to think home births are selfish?

[woozlet]

I just watched a 'desperate midwives' that I had recorded and there was a home birth on it which went wrong. It worked out ok in the end and the baby was ok. But I was really scared watching it, it just seemed like an unnecessary risk to take.

clanky not saying homebirths are, in themselves, dangerous. Not at all. Just saying that haveing a homebirth is dangerous if there is an emergency problem. And, as they can't be predicted, then a homebirth could be dangerous for anyone. Nobody knows who will be that one in a thousand or in a hundred thousand (or whatever the statistics are) who will desperately need that medical help, so why would anyone risk their baby's health (or their own)?

Deciding a birth is low risk can only be made afterwards.

I have had 2 hospital births. The first was induced as 42 weeks and was fine - 45 minute second stage, small tear only, good recovery, happy mum and baby despite the intervention. Second was a MLU and was fantastic. I was up and about throughout after a long bath - hubby was watching Match of the Day in our room about an hour before DD arrived. 15 minute second stage, no tears, happy mum and baby.

I'm aiming for that this time but who knows. Hospital births do not always end up being horrific and if it is wrong for some women to say that home birth is selfish (would never be my choice as too much can go wrong) then it is wrong for pro-home birth people to frighten everyone who is planning to birth in hospital.

"It is well documented that having hospital care during labour and birth is linked to unecessary interventions."

I do not see how, as someone who is NOT a medical professional, you are qualified to make that judgement.

I am going to have my 3rd baby in hospital in a few weeks. Both my hospital births were good, positive experiences. I am relaxed and comfortable about my choice. I do not see how by the act of stepping through the hospital door I am increasing my chances of intervention. That will happen if and when needed. It's very possible it will be needed, as my baby is transverse, and may not turn (though some of you may disagree that it would be needed!). I have to say that since the baby's malposition was identified the hospital staff have made it clear that they will do everything possible to make intervention avoidable for me. This is after two normal pregnancies - so the fact that you've had two normal pregnancies does not in any way indicate the next one will be.

Here is one example of a mother selfishly ignoring medical advice -
www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/NHS-refuse-twin-home-birth-help/article-912699-detail/a rticle.html

Here's another -
kentmidwiferypractice.blogspot.com/2008/11/sharons-story-normal-birth-of-12lb-baby.html

Plus, not going to name any names but if you go over to the childbirth discussion on mumsnet, there are several examples of women who proudly say that they plan to/have ignored medical advice and will "birth" their babies at home. How clever of them.

Mollybob, you are right when you say that deciding if a birth is low risk is only a decision that can be made afterwards.

"To say that people that choose homebirth are selfish on the basis that in Ethiopa people dont have a choice is a load of cobblers". I didn't say that, actually. I said that some women on this board are spoiled, and do not seem to see how lucky they are - if you could see the conditions that women not just in Ethiopia but other poor countries are expected to give birth in, I feel sure you would revise your opinions about NHS hospitals.

I really do think that home birth is like a religion for some women, and they are so anti hospitals they try to frighten other women into making dangerous choices.

Baby comes first. Not mum's comfort or stress levels. Hospitals are NOT dangerous, and it is ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

Im not saying hospitals are dangerous, I wanted to give people some positive experiences of homebirths. People who have a home birth dont see it as a religion, you are being intentionally inflammatory. I and others have repeatedly said that if there were a problem we would go into hospital on advice of midwives. My midwives were amazingly supportive and Im not spoiled I know I am extremely lucky. The thread itself wasnt about how grateful we should be to hospitals, the op said home births were selfish and we are responding to that in kind with our experiences. Hospital will be the right choice for some. Home birth will be the right choice for others. I am not anti hospital, just dont like being there if I dont need to be.

Funny that you have made reference to the article about the lady in Staford. I am friends with that lady and have been for a long time. Im pleased to announce that she had 2 beautiful children with no complications to babies or Mother. It was not a high risk pregnancy, she had no problems throughout and had successfully had homebirths before. So whats the problem with that? If the twins had been identical it would have put a different spin on it as it would have been more risk, but she had thoroughly done her research. If anything had cropped up she would have been transferred to the hospital that was near her home. By having a home birth she would have actually saved the nhs money but people wanted to make it look like she was after special treatment.

