Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

midwife staffing Vs getting my homebirth??

105 replies

mad4mainecoons · 10/02/2010 21:13

Just wondering what your experiences were.

the maternity support worker called in today to drop off my homebirth kit (im 37 weeks) and asked how i was, to which i replied excited, and feeling really positive about the prospect of a homebirth if all remains well with me and bump .

and she said, well yes, you will be lucky if you do get one anyway, because the midwives are often too busy and you may be made to go into the hospital to deliver, as there will be noone to attend you at home

so im wondering how common this is, that you miss out on a homebirth for the simple reason of staffing levels!

does anyone have any experience??
im in North cornwall and i suppose it does vary between areas of the country.

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
randomama · 11/02/2010 18:57

Really interesting thread, I'm due to have a HB in a rural area this summer and have already been warned by the MW that someone in the next village is due the same time as me. I guess we'll have to see what happens. I hope things work out easily and without any problems for the OP.

Slightly on a tangent, and approaching theNHS midwifery resources issue from the opposite corner, i stumbled across this thread last night on the East Dulwich forum. Someone suggests that

"The best advice i have read on here is to say you're having a home birth and then change last minute to a hospital birth. You will then get a midwife for before/during and post natal care which is what i didn't get and wished i had in restrospect. You need someone to fight your corner and your partner may not be enough e.g. to get you that epidural (or care you need) should you want it"

The suggestion made by R&A has been made a few times on the EDF recently. Quite quite shocking.

Babieseverywhere · 11/02/2010 19:11

foxytocin Sorry things went so badly for you.

I fear ending up in HDU again, like I did after DD 'birth'. Even now all I can rememember is the oxygen mask, the beebing of the machines, drifting in and out, hearing my baby cry and not being able to reach her due to all the wires and tubes.

Totally understand why women opt for a home birth. Two qualified midwifes being there all the time verus tied to a bed with very little midwife input as she has 4/5 other women to see to. No brainer really.

Boobz · 11/02/2010 21:09

?the marginal cost of another birth in there is practically zero and probably less than sending two members of staff out for several hours to cover one birth when they could cover at least two in the hospital.?

But is it really practically zero, or even a marginal cost? As already said, the costs of having a hospital birth should all be added up as a long term cost including everything that Milly and Foxy pointed out:

-- infections requiring treatment following hospital births due to exposure and poor cleanliness
-- higher risks of birth injuries (like tears which may be more severe) and c/s which means longer hospital stay and require more care in the long term.
-- appts to see ob/gyns to repair injury etc.
-- more traumatic deliveries meaning more women are more likely to suffer PND and PTSD and require follow up treatment.
-- Babies are more likely to not breastfeed after hospital births which have long and short term health costs for the NHS.

In reply to this, you said Bellissima that ?none of these 'costings' will make up for the fact that the basic constraint, at present, is lack of enough MWs to go round? and ?does not take away the fact that if there aren't enough to go round then you can't allocate them both outside and inside the hospital at the same time if there aren't enough. The logical conclusion of your argument Boobz is that, in terms of value for money, every mother should have a HB. It doesn't take more than a few minutes to realise that there simply aren't enough MWs to cover that.?

I can see your logic (as you can see mine!) that to really minimise the costs of the above problems following hospital births, that ALL women (who can) should have a homebirth. But in reality, MOST women want hospital births. Yes it would be impractical to have everyone having a home birth, as there aren?t enough MWs to attend to every woman in the country giving birth at home, but in REALITY, only 2% of women want to have a home birth. These 2% of women are probably saving the NHS far more than it costs to send 2 MWs out to attend to them (because of everything said above). Therefore, does it not make sense to ?allow? this 2% to give birth at home as this saves the NHS money, freeing up more cash to employ more midwives (i.e. better salaries, for example, so that more people are encouraged to join the profession) so that shortages are reduced? Obviously it doesn?t work if EVERYONE wants a homebirth, but we live in a world actually very few people want one, and so the maths works to ?allow? these homebirths to happen.

