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?

[quote Mothertomore]@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?[/quote]
Badassmotherbirther 😂 are we supposed to take that seriously?

Are you going to respond to my point about the Birthplace study proving FTM homebirth is riskier for babies?

And vbac isn’t necessarily risky but hba2c is. That’s why it isn’t recommended.

@AliceAll what are the exact differences between a home birth in the U.K. and in the US in terms of midwife support etc? Given vastly different healthcare systems - private insurance being the main one - it’s disingenuous to use these studies to imply the results are consistent with U.K.

I’m surprised you are so highly qualified yet conflate different country contexts. Fairly rudimentary mistake. In my PHD country context was important when discussing results of my own work vs others findings and how they differ. A good researcher doesn’t just find studies that back their own views and ignore this important dimension.

@EatDrinkEatDrink that woman was stupid and reckless and is proof that underneath all the statistic waving and talk of ‘informed choices’, deep down some women are just happy to gamble the health of their unborn child to impress their lentil weaving birthing goddess overlords.

@lifeisnteasy they pick and choose which data to use. Who guidelines are for the world yet the nhs don't mention them when giving you information. Infact they barely if ever inform you of your rights or evidence

[quote Mothertomore]@lifeisnteasy they pick and choose which data to use. Who guidelines are for the world yet the nhs don't mention them when giving you information. Infact they barely if ever inform you of your rights or evidence[/quote]
And you’re not doing that by ignoring a study relevant to our health system and the country we live in 🧐 righto

@mothertomore believe it or not I've not watched videos from "badassmotherbirther" I just let the midwives and doctors crack on and do their jobs during my births. Are you the woman out my group 🤣 you sound a lot like her? She trained her husband how to deliver a breech baby via 10min YouTube video 😆, "watch this jobs a good'un", was probably your badassmotherbirther video she used too.

I'm here because a certain doula with a god complex is bragging about how amazingly crazy all her supporters are on facebook and I forgot I still follow her.

I'm not sure why I'm still beating myself over the head with these birthing groups. Everyone in them was behind me when I was trying to have a dangerous freebirth after multiple c sections - until it went wrong. Radio silence. Zero support. Stories like mine don't fit the narrative, when we've done everything "right", seen the chiropractors, bought the crystals, had the independent midwife and doula and affirmations and refused all interventions and then it goes tits up and it's radio silence from everyone apart from the NHS who were still there even though I'd been such a dick.

I am grateful every single day that me and my baby are ok. That my selfish desire for that birth that everybody says all women are able to achieve didn't happen, because I would have died - not because of a cascade of intervention, but because of my own idiocy. I am thankful for a hospital that gave me a repeat c section and my beautiful baby is here with me right now, and I'm still able to have more babies if I want to (who will all be elective c sections from now on).

I saw the same thing in VBAC groups, where the stories where people defeat all odds get millions of likes. The repeat c sections more often than not get quietly dismissed. HBAC groups, where people don't acknowledge the posts about rupture or people who just can't birth vaginally. I'm so sick of the praise these groups give to stunt births, and I think it's incredibly dangerous and toxic and not supportive at all (unless your story fits the narrative of course).

Sorry this is rambly. Thank you for creating this thread. I don't see these opinions very often because my world is so "crunchy". I'm so sick of the language of achievement people use, and the narcissism it creates. I remain proud of my body, because I realised that it can do many other things despite not getting a vag badge, and thank god I'm alive to realise that.

it goes tits up and it's radio silence from everyone apart from the NHS who were still there even though I'd been such a dick.

Quite. I wonder how many people would really ‘put their faith in nature’ if they knew an ambulance wouldn’t come rushing to their aid the moment the luck turns. Not many I expect. Thank goodness you’re both ok. Those people have a lot to answer for.

@Namechangetimes100
Yes fair call, I also find it annoying when people throw their qualifications around as if that gives their opinions more weight, so sorry about that. :-) I did feel a need to rebut the narrative that everyone posting in the group is either aggressively anti-medicine or uneducated and vulnerable. There are several highly experienced midwives who post in the group too and much of the information shared is evidence based.

Regarding misinformation in such groups it's a tricky one, it would be unethical and dangerous for free-speech to attempt to close such groups and the fact is that medical professionals are often not up to date with the research, often give misinformation and/or use coercive language and sometimes make genuine mistakes so it's really important to have a forum in which to question statements made by medical professionals - and this is most important for those who are not otherwise going to go and read up the papers to inform themselves. There is a huge power-imbalance here and in general people are more likely to believe doctors than a random person on the internet - even if the doctor is talking rubbish. In real life I know several people who have been coerced into things they didn't consent to and which ultimately caused them or their baby harm. I think if they had been more informed beforehand it is likely they would have had a better outcome.

