AIBU- home birth social media support groups are f’ing dangeorus **Content warning - title edited by MNHQ**

[Namechangetimes100]

I’m in a few Fb home birth groups as I was planning to have one til the service got suspended, had an MLU birth instead and was absolutely fine! I’ve not left the group yet (probs should) but some of the advice given is fucking dangerous as hell.

The advice is free birth left right and centre. Birth at home for a pre term (35 week plus) baby, the woman did and the baby needed resus this was met with almost rapturous applause and more recently refuse induction or action for iugr. I mean ffs this advice can kill as well as the doctors = evil mentality.

I do totally believe and support informed consent and I do think that choice isn’t often presented to women in obstetrics and sometimes induction is made to seem like the only choice when it isn’t. I was coerced into induction with a ‘constitutionally small’ baby based on old guidelines so I’m sympathetic to a point to some of these opinions. But to even contemplate birthing a premature baby at home, fgs and a baby measuring under the 3rd centile and dropping and to refuse any sort of medical support in pursuit of the perfect home birth. I just don’t get it.

Any free birth or demanding midwives come out when there’s a national short staffing. It seems like a recipe for disaster.

I totally get my body my choice but seems like playing with fire In some instances to me-aibu?

Oh and I think the group does far more good than harm and I think the admins do an excellent job of balancing free speech, evidence-based-information, anecdotal evidence and opinions in the many areas of pregnancy/birth where scientific research is lacking. It's a hard balance and she does it with compassion, wisdom, a huge sacrifice of her time and a respect for women that is often lacking in other areas of maternity care.

@AliceAll

I'm in that FB group. I also have a PhD in biomedical sciences and know how to find, read and critique medical and scientific literature and am fairly up to date on the current literature around safety and place-of-birth. FWIW I have seen non-evidenced-based advice given in the group but in general much less than I see given by HCPs. My most recent interaction with a HCP being a case in point : at a recent scan I declined to follow the sonographer's advice and explained that the medical research showed no statistical improvement in outcomes for the baby in my situation. Her response (and to be fair she was polite about it) was "well that's not true". I wasn't sharing my opinion - I was sharing the medical peer-reviewed data. She was sharing her opinion. The issue of course with freebirth of course is that there is very little research on which to base one's decisions. The peer-reviewed data on well-integrated home-birth v hospital is conclusive that home is equally safe for the baby and significantly safer for the mother (which also has knock on benefits to the baby). This was research published just before the pandemic in the Lancet. Obviously that is not the situation now. Supported home-birth services are being cut left right and centre. MLUs are mostly closed or so hard to get into that they might as well be. Hospitals are chronically understaffed and birth partners are not allowed until the very end of labour (Completely contradictory to what the research would suggest is best). Hospital was never the safest place for the majority of women and now it is even less safe than when the research was carried out. Obviously unsupported home-birth has higher risk than supported home-birth. But I was unable to find anything to support the idea that in my circumstances (previous fast homebirth) it would be less safe than hospital risks + the risk of an enroute car-birth. As it happened midwives were available but she was born before they got there. I would not have made it to hospital in time. Being prepared to freebirth if necessary was the safest thing for me. It won't be for everyone. But it really helps to be informed of one's options and to have people to support you, and to call out the blatant misinformation given by HCPs (usually due to ignorance rather than malice). In the group I do see some non-evidenced-based advice given, (I've seen plenty of misinformation on this thread also.) but also I see lots of linking to the research, lots of advice to make one's own decisions and no coercion. I've also seen lots of encouragement and validation of women's stories who have chosen to transfer, have induction or csections. These are less frequent - as they should be. Oh and the majority of posts suggesting ignoring advice about induction for small babies are referring to SGA babies, or suggesting IUGR has been misdiagnosed rather than someone suggesting one should actually ignore advice about true IUGR. This is actually evidenced based advice. SGA (but not IUGR) babies should not be induced according to the research. It's really important not to confuse the two.