Boobz · 11/02/2010 21:11

But as someone has said before now, this has been done a few times in various threads, so to try and ensure I am not just saying the same old thing, I am going to retire to bed!

CarmenSanDiego · 11/02/2010 21:26

So sorry, foxytocin

It's incredible how brutal the hospital birth process is. Most women are left alone for most of their labour and in a hospital setting, you're really in the hands of the staff. All the talk in the world about informed consent and choice can't help when you have a really difficult doctor or midwife.

Birth trauma/ptsd is really common but not much talked about. We're told to pull ourselves together. All that matters is you've got a lovely baby. etc. etc. and I've seen it ruin women's lives or turn into long term PND.

We don't just choose a home birth because we fancy looking at our own wallpaper during labour. Fuck off with your 'selfish' argument. Women have a right to labour and birth where they choose. If the NHS can't support this, they need new management and new incentives to support women.

Having more home births would be cheaper. For a start, it slices the caesarean rate dramatically. You're considerably less likely to need an expensive C-Section if you plan a home or birth centre birth. You're also less likely to need an epidural.

I don't call women who have elective C-Sections selfish. It's their choice if they feel it will give them the birth they want. If your concern is 'cost' then you should be having a go at them, not the home birth people, but that's not such an easy target as us treehuggers is it?

CarmenSanDiego · 11/02/2010 21:27

New incentives to support recruiting/training midwives, I mean.

foxytocin · 11/02/2010 21:28

looked like I killed the thread.

BE, I am mostly over the trauma now which is why I can shoot my gob off about it.

but i suspect it will keep rearing its ugly head in the future.

ps, anyone out there reading this thread and want my kick ass letter I sent to my hospital, let me know. they tried the 'if we are busy...' stunt with me too.

bibbitybobbityhat · 11/02/2010 21:38

Oh yes indeed Randomama. The only other forum I look at is the East Dulwich Forum (apart from my secret Sudoko forum) and I am not surprised to read that.

Because I was not very clued up and had never even considered a home birth, I was completely shocked at my NCT antenatal classes, to hear two random ED mummies say they had opted for home birth because they they would be guaranteed one to one midwife care - even if they had to transfer in to hospital.

So, guess what, they both did have to transfer in to hospital. One had venthouse delivery, one had emcs, but lucky old them, they kept the midwives they had throughout all that, no matter what the other needs on the labour ward were.

For all pg women now who are completely happy with putting themselves before anyone else locally who might be giving birth at the same time as you: opt for a home birth.

The system SUCKS.

foxytocin · 11/02/2010 21:41

oh, this 2 midwives malarky too.

I didn't want two midwives at my HB. I would have been quite happy with one.

the second midwife is not there for you, she is there due to hospital policy. so don't bill us home birth advocates for the second midwife. Bill the trust managers.

--

the 2 week I had off work with antenatal depression I would also like to bill to the hospital where I delivered my first. The PTSD with the first labour make me unable to think straight because I had to get that baby out somehow and I just could not go into a hospital to do that and I was fearful of the unknown. I wasn't going to let them cut me just to put a plaster over my trauma. The consultant, when I told him how awful things were the first time, assumed i'd want a c/s. inretrospect, he should have offered me a psychotherapy appt.

women are butchered so often in the maternity unit and people still can't see that a lot of it is because they are actually in an overstretched until which has had it's finances butchered, midwives leaving the profession because of poor working conditions which exacerbates the already poor care.

mad4mainecoons · 11/02/2010 21:56

wow, ladies thanks for all the replies!

sorry it has been done before and tbh i didnt really forsee sparking a debate on the costings and resources of hone v's hospital birth but it has been intresting reading and has given me a lot to think about.

im still hoping for my homebirth and will just wait and see what the day brings, i think i have decided not to "stamp my feet" "threaten to sue" or "have a tantrum" if they say noone is availible, ill just ask if they can possibly send a MW from another area and if not i suppose ill go in.

