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

[everychildmatters]

Because clearly evidence says otherwise!!

And, to be clear, I had had a perfectly healthy pregnancy, no risk factors at all.

All birth is risky. Home, hospital, in an ambulance, in a taxi in the carpark. There are always risks and it's impossible to predict or mitigate all of them.

I can sit here and say I'd be dead if my mam opted for home birth, which is true. Doesn't mean that statistically home birth is any more or less risky than hospital births, just that there are different risks to take into consideration and with the state of healthcare in this country it's a crapshoot whether you'll have a good or shit time.

Going into a home birth thinking "home births aren't risky" is reckless and moronic. Going into a hospital birth assuming that you've mitigated all risk by giving birth in a hospital is naïve.

Perhaps we need to stop arguing amongst ourselves about who is superior because of where they gave birth and start arguing in favour of better care in hospitals and better education and easier to access information for all about all birth types, possible risk factors and benefits?

Completely agree.

Yep.

And the bottom line is that it cannot be argued - absolutely simply and irrefutably cannot be argued - that it is equally safe to be an unknown time away from an operating theatre, doctors, drugs, medicine, medical intervention.

It's not rational to make any argument other than "I know home birth carries more inherent risks than hospital birth. I know I cannot argue with this. But I want to have my baby at home".

That's the whole argument, I'm afraid, no matter how unpalatable.

Childbirth used to be the single biggest killer of women before modern medicine op.

In Afghanistan now that western medicine has been removed it is becoming so again.

(and I’ve seen a news story where the Afghan men are not blaming this on their own lacks or thanking past western interventions, no they’re cursing the removal of gifts they won’t create themselves, grumble grumble).

Why would you take a ‘risk’ with a life?

Who is to say that exact situation would have happened if you had stayed at home though. It's impossible to know.

All that went wrong with my first iPhone, in hoputl (not NHS, a private hospital in a western European country usually considered a lot safer than UK) was caused by the fact I was left alone as too many women were in labour simultaneously and they didn't have enough midwives and doctors. So the quiet one, who didn't appear to be on active labour, was told to get some rest.
I gave birth 10 minutes later completely alone as DH tried to find help.

Whereas my home birth in the UK... I had two midwives and a student midwife with me from when I called the midwives office in early labour. She was born calmly and safety a few hours later (with again a very short active labour)
And thats what made it safer... undivided medical attention.

Until we are at the point where every women in labour has undivided medical attention in hospital, complications like that will occur.

Again, why do you think NICE gives the advice it does then? If you know better just from your own common sense?

Out of interest, does your argument mean that you're equally against standalone midwife units? Why do you think the NHS runs them if they're obviously dangerous?

I’d consider home birth only if I lived within a few streets of a hospital and had someone on hand who could drive me there if needed.

id pay no attention to whether or not I was “low risk” my second child after having a normal birth with my first one I was slim, healthy and young with no complications and still needed a c section and we both could of died

Just my advice to anyone reading

Me too. I was 21 years old and it was my first (and only) baby. Everything went wrong in labour and me and baby very nearly died and indeed would have without quick action from doctors

It makes me reslly angry when people downplay the risks in favour of the so called 'perfect' birth experience.

Not for the first baby. For the first baby there’s a higher risk than hospital. This is only applicable for 2nd+ baby and with no risk factors.

I’m torn on this topic. I’ve had 1 medicalised but okay hospital birth, and one that was truly awful - despite insisting I needed to be in hospital ‘for our safety’, my entire 12 hour labour was completely unattended (bar midwife popping in to do my obs every 4 hours) in a cubicle on an 8 bed ward because they refused to acknowledge I was in labour. This is despite me telling them my contractions were strong and regular, an initial vaginal exam the night before showing me to be 4cm (yep), and me literally saying ‘I’M IN LABOUR’ any time a midwife walked past my bed. How on earth they could make such a prolonged and blatant mistake I have no idea. By the time they realised I was vomiting through pain and 10cm with a visible head. I had been signed off for the birth pool and I feel very angry that my birth was being ignored and left on a bed for hours, followed by a rushed transfer to labour ward and told to lie on a bed with bright lights and endless staff coming in and out.

I had no labour or baby complications, and despite my ‘background condition’ I’m sure my son would’ve been safer at home with one on one midwife care rather than being completely ignored in hospital.

Hospital apologised but damage is done - no good experiences for me and I can’t have more children.

