In two minds about having a home birth

[ViolaCrayola]

I had a horrible hospital induction 1st time around (have posted about this before), now 31 weeks with DC2.

Have been seriously considering a home water birth - have terrible SPD and water really helps. Plus all the other pros about home comforts, privacy, 1-1 care etc.

But I am very unsure that I actually want to have a baby at home! People seem to often be either very definite about home births one way or another, but I just feel undecided. Has anyone else felt like this? How did you decide eventually? Time is running out! :)

Hmm, not sure any midwife has the right to deliberately override a plan that a woman has made for her care that has been agreed by a doctor and which she felt strongly enough about to part with large sums of money. It might be a bonkers request but it had been made legitimate and the mw profession should be trusted with such prior agreed requests.

I was a bit dubious about that too Starlight, which is why I did as I was told
I was on about £20k then LaVolcan. And yes, he did still get his fee. He was rarely there for longer than an hour for a vaginal birth.

That's truly shocking! I think I'd have been just as angry about him getting about a 1/5th of my annual earnings for one hour's 'work'. (But we are going off topic here a bit, so I'll say no more about it.)

Gut wrenching though to watch them go like chubby little lambs to the slaughter.....

Good God, you're STILL at it! I do find it incredible how people insist that black is white, and try to portray themselves as experts on a subject about which they clearly have a very tenuous grasp.

And how they are perfectly happy to pontificate on their blinkered opinions, but get all antsy when others disagree with them.

Which reminds me, I must go to pick my children up.

carrie?

How very DARE mothers debate the issue of maternity care,
as if they know anything at all about it!

Women! Know your place!

"and try to portray themselves as experts on a subject of which they have a very tenuous grasp"

Pot? Kettle?

I never claimed to be an expert, Shagmund. All along the line, I explained that I was merely speaking as I find, that I have seen many mothers and babies narrowly escape disaster. Some consider that shroud waving, many others (who don't want to get involved publically, so have PM'd me) are grateful for the view from the other end of the spectrum. You may find my views extreme, I find your views extreme. Everyone reading either is completely free to ignore them.

Good God, you're still at it! Carrie Maybe that's because we think a debate about how to deliver the optimum standard of care for each woman is important?

Who do you think is insisting that black is white? Is it the qualified obstetricians whose report has been quoted?

Or those qualified midwives who come on the thread and speak from years of experience?

And how they are perfectly happy to pontificate on their blinkered opinions, but get all antsy when others disagree with them.

Ah, perhaps you are referring to 'Dr' Amy here? The woman who claims to be an obstetrician/gynaecologist, but whose registration lapsed nearly a decade ago? That sounds like a fraudulent claim to me.

BTW your initial post said that you were 100% against home birth. Would you be able to point us to the the peer reviewed literature which has helped to inform that opinion?

I have also said all along that my views have nothing to do with the literature or studies that you all seem so fond of.

I've said it before until I'm blue in the face, but will repeat:

I have seen enough unpredictable obstetric disasters, including fetal and maternal demise, to know that I would never recommend a home birth. I consider them risky, borne of my own experience. That is my attitude to risk. Others may take the polarised view.

What part of that don't you understand?

So you have seen lots of "unpredictable obstetric disasters, including fetal and maternal demise" (way to sound like you're in touch with the people).

How many home births have you witnessed Carrie? Any?

I never claimed to be an expert, Shagmund.
Carrie you are being a little disingenuous here. In your opening post you you stated that your opinion was as a mother and an anaesthetist. This was a claim to some expertise. I got a sharp put down from you - you said words to the effect "I've been at 1000 deliveries, I know more than you".

I and others have quoted the Place of Birth study. I would have no problems if you expressed surprise because it didn't agree with your experience. However, it did look at the births of 64 538 women, so it can't be dismissed as being a small sample and is an order of magnitude substantially greater than that of your own experience, so perhaps their findings are worthy of consideration? I asked you if you had read the report? I didn't get an answer.

My particular take on the subject is that all women need an attendant qualified to deal with their particular needs. The reality is for many women that being in hospital doesn't guarantee that they will be attended because rising birth rates and staffing issues mean that the current system isn't coping. So how can we provide a system which entitles all women to appropriate care?

I have seen enough unpredictable obstetric disasters, including fetal and maternal demise, to know that I would never recommend a home birth. I consider them risky, borne of my own experience.

Another reference to your area of expertise.

How many of these upredictable obstetric disasters have happened with those who were booked for hospital births? You didn't answer the question about iatrogenic problems, I recall.

The RCOG doesn't agree with your opinion; isn't what they say worth some consideration? They say: "For women having a second or subsequent baby, home births and midwifery unit births appear to be safe for the baby and offer benefits for the mother." (Bold emphasis mine.)

If I may quote your own words "What part of that don't you understand?"

Carrie - Presumably you've seen hospital births go horribly wrong too, resulting in mums in HDU and babies in special care.

How do you feel about the fact that you have probably witnessed dozens of emergency c/s among low risk mothers that, according to to the research, may well have been averted if they'd stayed out of hospital? Or do you look at all women in this situation and think 'good think they laboured in hospital' and stonily ignore the fact that their problems are very frequently iatrogenic in origin?

Anyhow, midwives also see what you see. However, in addition they they see the full range of births so have a representative view, and the vast majority have no problem with recommending home birth as a safe option for many women.

Anyway - at least you've been humble enough to admit that your view isn't a fully informed one, so good on you in admitting your ignorance and bias in relation to this issue.