My friend who will be my birth partner has had 2 homebirths and wants to be a doula someday so i know she will give me great support at home in the early stages no matter what happens.

thanks again.

OP posts:
MillyMollyMoo · 11/02/2010 22:10

For all pg women now who are completely happy with putting themselves before anyone else locally who might be giving birth at the same time as you: opt for a home birth.

Well you know what I am happy to do that because my cousin and aunt have both lost children due to medical negligence, my best friends husband defends hospitals daily in the catalogue of errors they make, it's all in a days work to them. You're baby could die, it's just a day in the office and I'm afraid many of the front line staff who we all like to think of as the NHS angels are frankly just plain idle and crap at their jobs.
So if anything does going wrong whilst I'm being "cared" for I want somebody to be accountable and on a busy labour ward where 4 midwifes attempt to deliver 12 babies it's buried and called lack of resources, bollox to that somebody will look me in the eye and apologise which is more than my cousin and her husband ever received.
Everyone else can stamp their feet at the hospital and see how far that gets them.

pandora69 · 11/02/2010 22:11

"The system SUCKS."

The first thing that has been written that I think we would ALL agree on! In an ideal world it would be the right of the woman to labour where and how she choses. But in the real world this is not always possible. I am not saying this is right, and I have definitely not said at any point that women in hospital should have priority over women at home. However I do believe that when resources are only available in a supply which is lower than the demand for it that that is the wrong time to start arguing. I fully agree with the arguments that home birth leads to less intervention (and the only reason I am opting for a hospital birth is due to distance from the hospital and previous difficult birth,) but when midwives are stretched each individual midwife can achieve more per patient if she is not travelling to their home and if she has all of the equipment on hand.

Finally, I will say it again, just in case anyone has missed me saying it the first few times; I am not saying home birthers should not try for home births, but that in the case of exceptional circumstances they should be prepared to change their plan. The advice to ask for someone's name and then tell them your family will sue them if they are unable to send a midwife and something goes wrong is just a really stupidly stress-inducing thing to do while in labour - far easier to have prepared yourself for the birth you want wherever you end up. It is much easier to refuse to do something when the resources are there (ie refuse an epidural) than to demand something which you are dependent on someone else's compliance for. Wherever you are.

foxytocin · 11/02/2010 22:27

pandora, your line of thinking is the main reason that hospitals trot out the 'we are busy you will have to come in' line. because it works. time and again, it works.

i had the team leader tell me I was being selfish to all the women labouring in hospital.

Why in heaven's name would I want to go to an overstretched labour ward when these are the places that put women and babies at risk of death and injury! One more woman labouring on an overstretched ward is the last thing any of those women or midwife on that ward needs.

When we as the public ask firmly and consistently for a service they money will be allocated to provide it. If we keep wimpering and accepting that excuse, they keep using it to deny the service and the service is cut. simples.

the only one talking about throwing a tantrum and stamping one's feet to get a homebirth is imagining that this is necessary in labour. it is not. that line is used to put the frighteners on women. you are giving them ample notice to provide a service as all the other women who put it in their birth plans. People are paid a lot of money to plan for these eventualities. They can call on bank midwives and IM to come into work when they need to.

foxytocin · 11/02/2010 22:29

here is another thing to consider, when a woman who is planning a hospital goes into labour and can't make it in, would it be ok to tell her that they can't send a midwife because they are too busy so she will have to go in? hmm?