I also have a phd and 2 masters degrees (research and taught) if we’re going to academically flex and sorry but the saving baby pathway which is based on the most up to date research does put forth the idea that a baby measuring under the 3rd centile is statistically more likely to be iugr (these things can’t always be seen on a scan). Also elevated arterial dopplers and declining growth velocity are the best indicators or iugr and there have been posts saying ‘scans are wrong all the time’ maybe at delivery birth weight wasn’t exceptionally low BUT that doesn’t prove the baby wasn’t growth restricted.

Also as the mother of an sga baby I’m very familiar with the distinction between small for gestational age and fetal growth restriction.

Also I should say by PhD I mean Dphil.

Point is dangerous information is dangerous information regardless of the source. No one should be cajoled into anything but equally risks shouldn’t be obscured because if they are they no matter how you dress it up, you aren’t making an informed decision

The worst treatment I ever had was on a maternity ward. Ofc YANBU but pregnant and birthing women are treated disgustingly in this country. No wonder some are trying to seize back control.

[quote Mothertomore]@lifeisnteasy
Home birth is safe for first time mums![/quote]
Source?

[quote Mothertomore]@lifeisnteasy
Home birth is safe for first time mums![/quote]
No it isn’t. Babies are almost twice as likely to suffer a bad outcome.

I have a friend who has had four free births, she always said well I did it last time and it was fine. I think she's crackers, women used to die in childbirth all the time, anything can happen. You need proper medical support. 101 things can go wrong.

I do agree that there is (in my opinion) no other field where ‘patients’ are so routinely treated so poorly, obviously it’s not every woman but it’s happening enough to be systemic.

I’m sympathetic to wanting to put middle finger up to the system and I do believe for a lot of women (not necessarily just the text book low risk ones) home birth is a fantastic option no more risky than an free standing birth centre. I think a free birth course just in case you have a bba is also fantastic. I also completely related and understand wanting to soundboard the info you’ve been given by so and so consultant / midwife. However that doesn’t mean that obstetric risks don’t exist and to shun all scans / bloods really really shouldn’t be encouraged, even though it’s the mums right. I don’t think free birth as the plan a should be encouraged either unless you’rr birthing with someone who knows what a crisis situation looks like and can act accordingly.

@MimiDaisy11

www.nct.org.uk/labour-birth/deciding-where-give-birth/giving-birth-home/home-births-are-they-safe

@lifeisnteasy where's your proof?

www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg190/ifp/chapter/choosing-where-to-have-your-baby

I've had a hba2c (home birth after 2 c-sections) 3 hours from my waters going to baby being born.

University of Oxford birthplace study, @Mothertomore

And a vba2c sounds really rather risky.

@Namechangetimes100

I don't get it. You know the system is messed up so why can't women choose a free birth? As long as they are aware and well informed of the possible risks then send them luck.

All the advice isn't for everyone. Some are willing to stand their ground more than others and that's fine too.

@lifeisnteasy I've had 3 vba2c's

Most of the transfers are for pain relief or "long labour" they are rarely for emergencies. @lifeisnteasy

@Mothertomore

Most of the transfers are for pain relief or "long labour" they are rarely for emergencies. *@lifeisnteasy*

Read the nearest paragraph to the bottom of the screenshot. Adverse outcomes for first babies are nearly doubled in home births.

Quote:

For women having a first baby, a planned home birth increases the risk for the baby. For nulliparous women, there were 9.3 adverse perinatal outcome events per 1000 planned home births compared with 5.3 per 1000 births for births planned in obstetric units, and this finding was statistically significant.

[quote Mothertomore]@lifeisnteasy I've had 3 vba2c's[/quote]
🤷🏼‍♀️

[quote Mothertomore]@Namechangetimes100

I don't get it. You know the system is messed up so why can't women choose a free birth? As long as they are aware and well informed of the possible risks then send them luck.

