To be fed up of the "home birth is risky" misinformation?

[everychildmatters]

Because clearly evidence says otherwise!!

No, they aren't. For second and subsequent low-risk births, home birth is as safe as hospital - which means the two have different risk factors, but they both come with risks and benefits. It simply isn't true to say that every single birth in every circumstance is safer in a hospital.

And some of those things aren't choices made by medical staff. Arguably over-intervention is, but birth slowing down in hospital happens to many women, but it isn't something anyone can help, it's a physiological response. So yes, it is a reasonable risk to factor in.

I was injured in hospital, I wouldn't have been if I birthed at home. Second time I went to the hospital with 4 mins before I birthed and the 3rd time I birthed at home. I'd have likely been further injured if I birthed in hospital or accepted induction - which I was massively pressured about the second time, despite only being 41 weeks pregnant. One of the reasons I put off going near the place.
There are certainly reasons modern medicine is amazing and literally saves mothers every day - csections and induction absolutely have their place.
...50% C-section rates and pressure to induce for no good reason, not so amazing.

I apparently with my second had to be induced because it was a medical emergency (consultant couldn't tell me why other than the fact I was 40+6). It was such an emergency he wanted to do it the following Monday because they were understaffed.
I gave birth 12 hours later.

Home births by their very nature are more risky than hospital births because IF something goes wrong, you do not have the access to care & help immediately as you do in a hospital. That absolutely does make them riskier- if shit hits the fan, you’ve got less access to support and it will take longer to get it, that can be the difference between life and death.

That’s not to say the risk of something going wrong is always higher at home, but that IF something does go wrong the risk of a bad outcome is higher because you’re at home rather than in a hospital where in a matter of seconds you can be wheeled into theatre etc.

So just to check, you think you know better than the clinicians that have done every single study of home birth ever done? Because none of them would use your 'technique'.

My great Gran died as did the baby as it was a home birth as it was in those days. I and my mum would have been dead if it was a home birth and me and my dd would be died if it was a home birth. That is facts in my family and why we never be stupid enough in our family to have a home birth. Retained placenta.

So why aren't the outcomes worse for low-risk births of second and subsequent babies? If it is obvious common sense, then why don't the outcomes show it?

I would have been the perfect candidate for home birth with my second. Had a natural delivery first time round with no issues, delivered the placenta without the injection, had a low risk second pregnancy and went into spontaneous labour.

If I had had a home birth, chances are I would be dead as I had a horrific PPH sometime after delivering the placenta (again without the injection) during the golden hour and was just casually bleeding out whilst cuddling my second born.

Do you have any evidence that home birth is safe in the context of the NHS in 2025, when an ambulance is likely to take well over an hour to get to you if something goes wrong?

I get wanting a home birth, absolutely.

I couldn’t personally take the risk of a rare, unforeseen complication that needs urgent hospital treatment, particularly for baby. The stakes are too high for me.

What research are you referring to? A link would be handy.

I think this is a fair point, and actually this is why I didn't have a home birth for DC2: he was born at a point during COVID where ambulance services were extremely strained and so the risk of not being able to transfer if required felt too high. However, I do think this has to be weighed against the fact that in-hospital maternity services are also strained and in crisis currently.

There is plenty of evidence that shows hospital is not always safer than home, but it depends heavily on what the factors are that make "all things equal". For example a fat woman giving birth to her second baby is in a different category to a thin woman giving birth to her first even if both are "low risk".

Hospitals can create risk that doesn't exist at home just as the opposite is true too. It depends on the individual circumstances.

Setting yourself up to be reliant on a poorly functioning ambulance service is risky.

Don't believe your community midwife when she says that you will get an ambulance if you need one, frequently there are NO ambulances available in large geographical areas regardless of your priority (and you aren't the highest possible priority on the system unless one or both of you have actually reached the point of stopping breathing).

Midwives can't save a woman's life if the woman is bleeding out.

That's what happened to me. Fortunately I was in hospital and doctors rushed in to save me as I went into severe shock. I would have died if I had been at home.

It's a choice every woman has to weigh up. But it is incorrect to say that midwives have all they need to assist with a home birth. That is only true if things go to plan...but they often don't.

@Perfect28 Totally agree. I've also bedshared with all three of mine since birth, having done our research and adhering to the Safe 7.

Why don't you supply some stats, OP, with sources, so that we can actually engage with your argument?

I had a unplanned home birth which worked out fine and I didn’t need to go to hospital at all, had something gone badly wrong it would have been a race to the hospital

IMO..
normal pregnancy, normal birth.. riskier at hospital but only because of HOA

pregnancy with risk factors and normal birth.. riskier at home
Pregnancy with risks and problems in labour and delivery.. riskier at home.

I'm really sorry that happened to you.

No, but I also know clinicians studies tend to be into a specific subset of something, not the very general question being asked here. What are you saying they do?

For example I was just skimming an article about a British Medical Journal study that confirmed some planned home births are less risky than some hospital births. You can see in that study they weren’t trying to prove if ALL home births are safer, they were trying to prove a specific point. That’s what I’m saying, most studies look at specific things rather than a
more general question like is being asked here.

I wouldn’t recommend even then to be honest, I was age 24, bmi also about 24 no complications, fit and healthy, second child after a regular delivery the first time and still almost died thank god I was in the hospital

Feel free to speak to your midwife, and consultant, just as I have, to get all of the facts and make your own decision ☺️

I suppose the problem with this though is that you don’t know you’re going to have a normal birth until the time comes, and by then it’s too late to change your mind.

I had my daughter last year, no risk factors, no reason to believe there would be any issues, perfectly normal and healthy pregnancy & baby. We’d both have likely died if we hadn’t been in the hospital but there were no signs in advance that would be the case. Even the less than 30 seconds between the emergency buzzer being pulled and what felt like an army of people arriving in the room to help us felt like forever, nevermind waiting for an ambulance, blue light to hospital etc.

Oh my goodness, this!!
Did anyone see the Dispatches programme on Ch 4 last night?
999 : Undercover NHS in Crisis. This was shocking!

As they say, labour is only ever normal in retrospect.

I do remember a very sad MN post from someone who’d wanted a home birth for her first baby. But there were complications, help couldn’t be reached quickly enough, and her baby suffered brain damage. Unsurprisingly, she felt appalling guilt.

Yes, I know such cases will be rare, but…