PootleTheFlump · 11/02/2010 22:47

I am going to avoid the hb vs hospital argument, because I can't put it as well as others have already done, but basically [what boobs said]

OP - I live in Devon, and my MW time run an integrated model, whereby the on call mw from your team comes to your home when you are in labour, and then delivers the baby at home or in hospital, depending on your preference/circumstances at the time. As a friend had had to go in as there were none of her team available, I asked about this many times and was reassured it was a rare occurance. However, when I rang in the middle of the night, there was no cover available, so I was "invited" in to the hospital. I was informed that the rest of "my" team would be on in the morning, and luckily I did not progress that quickly and was seen in office hours. The mw who came out was going to be off duty in the eve and again there would be no cover that night, so when I got to 5pm and was only 6cm I got really stressed I would be made to transfer at a really late stage, but they reassured me that they would never do this, and another team would send someone. As it was, DD arrived all in a rush and the mw went home only 10 mins late!!

I second what someone said earlier, just make sure you labour and deliver in office hours

PS - My homebirth was the best thing to ever happen to me and I recommend them to anyone who will listen. Good luck!

PootleTheFlump · 11/02/2010 22:55

Well, obviously DD is the best thing ever!! But her mode of arrival was a v positive experience

Boobz · 11/02/2010 23:03

Good luck mad4mainecoons -- I will be looking out for the birth announcement in 3 weeks time... on our homebirth thread you joined perhaps? Do you think your baby has turned yet?

bibbitybobbityhat · 11/02/2010 23:05

Foxy, I think you might be guilty of a wee bit of exaggeration here:

"Why in heaven's name would I want to go to an overstretched labour ward when these are the places that put women and babies at risk of death and injury!"

All labour wards are overstretched. That they can usually deliver healthy babies without one to one midwife care is to be commended, not scorned.

Infact, can anyone explain to me why homebirth mortality rates are not significantly LOWER than hospital mortality rates, given that the hospital ends up having to cope with

  1. the babies whose mothers' pregnancies were not deemed suitable for home birth
  1. all the emergencies, sudden onset labours.
  1. the babies for whom home birth was not progressing/complications had arisen/mother decided she wanted to go in to hospital.

I should think hospital birth outcomes would be on a par if not better than home birth outcomes if all women got a dedicated midwife throughout labour and two through delivery, with no time constraints and other women queuing up behind them in the labour ward.

foxytocin · 11/02/2010 23:15

let me rephrase it a little bibbity:

overstretched mat wards put women and babies at risk of death and injury.

as opposed to a mat ward which is working at average capacity or lower.

Better outcomes for the women in those scenarios.

I was one of those women who has been put at risk of injury and death and so was my baby. I don't know if the ward was particularly busy that night.

I'll rephrase what someone else has said. If you want a hospital birth with the best chances of a good outcome, try not to go into labour at night, on the weekend or on a bank holiday.

foxytocin · 11/02/2010 23:21

"All labour wards are overstretched. That they can usually deliver healthy babies without one to one midwife care is to be commended, not scorned."

I prefer to look at this idea in a different light. To me it is a testament to the resilience of women and babies that they can go through labour and delivery and have half way decent outcomes despite the lack of support on labour wards.

It is also a testament to the commitment of midwives who battle on against the lack of funding and over work that more lives are not lost.

someone said below that so many women around the world wished they could have hospital care while in labour. I think that is sadly true because outside the West many people think hospitals are a panaecea. but it is not hospitals which would make birth outcomes improve. it is one woman to one midwife, access to antenatal care and access to a good nutrition in childhood, adulthood and during pregnancy.

bellissima · 12/02/2010 08:56

"It is not hospitals which would make birth outcomes improve. Its is one woman to one MW, access to antenatal care and good nutrition..."

No foxy - it is all of those things PLUS access to a doctor and possibly a surgical team when things go wrong. For the majority of births then the factors which you quote are indeed correct - couldn't agree more. But a certain percentage of births will always require more than that, and those are the births which go terribly wrong where hospital care is not available. Those are the births which result in deaths in countries where access to hospital care is restricted. Those are the births for which medieval MWs and 'doctors' (such as they were) carried instruments which allowed them to dismember the baby, in extremis, should it become stuck beyond hope, in order to give the mother a chance of survival. Those are the births, even more recently, in which my own (well-nourished) mother would have died having my sister, had the family not moved from an out-lying village to the centre of Exeter so that she could be rush to the hospital when she haemorraged massively. They are, of course, a small percentage of births, but for those births hospitals are far more than a 'panacea'. There is enough personal experience in my own family to assure you of that.

monniemae · 12/02/2010 12:32

bibbitybobbityhat and randomama - the two things are different.