All the advice isn't for everyone. Some are willing to stand their ground more than others and that's fine too.[/quote]
I mean you can, doesn’t make it safe or wise and it’s not something that should be blindly encouraged as it’s not without risk. Even more so if you’ve shunned all scans and medical care.

Reason why it shouldn’t be encouraged

My friend and I gave birth a week apart, both hospital births. Mine, had some pethedine for the b2b birth but it was complication free so I could have free birthed. Fantastic
My friend however dilated super quickly and then went on to tear up down and side and everywhere and then had a severe bleed and nearly died, all really quickly, if no medic was there she’d be dead. No external risk factors just one of those things.

Both low risk second babies.

But the problem is on those groups they aren’t being informed the risk is glossed over, that’s the point

I'm in a fb group of women with the same due date. When we had our babies one of the mums shared her "amazing" birth story. She wanted a free birth but her husband didn't so the compromise was a home birth. She started to do bizarre things on the group like advising other mums to turn down scans to monitor the baby in the final trimester (😱) because she had and she goes with her "gut" rather than go for a scan. It all came out why she was refusing scans after the birth. Turns out the baby was breach and she clearly knew as she got her husband to watch a video on delivering a breach baby just a week before the birth - funny eh? So she went into labour and kept telling her husband not to call the midwives. Got to the point of pushing and it was obvious her baby was breach. At this point the husband rang the midwife, the midwife told him there was nothing she could do it was an emergency and he needed 999. The woman was fuming that the midwife wouldn't ring 999 for them (must have disturbed her zen birth). She thankfully got the baby out and the paramedics got wires crossed and thought the woman just needed transferring to hospital not an active (breach) birth so they only arrived nearly an hour later. The woman hadn't delivered the placenta, it was stuck. They told her she needed help or she could bleed to death. Again she fumed and didn't want to go in. They took her in after promising she could leave as soon as it was sorted. The first midwife that saw her in hospital was frosty and told her how silly she had been, they didn't allow her out for a week as they were concerned about what had happened, she wanted to complain and probably did.

She told this birth story on the group and was met with applause, I was flabbergasted people were telling her how amazing she was. Her baby could have died, if it'd got stuck on the way out, it could have been completely starved of oxygen. Instead they all told her what an "amazing mama" she was. This woman also refused to vaccinate her baby too, again trusting that gut of hers. I feel sorry for the child and husband, it seems this woman's need for a natural zen birth completely trumped the life of her unborn baby. Still makes me angry now thinking about it, I had to sit on my hands not to comment on how stupid she was at the time!!!

@lifeisnteasy
The Hutton and Reitsma papers in the Lancet I was referring to find that there is no difference in safety for first babies, and improved safety for first time mothers at home.

[quote AliceAll]@lifeisnteasy
The Hutton and Reitsma papers in the Lancet I was referring to find that there is no difference in safety for first babies, and improved safety for first time mothers at home.[/quote]
Well, the Birthplace study says that isn’t the case 🤷🏼‍♀️ And this is the study used by the NHS.

@lifeisnteasy
www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(19)30119-1/fulltext
www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(19)30119-1/fulltext
You are correct that the birthplace study did find a small but statistically significant increased risk to the baby for FTMs but still showed that home was safer for the mother. The review and meta analysis I posted above includes the data from the birthplace study along with several other large studies and did not find this effect. Arguably the birthplace study is the most relevant data to the uk but I do think the fact that it isn't replicated in other studies is important to consider when making categorical statements that it isn't safer for FTMs.

@AliceAll but how can you make the categorical statement that it is?

Surely the study relevant to the U.K. is the most valuable?

@aliceall you just can't be heard over those who believe "medical professionals know best"

@lifeisnteasy you said a vba2c sounds really risky. No more risky than a vbac.

@EatDrinkEatDrink breech is just a variation of normal have you not seen badassmotherbirther videos on Facebook?