Who said hospitals were evil givememoresleep? You are putting statements where there have been none. You seem to be reading it as you feel it suits you.

*Agree, anniemac. It's like the 'a red car killed my cat so all red cars are driven by crap drivers' theory.

'I know someone who had a horrific hospital experience so hospitals are evil'. Bollocks.*

Im really pleased that you had a good experience anniemac...just confirms my statement that hospital is right for some and not for others.

Sorry clankypanky but it is this part of the article about your friend that really gets me -

"The couple say they are being denied their rightful choice".

WHAT ABOUT THEIR BABIES? It's not about the couple!!!It's about their babies right to a safe delivery!!!!

But I see that on this occasion the independent midwives stepped in - of course they did, they were being paid large sums of money to do so.

Your friend may have got away with it and delivered two healthy babies - I'm genuinely glad. But she risked their lives, and that is something she can never change, as a hospital is the safest place for a high risk multiple delivery. Sadly, her babies didn't get a say in the matter, and she behaved in a negligent way towards them.If a midwife or doctor showed that kind of negligence they would be struck off.

The worst case scenario in a hospital birth is that you may end up with a section. That may leave you sore, traumatised, and upset, and you may find it harder to bond with your baby. It may leave your baby sluggish, unable to breastfeed - but you will both be alive.

The worst case scenario in a home birth? Your baby dies, or is brain damaged, and you die too from excessive bleeding. Why risk it?

Childbirth is a condition where decisions need to be made quickly, and where things can change from normal to dangerous within minutes.

It just stuns me time and again that anybody would be willing to take that risk with their precious child's life. Childbirth is not about your rights, it's about getting your baby into the world in as safe a way as possible.

Of course it is their rightful choice to have their babies where they feel they will be delivered the most safely and happily and where she thinks that she will be able to labour in peace so that her babies were born with no distress. It may be a cliche but sometimes Mothers really do know best. You cant seriously suggest to me that hospitals never make mistakes or put peoples lives at risk? They do everyday. It seems very naive to me to go through life with the attitude that there is one way for everything and we should always listen to the expert. Also she lived in Staffordshire...did you not see all the coverage about the hospital being the worst in the country and how many people had died unnecessarily because of negligence...Id have been pretty put off a hospital birth too.
To suggest that she would harm her children is disgusting, she didnt 'get away' with anything, if she had thought for a millisecond that there was any risk she wouldnt have had them at home.
How could you go through life always thinking of the worse case scenario...you'd never do anything would you? You are very extremist.
It wasnt a high risk multiple delivery, as I have already said.
Having my first baby in hospital did put my babies life in danger...how lucky I was to have them step in and 'save' him eh.

ABCD - you seem to be very anti IMs. Can I ask why? We used IMs for DD and are doing so again for DC2. Yes, IMs are uninsured, but that is not by choice - and uninsured is very different to unqualified or unregulated. From my experience, IMs are extremely risk aware but, because they are not bound to follow hospital policy, they have a different perception of risk to many MWs within the NHS - they often consider "unusual" what the NHS classes as "abnormal", but if you have the chance to do it then "unusual" does not mean "stupidly high risk". IMs may take on clients deemed high risk by the NHS, but they have no interest in risking lives and will turn away women that they feel they cannot work with.
Ironically, a common reason I've seen given for MWs to become independent is that they feel the way they are forced to practice within the NHS was dangerous for the mothers and/or babies under their care...

Nothing in life is without risk. Neither a home birth nor a hospital birth guarantee a safe outcome for either mother or baby. No, of course hospitals aren't the work of the devil and they do save lives, but that doesn't mean that they're a perfect solution either. The WHO consider that a 10-15% CS rate is optimal for foetal and maternal health, but in the UK we're around 25%. To me that means we're doing harm by trying too hard to do good. Its far easier to defend action than innaction, and the further we go towards a sue-happy culture the more pressure there will be on hospitals to put themselves in the most defendable position. How can that not lead to more unnecessary intervention in a hospital environment?