Re the small babies thing; you are obviously more informed on small babies than I am. I only briefly looked it up when I got referred for an extra scan due to one inconsistent measurement (by a student midwife). I wasn't convinced that they were following the RCOG guidelines in recommending this as it was only one inconsistent measurement and not by my usual midwife but I was at 36 weeks by this point and I wanted a presentation scan before a homebirth anyway so just went along with it. The research I read at the time was that induction for small babies (without other signs of growth restriction) caused more complications with no improvement in outcomes. Maybe this has been superseded. In real life I know several people who have been mistakenly (and against RCOG guidelines) put on a high-risk pathway for growth which impacted their future care. On the group I haven't noticed people saying to ignore abnormal artery readings and mostly people are saying that you need two scans to diagnose growth restriction - which I believe is in line with RCOG (unless

A lot of the info is evidence based, and it’s great to share the stats for each trust which is also see a lot of. It’s not about censorship it’s about moral and ethical responsibility and laymans can be wrong about certain things but admin need to make sure that they aren’t supporting dangerous practices. Prem home delivery with no medic present is flat out dangerous, maybe baby won’t need nicu but there’s a good chance they will.
Growth restriction is different and it is intrinsically difficult to be 100% sure of as an arterial doppler gives a snapshot of a moment in time.
So to clear things up - sga stands for small for gestational age which translates as less than 10th centile on personalised charts or less than 9th centile on who redbook charts.
Low birth weight is a birth weight of less than 2.5kg and less than 2nd centile in who redbook charts
Fgr or iugr is fetal growth restriction or inter uterine growth restriction where there is a pathological factor hindering the baby’s genetic growth potential (genetic abnormality, maternal lifestyle such as substance abuse or malnutrition or anxiety and depression to a lesser extent, infection or most commonly a placenta issue). A baby can be growth restricted at any birth weight but most are low birth weight.
7/10 sga babies are what’s defined as constitutionally small ie they are petite and low on the charts but there is no pathological reason as to why.

3/10 are growth restricted.
The rcog old guidelines used to recommend induction at term 37 weeks for all babies under 10th centile as they couldn’t be sure which small babies were truly growth restricted, these guidelines were released in 2013 and superseded in 2019 with the saving babies pathway which recognises that babies who measure between 3rd and 10th centile (in the absence of other concerning factors ie elevated dopplers, genetic condition, soft markers of anything on a scan, elevated or reduced liquor, or significant reduction in growth velocity etc) are likely to be consistutionally small and mothers are to be offered an induction at 39 weeks as that’s the week that correlates to the lowest rate of still birth and there is still a relative degree of ambiguity in if baby is growth restricted.

So now you know.

I've found this really interesting reading and I am definitely on one of the home birth groups mentioned

I definitely think that the medical profession have a lot to answer for in terms of making women want to birth on their own. It was definitely a fucking awful induction experience with DC1 that was behind my decision to have my second at home (highlights included the - female FWIW - obstetrician bringing in a group of medical students 48 hours deep when I was basically delirious with exhaustion and suggesting they "have a go" at examining me but fortunately the brilliant MW told them where to go). Vowed never to be induced for post dates again but I would have complied with all monitoring recommendations to avoid it. But I can totally understand why women who had similar experiences would be driven to avoid medical professionals.

As it turned out, I was one of those who called the midwives and nobody was available - I of course demanded somebody came out immediately

But only because it was too late and DD ended up being delivered by two fantastic paramedics!

@Liathroid The US has a crazy health system and no it’s not remotely generalisable to the UK but, if you read the papers I cited, I did not do that. The Hutton and Reitsma papers are based on studies from around the world and include data from the UK, the Netherlands, Canada, Iceland and New Zealand.

The authors are Canadian. I'm surprised you'd confuse Canada and the US while trying to make a snide point about geographical context :-p (Joke by the way - not trying to get at you - but humour is hard to convey by text)

For all those going apeshit over medical advice, you do realise it varies across different nations, including those with very good medical systems e.g. France.

The uk used to advocate putting babies on their fronts to sleep when other countries didn’t.

You can actually be smart and question things your local trust is doing. It can also vary across trusts.

And you can look at relative risk vs absolute. And you know, the actual recovery and trauma of parents and babies afterwards.

My daughter who’s seven and the light of my life would be dead had I followed the advice of these cranks. As it was she was born with a crack team of paediatricians who saved her life.

Birth means nothing, yes great to have a straightforward one but the end game is a healthy baby and mother. That’s all I cared about. Thanks to expertise that’s exactly what I got.

I've been looking at the NICE guidelines for twin pregnancy (mostly timing and mode of delivery this evening).

When you look at the rationale and data that the guideline is based on it tells you there wasn't enough data so it's all based on the committee's joint opinion/experience (which I'm sure isn't biased in any way ). And the data? One source from Ireland, none from the U.K, South Korea, USA, Pakistan...

@Namechangetimes100 Thanks for that. I might copy that info in case it comes up again this pregnancy. Just checking if I've understood correctly - for babies that are around the 15th percentile - they would be classed as normal and not recommended for induction (unless also showing a drop of percentiles over multiple measurements)?