Double check the statistics that you're using- if a home birth baby is transferred to hospital because medical intervention is needed to save the mother or baby, is the birth counted as a hospital birth? This certainly used to be the case which sways the data significantly. The probability of things going wrong may be low for a straightforward pregnancy, but the severity of the consequences is high.

But you are assuming that there will be a higher level of care at home.
If the hospital is overstretched and can’t provide enough midwife care then equally the same system will be unable to provide enough midwives for 1 to 1 or 2 to 1 midwife care at home.

I think what that says is births are safer when there is adequate medical care available.

Hospital adds risks that don't exist at home. Of course other risks are mitigated by access to emergency care. But it is not as straightforward as 'homebirth is riskier'. That is not the whole argument at all because the home environment provides factors that can statistically improve birth outcomes and lower interventions for women who are already low risk.

That doesn't mean home birth is always safe and it doesn't mean hospital birth is always safer either.

Saying that low risk women (which will be those on second or subsequent babies with a proven track record of no complications, no underlying health conditions, no pregnancy complications etc) should be offered home births doesn't mean that 'for the general populations homebirths carrier greater risks) is not a valid statement. First time mums, anyone with any kind of health co diton or pregnancy complications, anyone well overdue etc home births will be much higher risk

Why are you becoming increasingly incensed by calm statement of facts? It's a bit odd.

Again, it is completely, totally and irrefutably correct that it is always riskier to go into labour where you do not have quick access to an operating theatre, blood clotting drugs, medical staff and medical care.

It doesn't matter how angry that makes you. Reality doesn't care how you feel. You have nothing important or useful to say to me so please go and yell at someone else. Cheers.

She's absolutely hell bent on not listening I'm afraid, rationality and reality won't touch the sides.

The current statistic is that 50% of women who attempt a homebirth in my area are blue-lighted to hospital.

Both women in my antenatal class who attempted a homebirth with their first child ended up in hospital with EMCS.

I needed c sections for both my children.

I would only have considered a homebirth for my second child if i had a smooth natural delivery for my first.

Look at this graph at how common death was in childbirth in this country. Annoyingly the lines aren’t annotated but I assume the huge drop is mothers not dying.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Simon-Collin-3/publication/226933583MaternalMortalityinDevelopingCountries/links/0c96051b83b2c98467000000/Maternal-Mortality-in-Developing-Countries.pdf?origin=publicationdetail&tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6Il9kaXJlY3QiLCJwYWdlIjoicHVibGljYXRpb25Eb3dubG9hZCIsInByZXZpb3VzUGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIn19

The homebirth team is often separate to the hospital. During mine, the hospital wasn't accepting new admissions (the second nearest being 90min from my house) but the homebirth team was the community midwives.

So, yep, home birth is always the riskier proposition and there is no rational argument against that.

Now, I'm off. I already know I'm right and have no interest in being shouted at by irrational people. Feelings don't trump facts, I'm afraid and I don't want to just keep repeating myself on a loop.

Cheers. 👋

Nobody is saying giving birth at home necessarily increases your risk of something going wrong, but what it does increase is the risk of a bad outcome if & when something does go wrong.

As I say I was low risk, as textbook as it gets, no concerns whatsoever, and still both my baby & I would be dead if I’d chosen to have a home birth.

I do find it frustrating that people think they know better than all medical guidance based on their own gut feeling, yes. I didn't 'shout', and your annoyance that I've asked a question you can't answer doesn't mean I am 'incensed'.

For a first baby I agree. I follow a lovely lady on Insta, she has just given birth to her first baby. She’s early 20s (so perfect age biologically), is very healthy and slim and stayed very active and well in her pregnancy with no complications, average sized baby. She was determined to have a home birth, went into labour naturally at 41 weeks and had set the house up for optimal usage (birth balls, use of the shower, pool, bean bags, etc).

She live-posted her birth and initially it seemed to be textbook - waters going, regular contractions. Eventually the posting stopped, and eventually it turned out her labour had gone on for a full 48 hours with an 8 hour pushing stage. She had 2 very holistic midwives who despite trying everything the baby would not budge. They ended up calling an ambulance as the baby’s heart decelerated, luckily just as the paramedics arrived they did an episiotomy and the baby came out.

The mum was so deeply unwell from her labour she wasn’t able to get out of bed for a
month, and is still in near constant pain 3 months later. She’s had a reparative surgery and will probably need more. She only went to the shops for the first time the other day as lifting or being on her feet is too painful.

Honestly I’ve followed it thinking, there’s absolutely nothing she could’ve done differently and she’s still probably permanently damaged.