Worst case outcome for a birth in any location is the same - dead mother and dead baby. The cause may be different, but the risk is always there.

It's interesting how different people can read things in different ways - I looked at the 2nd birth story you linked to and read it through. I can't see where the mother "selfishly went against medical advice". I can see an instance where the mother was given conflicting medical advice and had to choose which to follow - and that, from the information presented and referenced, the advice given by the NHS MW was innacurate according to her governing body. I would have been interested to read the story of the lady with twins in Staffordshire but the link doesn't seem to take me there.

"Sometimes Mothers really do know best".

Erm...

Better than the medical profession? Not in most cases, I wouldn't have thought.

The point is, you can never know when intervention might be needed. Or when there will be no available ambulances. But of course the mother's preference and comfort should come first .

Agree that it has become evangelical quasi-religious movement, like home-schooling. People making sweeping statements based on their experience and implying that hospitals are dangerous places. They aren't. They're less pleasant than home, sure, but they're the best way to ensure that you don't spend your life thinking 'if only I'd...'

Well I had no idea I was worshipping at the altar of home birth when I had mine.

They were completely supported by community midwives who were able to reassure me that the ambulance journey from my home was so short that in all honesty it would make no difference if I was in hospital or not if things were going wrong. They also monitored me regularly and would have been aware if things were starting to go scary.

On this basis and the standard of care I could expect, as well as all the evidence, I decided that it was the safest (and actually the cheapest to the NHS) option.

Wish I had been 'selfish' and had dd at home... I am sure she would have come out fine in her own time rather than being rushed because the mw etc wanted to clock off (dd obliged and came out just before shift change and everyone disappeared in minutes...) [slightly bitter emoticon]
Would love to have a home birth next but dh so squeamish he wouldn't survive it

errm, do you think the medical profession are always right and that they are going to know more about your body than you do, I dont, I also know my capabilities and limitations - they dont. I havent checked the statistics on this but I know others on here have and Im pretty sure that home birth is not deemed any more dangerous than hospital birth, so why are you so against people that have one. To assume that I was selfish and intent on putting my babies at risk to fuel my whim is downright rude and disrespectful of so many women and completely misinformed and ignorant. What would you have suggested I did during my last birth, my labour started, I was very calm at first thinking I had plenty of time, and if Id planned on going into hospital then at that point I would have waited anyway. My labour escalated very quickly and my baby was born within 45 minutes. Because I had planned a homebirth I was lucky enough to have midwife number on speed dial so she arrived in time and equipment was there. If Id not planned that I would have been in serious . Should I then have got up and got into an ambulance 'just in case' I haemorrhaged and died? bollocks should I, I had a lovely bath, washed my hair, got into a freshly made bed, hugged and kissed my lovely midwife and got on with loving my baby. You cant avoid all risk in life 'just in case'. I mean, walking down the road whilst pregnant you COULD trip and fall and hurt your baby, best stay at home just in case then, dont want to take any unnecessary risk now do we.
I dont really know how to comment on this:

Agree that it has become evangelical quasi-religious movement because quite honestly I dont know what it means, seems like a sweeping statement youve picked up off another mn thread that makes you think you sound big and clever, but neverthless think it is again probably insulting.

I havent implied hospital is dangerous, I will admit I am basing things on my experience and the experience of a lot of my friends...what else would I base it on, thats normal no?

why does my making things bold not work!

Haven't read the whole thread but just wanted to add some info - if anyone is employing an independent midwife, you can check their registration status and also find out about any disciplinary hearings pending against them on the NMC (Nursing/Midwifery Council) website - this is the regulatory body. It's just an extra safety net to ensure that your midwife is properly registered.

thats great, well done sassy

clankypanky: Even though your comment wasn't aimed at me, I'm going to reply anyway. Yes I do think doctors know more about my body than I do - I don't even see how you can dispute this! I don't have a medical degree or expert training and I haven't got any experience working in hospitals. Are you saying you've never bothered to go to the doctor for any illness because you 'know your body'? I can see your argument in terms of pain relief etc. knowing what you can and can't stand, because that is a very subjective thing. No doctor would say they know everything. They make a judgment based on the available evidence and sometimes it's the wrong one. But you don't know what's happening inside your body. No one does.

