital birth?

You wouldn't be trying to characterise me as someone who's silly, unreasonable and wrong-headed, would you, given that all these descriptions would be reasonable if I did actually believe that all hospital births are terrible?

Note: when working out what people are actually saying in an argument it's sensible to take into account the qualifying words they use like 'on average' and 'appear more likely to have'. Nobody sensible talks about human experiences like childbirth in terms of absolutes. They know that it's a complex issue and that all women are individuals. I have carefully avoided discussing things in terms of absolutes in my posts, so I don't understand why you have accused me of doing this.

Yadnbu - I like you agree feel very wrong when people say they want a home birth (of course people can and should be able to do whatever the hell they want) but having had a stillbirth of twins (due to ttts so not technically because of the process of labour etc) I would always, hand over foot, have medical professionals involved. Yes, women's bodies are built to give birth and therefore homebirths should always be possible but the chances of things going wrong in a split second are high. I just couldnt and wouldn't risk it x

Would add, that the view that home birth or birth in a non-hospital setting (ie in a free standing birth centre) means a mother has no access to emergency medical care or input from doctors is just odd.

Mothers in these settings are carefully monitored in the same way as they would be in hospital, and midwives have access to the same drugs which are used to treat PPH and to resuscitation equipment they would be using in hospital.

They have rigid protocols in place for emergency transfer to hospital, and they use these protocols all the time. That's why the outcomes are as good as they are! Because out of hospital birth takes place within the context of a medical system with the capacity to deal with transfers efficiently.

"Yes, women's bodies are built to give birth and therefore homebirths should always be possible but the chances of things going wrong in a split second are high. I just couldnt and wouldn't risk iT"

I'm sorry for the terrible loss of your babies, but surely you can see that your experience of a tragic outcome following a high risk pregnancy doesn't add any weight to the argument against birth out of hospital for low risk pregnancies?

I don't know how reliable the statistic is but I saw once the statement that only 8% of hospitals regularly have more than 60 hours of consultant cover i.e. 74% of the time the medical attention is not on tap.

" I would always, hand over foot, have medical professionals involved"

Midwives ARE medical professionals.

And in the UK doctors are not involved in low risk births in hospital, unless the labour becomes problematic. Women who have problematic labours in out of hospital settings also have access to medical input in because they are transferred in to hospital if this occurs. The net result is this system parity of outcome for the babies of low risk mothers labouring in non-hospital settings and improved outcome for mothers.

I wanted a home birth with DS2 but I said that at the first sign of trouble I would go into hospital.

Well there was trouble, we were blue lighted to hospital and I ended up with a crash C-section. It wasn't what I planned but we both survived. I don't think it's selfish as long as you are prepared to follow the midwife's advice.

Whoops that'll learn me to not preview my post...

I meant to also put within a hospital/medical setting

Gah

Some hospital births go wrong because medical personnel of sufficient seniority are not called.

minifingerz is is accuse of regarding hospitals and intervention as the enemy, which I don't see as the case myself.

But, if you have had a home or MLU birth, and you get virtual strangers opining that you are stupid, you have risked your baby's life, or want a nice experience, which believe me, people do, followed by a tale of how this, that or the other went wrong in hospital, and you were lucky, then IMO it's a) quite legitimate to tell them that their view of hospitals may be just a bit rose-tinted and that it wasn't always 'just one of those things' and b) to wind their necks in because they don't know the first thing about you or your health, or the quality of care you have received. I am nearly always to polite though to say anything.

" is is accuse of regarding hospitals and intervention as the enemy"

The sad thing is that anyone who knows a bit about birth and maternity care knows just how incredibly lucky we are in the UK to have access to high tech care when we need it and the incredibly important work that doctors do daily saving the lives of mothers and babies.

Therefore it's sad and frustrating to have people leap in with accusations along the lines of 'you think all interventions are bad' in response to a fairly complex argument about what constitutes optimal care for low risk women. It polarises and degrades the debate because it suggests that there are actually people out there making a case against all medicalisation in birth, and there's not! I know it's silly and ignorant and I shouldn't respond but I feel so offended by it that I can't let it go unremarked on.

here

This is an interesting article by an American doctor who was researching different systems of maternity care following the publication of the latest NICE guidance which recommends out of hospital birth as the safest model of care for low risk women. He expected to criticise it but instead found that he was persuaded by the evidence that what we have in the UK, our system of care where mothers are mostly cares for by midwives in a range of settings, including non-medicalised ones, was better than the US where almost all women are cared for by doctors in high tech settings.

Yes to me I wasn't and still wouldn't be bothered about a prolonged labour or intervention. It's purely death of either mother or baby that is my concern.

What's the whole problem with Cs if you want more dc? Do you mean a pph resulting in hysterectomy so no more dc?