I was quite shocked when in labour with my two at how little continuity of care or any real care at all was involved for quite long periods. (that's how it felt - very unsettling with people popping in and out and leaving us on our own for long spells - especially with longer first labour with dd)

This is something that was going to happen twice in my life. I needed some knowledgeable, confident, friendly assistance for a few hours - ideally from someone I'd had a chance to meet before. Is that really too much to ask ? Quite shocking. Care on post-natal ward with DC1 also left so much to be desired - wish I'd gone straight home now and not stayed for first night

Awful to hear of 4 women dying on one mat unit over a summer, 2 deaths being related to staffing issues (upthread)
Relating this back to this thread I'd say with care like we've experienced in hospital it's no wonder women feel they will be better off at home - with more hope that a midwife will stay with you
I agree, especially if you live near the hospital - you can always transfer if needed (I only live 5 mins away - so think it could have been a good option with DC2 at least)

Why, when people read posts from people who are NOT anti homebirth, do they imagine all sorts of things that are not there?

How many times do we see on these threads ranty threads about women wanting unattended births, being anti hospital births, trying to force women into birthing in trees, hating doctors and rejecting modern medicine?

Then you read, re-read and read again only to find a thread with people stating nothing of the sort.
No pushing of agendas, no guilting women into homebirthing, no hippy dippy upside down in a hammock made of yak hair birthing stories.

It seems the vitirol comes from those who are anti home birth and the only way they can deal with HB is to make things up that do not exist.

Utterly bizarre.

If you dont want a home birth dont have one. No skin off my nose.
But please dont attempt to bully me, shame me, guilt me by projecting your ideas of what a HBer is like and why people have HBs.

Particularly those who have never seen one.

Absolutely MrsDeVere

"WhatthehellYou haven't answered what you expect a consultant to do for a low risk woman or how you anticipate this might work?"

What an utterly stupid question. Have you read my posts to shagmunfreud? I have explained that I think women should have the choice to decide who is going to be their ante natal care provider. I don't understand why that suggestion has caused such a stir here, especially since majority of other countries do give women that option. But apparently a woman choosing an obstetrician for her ante natal care is something of a scandal in the UK.

It isn't a question of what a consultant can do that a midwife can't. For that matter what can a midwife do that a consultant can't? It isn't a question of what one can do that the other can't, it's a question of how the individual woman wants her ante natal care to be approached- midwives and consultants have completely different ways of approaching pregnancy and birth. Every woman has the right to decide who will be better suited to her priorities.

LaVolcan
"Ah, perhaps you are referring to 'Dr' Amy here? The woman who claims to be an obstetrician/gynaecologist, but whose registration lapsed nearly a decade ago? That sounds like a fraudulent claim to me."

Get your facts straight. Dr Amy is a Harvard educated doctor who gave up the practice of medicine to raise her four children. Her registration did not lapse. You clearly dislike her, but there is no need to make up nonsense in a desperate attempt to discredit her.

FFS, do you people actually try to understand what people are saying in posts? Or do you just choose to interpret them as suits your own argument?

I can't put my view anymore plainly than I already have. Biased, probably. Ignorant ... hmmm, I don't think so.

An attitude just like 'Dr' Amys, indeed.

"You NCB'ers believe [this] but you're all wrong and stupid"

Whatthehell your attitude leaves a lot to be desired, my question was not 'stupid' as you so charmingly put it, but a genuine attempt to get a handle on where you were coming from as it seems such a pointless thing to argue for. Better obstetric care for those who need it, more staff to care for women and high risk pregnancies, resources to provide better postnatal care, yep I can understand an argument for all that. Low risk women to see an obstetric consultant to get exactly the same care they'd get from a midwife? Nope, don't understand it, it's a complete waste of resources and really just smacks of people not understanding that doctors aren't just better qualified midwives because they spend longer at university. Most doctors defer to midwives on normal low risk maternity care, they know that is not their area of expertise and they have more than enough to contend with the women who actually need them.

elizaregina Tue 03-Jul-12 20:44:21

"Because we should all have CHOICE.

If a woman feels SAFER by chosing that - why not let her have it?"

If I was that type of person, I'd no doubt feel safer if I had a world renowned consultant do my annual blood pressure review, rather than the practice nurse. But is it a sensible use of money that could be spent on saving other people's lives?

What I want to know is that an expert will be involved the moment my bp starts doing funny things it's not supposed to. Which is what I would want from pregnancy care, too, and which could usually be provided by either a homebirth midwife or midwife care ending in a hospital labour- either way with the understanding that any problem would be referred to a medical specialist. That seems a reasonable level of choice to me.

But insisting that every pregnant woman has to be seen by a consultant does seem like insisting that every mole has to be seen by an oncologist, just to make the woman feel safer.

What - have you actually had a baby?

I've had midwife led care and care from an obstetrician. This is what happens at a routine antenatal appointment:

Doctor or midwife

• greets you and takes some pee to test it for various things.

• asks how you're feeling
• takes your blood pressure
• measures fundal height
• looks at your notes and asks you if there's anything you need to ask her.

This is what happens at a routine antenatal appointment. There is absolutely NO difference in what happens during the appointment EXCEPT if you have health issues, in which case the doctor may conduct some additional tests or give you information about your condition.

Seriously - HOW do you think seeing a doctor makes it different?

There is NO difference in what you get if you're a low risk mum. There is no justification for the additional costs involved in providing doctors in this situation.