I don't think your selfish for choosing to have your baby at home, and considering how your labour went it was obviously a good way to go for you. But if things had gone differently, it wouldn't have been and something serious could have resulted. I think this is all abeeceedee is saying: the worst case scenario is so horrific that for many (including me) it is not worth the risk.

Your friend is lucky that her babies were born with no distress. It was not a foregone conclusion. Everyone's always fine until something goes wrong.

inmylittlehead: Im not too sure if youve read my other posts but I have nothing against hospital births...I am responding to people saying home birth is selfish. Its not. There is no grounding for this. It is not of any personal insult to your situation.
Im also not saying that if something bad cropped up you shouldnt go into hospital. If complications had arisen, i had a bag packed and ready to go to hospital. Trip to hospital would have been insusequential time wise. Can i please ask someone to come up with some actual evidence that is actually happening to convince me that home birth is MORE dangerous...Ive not seen any. More than the odd case as well because you know I'll throw a hundred hospital ones back at you.

Well there probably will be more hospital problem stories than home birth ones because more people give birth in hospitals than at home... For me 'the odd case' where being in hospital would have saved a life is enough - I am an unlucky person.

You haven't defended your position on 'I know my body better than doctors', which was actually my main point as the homebirth debate can (and will) go on forever and a day

Can i also just ask why you lot saw so many doctors during your pregnancies. I never saw a doctor becuase they dont generally get involved.. I think even doctors would admit that midwives are more knowledgable than them.
Most doctors dont like home births because they are CONTROL FREAKS!
I would most certainly challenge a medic, because I am not a sheep and I know they are not the be all and end all and they do make mistakes.

So why would a hospital one not be enough, honestly we are all so conditioned..

I take issue with the 'control freak' comment. By all means challenge them if you really feel a particular thing isn't right, but in general they will know better. It's not a patriarchal conspiracy, just basic fact. I bet they make a hell of a lot less mistakes than someone with a layman's knowledge of medicine and anatomy. Just a hunch.

Midwives are fine for the straightforward stuff, but complications are always a possibility and one they are not trained to deal with. You are lucky that you had uncomplicated pregnancies.

my doctor was very pro HB

she said i should tell everyone how lovely it was, and that the stats did show it was beneficial, and more people should do it.

so ner....

although the huge number of people given really bad advice in their post-natal care from GPs (eg, give your 6wo ribena!) Does seem to suggest that most of us would do better to trust our midwives when it comes to childbirth and associated issues.

Right then in my little head, to answer your question...
My first birth was horrendous, I was very young, totally trusted the medics. They put me on pethidine...which made me trip out. If I could have made myself clear I could have told them and they could have given me the antidote but my brain was too busy telling me I was dying and there was noone around to help, I had a sadistic bitch shove her arm up me when I was in the middle of a contraction, I had a monitor strapped to me even though I wanted to walk around I was told I couldnt. I was given an epidural even though I was ready to push and they didnt believe me. My baby became distressed because of it all which put a rush on it because his heart rate was dipping. However, I couldnt push becasue they had made me have an epidural. Its all a butterfly effect you see. Icant be bothered to tell the full full story because it is far worse than that but it is enought to know i know myself more than they did.
Im not slating the medical profession, it is all miscommunication. If I had one person soley looking after me Im sure I would be insafe hands but have you ever actually been in hospital? Your case is passed from one person to another to another to the point where they can only trust what is written in front of them....sometimes its not recorded. My step dad recently had an appalling situation where he literlly would have died if he hadnt challenged something because his notes had not been written up and Im honestly not exagerrating, thank goodness he is of sound mind and noticed what was happening.

terrible spelling sorry. And doctors are control freaks I know quite a few and they will admit it.