@Theregoesmyhomebirth that’s because it’s unethical to experiment on pregnant women and put them in high risk situations for the sake of data collection.

@Lifeisnteasy Yes, Thankyou I am aware of that. But surely there must be some recognition the data itself is flawed? My clinical information is currently going to St George's to form data on modi twins, but I'm not convinced they will recognise the role the current practice has on it (coercive healthcare, treatments given based on existing guidelines). Certainly a question for the researchers, must remember to email them.

My point was that the evidence is pretty shaky in terms of how applicable it is given the differences in population and healthcare. But it's not that relevant to the point of the OPs thread so I won't continue.

@Theregoesmyhomebirth I feel like you’re trying to make a point, but I’m not sure what it is?

I'm all for evidence based home birth when appropriate, I had 2 myself. But I personally can't get my head around freebirth. And I think it's unbelievably unethical for a doula (not a medical professional) to be charging people for "advice" on how to have one. The admin of one of these groups is always rattling the tip jar, charges for phone calls with her, turns every post people make to being about herself and posted the other day saying "my groups are an empire and I am their dictator", which is... yikes. There was also a vote for "woman of the year" by a clothing brand. They asked people to nominate someone who deserved to win it. One of the nominees was a woman who volunteers to photograph stillborn babies, incredible stuff. But the admin of one of these groups asked all the group followers to nominate her, in multiple posts. Telling people "it's your last chance to nominate me!". She ended up with loads of nominations and likes from all her group members and won the competition. Kind of defeats the point of people nominating someone and that person winning organically.

I suppose my point is that often the advice of professionals/NICE guidelines are hailed as flawless and to be taken as gospel. But they're not perfect, have their own biases, and aren't always based on that great data, because well (for the reason you stated above) there isn't the data available.

I'm in the homebirth group of Sam's, I've always found that she and the group have celebrated all births regardless of how baby arrived be it c section, hospital or homebirth. I have seen Sam tell women to seek medical attention when necessary. Sam and her group gave me the confidence to speak to consultants and find a plan that worked for me and my baby.
After my first birth I can see why people wish to avoid a hospital birth. Not once was I listened to, after pushing for an hour a registrar walked in and told me I was having an episiotomy and forceps delivery. No mention of risks, no consent from me gained. I wasn't even told the reason why. After being told the episiotomy was a small incision I was cut to my fucking leg while I screamed in pain begging her to stop. I felt each part of the forceps go in and be clipped together. My memory from giving birth is me laying there screaming for her to stop and shouting no. As a rape survivor this is incredibly upsetting. After being stitched together (door open legs in stirrups and everything on show) I was walked to the postnatal ward where the midwife laughed at me because she walked so fast with my baby and I couldn't keep up. When I was pregnant with my second I spoke with my midwife who was horrified by what had happened, she arranged for me to have a birth debrief with a senior midwife. Turns out that there was no real reason for the forceps delivery, baby was 2cm from crowning and I'd probably have pushed him out in the 11 minutes the registrar took to set up (I'd been told I no longer needed to push so definitely not an emergency). I am in daily pain from the episiotomy scar 4.5 years later. Baby was born with perfect cord blood gasses and perfect apgar score.
After my first birth I was determined to have a homebirth but after a few things cropped up I decided to opt for the mlu, I was never once judged by the group for that. My entire pregnancy I was petrified at the thought of giving birth in hospital again. I spoke about it to every single medical professional I saw in my pregnancy. Thankfully the gd consultant I saw was brilliant, extremely supportive of my choices and worked with me instead of telling me what to do. She had to offer induction at 40 weeks per guidelines but even said herself that it was unnecessary and could see no danger in my declining it as I had an appointment at 40+1 to review. NHS care is not usually tailored to each woman and baby, it's blanket guidelines that can cause more harm than good. In a gd group I was in there were so many cases of people being told that baby was measuring big so induction was needed at 36/37/38 weeks to put a woman through a 4 day induction ending in c section only for baby to weigh 6lbs or less. My first birth experience very nearly put me off engaging with the maternity service's, not the homebirth group.

@BananasOfTheWorld sorry to hear about your experience. Glad you and baby are well.

Who is the doula?

@AliceAll yes that’s my understanding, unless baby measured 99th centile and then one week measured 15th and or had elevated dopplers but I don’t think elevated dopplers alone is cause enough for concern but I do imagine at the end of pregnancy it would be enough to recommend induction (but I’ve not read this in the guidelines)

15th centile in utero means different things for different people so will plot differently in the WHO charts but basically it’s all variations of normal.

I’d recommend a quick google of saving baby pathway, it’s the second edition you want. Very interesting read for me personally as my first was sga and it was terrifying but she was induced at 37 weeks based on old guidelines, the trust now follows this pathway so she was only 5lb at birth but would have be more like 6lb if induced at 39, so I did my research prior to my second pregnancy.