Homebirth, am I crazy?

[rubberducky87]

Just that really. I'm a first time mum and I really want a homebirth but scared because I've never done it before. Only a few more days until I'm due! My midwife is very supportive but I'm still nervous. Any stories to share??

Flowers you seem not to understand YOU should NOT be advising anyone! Please leave it to the medical professional

The OP asked Bees!!! This is an Internet forum where people discuss things! If the OP only required the advice of her midwife then why bother asking!!!
And I'm sorry but human experience is valid in terms of offering opinions. If you live through anything at all then you are likely to know enough about it to offer advise. As parents that's what we do all the time!!

Sigh

flower, you have said yourself that you don't understand the benefits of home birth over hospital birth. Clearly you haven't read a lot about those benefits. Also, you have completely ignored my earlier post on this subject explaining why for me personally, as hospital birth will be riskier for both me and my baby.

I suspect that OP has had her baby now. When she asked for stories to share, I assume that she wanted either positive stories, or at least ones where someone told of a problem arising but how it was dealt with. I suspect she didn't want to hear stories about extremely rare emergencies, which could happen even for someone already booked for a hospital birth. If she was of the same mind as Flowergirlmum she wouldn't have booked a home birth in the first instance.

The sort of contingency she might need to discuss with her midwife could be should she go to hospital if her waters broke before the head was engaged? If the babies head was engaged when she went into labour, then surely a cord prolapse couldn't happen?

I thought I had also read that cord prolapses were more likely with hospital births because of routine interventions like ARM?

Yes, now it has been mentioned it reminded me. One of the reasons I was told I would be advised to think about transfer is if I was in labour without the head starting to engage. Because of the risk of cord prolapse.

Flowerygirl also mentioned that she was on continuous monitoring when it happened. Any indication for continuous monitoring would be another reason you'd be advised to transfer.

Agree with penguins

Really don't want to comment anymore but I will answer your questions/comments and then leave it.
I was being monitored because my waters had broken. Contractions hadn't started. It was the usual monitoring that they do as standard (well I assume it's standard as it happened to me with both births) when you arrive at the hospital. The baby was pretty active and so the monitoring went on longer than normal as she kept bopping away from the sensor pads. When the first contraction happened the heart stopped. That led to them discovering the prolapse and the 3 minute countdown began. It wouldn't have been picked up at home as the monitor pads wouldn't have been used. We would have just been waiting for labour to begin in earnest.
I don't agree that the OP only asked for positive stories and I feel that to not present all sides would be ridiculous and quite irresponsible.

There are no doubt many people who will tell you, for example, that they smoked throughout pregnancy and it was ok. It doesn't make it the best choice though and I would hope that people wouldn't only tell the positives should an OP ask about that!!

As I say, I wasn't going to return. I have. I won't again.

That sounds terrifying. I am sorry you went through that.

It isn't a story about the safety of homebirth though.

As you say, you were only still being monitored because your baby was moving so much. In most cases you would have either been off the monitor or already sent home to await labour. What saved your daughter was the luck of being on the monitor, not where you had planned to give birth.

You don't say if the head was high. If it hadn't started to engage at your previous appointment then our mw's ask you to go in to check it has if your waters go. If it had been engaged and moved, they would transfer you as soon as they came out and discovered that. So a woman who had planned a homebirth would be as likely to be sent to hospital there as someone planning home birth.

Sorry. last two words should be hospital birth.

No, the baby was engaged. All was on track for a natural delivery. The baby was thought to be big which is actually a contra-indication for prolapse (it's more common with small babies- mine was 9lbs 7oz).

I totally agree though- luck was on my side that day. That's my point really. Had I not been in hospital the odds are very high that she would have died or at the very least been severely brain damaged. I could never therefore agree with anyone who argued for avoiding hospital.

I am sorry but no. The odds are almost as high in hospital. Your situation is vanishingly rare. The odds of it happening when you happened to be on continuous monitoring is even smaller. You could easily have been on your way in, waiting not on the monitor or sent home. In most hospital situations your birth would have ended in tragedy. As I said, I am sorry that happened to you.

I agree with penguins. Furthermore flowergirl, although you say that negative sides should be presented, I think that almost everyone who has a home birth will tell you that the disadvantages are discussed. I doubt very much whether the majority of women are told about the disadvantages of hospital births.

Maybe there's a reason for that?

Penguins- you're missing the vital point there. You're kind of arguing for me!! You are right- I could have been at home (ie not physically in hospital) and it would have ended in tragedy. Do you see my point here??

flowergirlmum why did you ignore my question?

No. You are missing mine.

Yes flowergirl, it obviously was a possible tragedy which thankfully was prevented but you could just as easily have been booked for a hospital birth, sent home because they were busy and you were deemed not to be in established labour, and it could have either happened at home with no-one in attendance or even worse, at the roadside. Would this automatically mean that you should tell all pregnant women that their hospital birth could potentially end disastrously?

In that scenario a planned home birth with a midwife in attendance could possibly make a difference.

I did once read a midwife somewhere, (can't remember where) stating that even the best equipped hospitals could not deal with two crash sections at once - and that one or both babies would suffer.

LaVcan you are so right

Which question Jackie? I haven't seen it.
You are arguing that the only safe place for my baby to be born was in hospital and you are quite right.

No one is disagreeing with that being safe for you, Flowergirlmum - just saying that what was right for you, is not right for everyone.

I had a friend who lost a baby as a result of placental abruption. She spent the last months of subsequent pregnancies in hospital. That was right for her, but we wouldn't expect every woman to spend the last month of pregnancy in hospital, just in case the same rare event happened.

I think in a cord prolapse it is absolutely right for everyone to be in hospital and as I've said many times- you have no idea whether it'll happen or not.

As we don't know who cord prolapse could happen too, all women should be in hospital on continuous monitoring from the moment they start to contract or their waters go.

Until that is the case, planning a hospital birth makes very little difference to your odds of a good outcome.

The fact you were saved by a super fast section is obviously great. That isn't the same as planning to birth in hospital making much of a difference to your odds of that outcome. You had to be unlucky enough to have the rarest sort of prolapse then lucky enough to happen to be on monitoring when it happened.

Women are advised to go into hospital when their waters go and are monitored for a reasonable amount of time.
And of course, I'm only speaking about cord prolapse because I know about it. There are many other difficult birth situations and many other reasons why a home birth might end in a hospital transfer. Have any of you had experience of a transfer situation?
Must be said, to a casual observer reading this you'd think my views were minority ones. It couldn't be further from the case.

Oh Jackie, just spotted the question and have already answered it