"For all pg women now who are completely happy with putting themselves before anyone else locally who might be giving birth at the same time as you: opt for a home birth.".

Lots of planned homebirths end necessarily in hospital birth, because of complications or concerns, or because the woman wants/needs different pain relief. I think it's ridiculous to see opting for a homebirth as selfish because you might end up in hospital anyway.

What Randomama is talking about is deception - saying you want a homebirth when you know you will want to transfer to hospital, because you want that guaranteed one-to-one MW care. Which may lead to more woman being denied MW attendance at their homebirth because the other MWs have all gone to hospital to care for women who had no intention of giving birth at home in the first place.

Not that I would be quick to castigate them - opne friend who gave birth in Kings spent their labour alone in a toilet because of an apparent lack of available staff.

I'm uncomfortable with the response to 'the system is currently unfair and there aren't enough MWs to go around' becoming 'so everyone put up with inadequate resources - if that woman's experience is shitty then so should yours be'. Women need to worry about their own child's birth, not the staffing stuctures and available resources in their area.

We should be encouraging the OP to know what she can do to help her have the birth she wants, ie empowering her, not encouraging her to put up and shut up. This doesn't mean she has to turn into a hideously selfish ogre and threaten to sue them all, just that she and her DP should have some awareness of what they might be able to say / ask to make sure that if at all possible she CAN have a homebirth.

Babieseverywhere · 12/02/2010 14:40

I agree with foxytocin.

I nearly died as I was tied to a bed monitored only by machines and a panicking midwife with too many mothers to 'look after' and not enough hands.

My complications only happened because I was tied to an hospital bed and ignored, classic waterfall of interventions.

If I had one to one care at home OR in hospital my birth would never of got that bad and this is what the midwifes and consultants told me after the fact.

Which is why I am yet again fighting for support at a home birth, as I will NOT get support I need in hospital.

pandora69 · 12/02/2010 15:30

"When we as the public ask firmly and consistently for a service the money will be allocated to provide it. If we keep wimpering and accepting that excuse, they keep using it to deny the service and the service is cut. simples."

But it's not so simples, is it? If every incidence of a woman asking for midwives to attend her labour at home, and whether that request is successful or not, is logged, then you will have facts and figures to go into battle with and ask the NHS why there is not more funding for what is clearly an underfunded area of care in demand. On the other hand, if noone is recording who is asking for what, and what they actually get in the end, it doesn't matter how many women ask for a midwife at home while in labour, the information will not be getting through to the people who hold the purse strings and the policy makers. What I am trying to say here is ask for something you truly believe in, but ask in an effective way. Simply hoping that if enough women shout at receptionists the message will get through is not going to work.

On another note entirely (and recognising that this is a bit of thread creep here,) you say;
"someone said below that so many women around the world wished they could have hospital care while in labour. I think that is sadly true because outside the West many people think hospitals are a panaecea. but it is not hospitals which would make birth outcomes improve. it is one woman to one midwife, access to antenatal care and access to a good nutrition in childhood, adulthood and during pregnancy. "

That is a very long way from the truth. As someone who supports several children's and womens' charities in Africa personally (ie I actually go out there 4-5 times a year and help out in person,) I see the problems they are up against and talk to the women about their babies and their deaths. They are often attended in labour and at the birth by a trained nurse and also a village traditional midwife, plus they are supported by the women of their family. They have lots of babies between them, and even young girls will have helped out in dozens of situations. They receive a lot of one-to-one attention. But what they are missing is access to modern western medicine and yes, hospitals, and for all that you think a hospital is a place of death and injury, if you made the same statement in a developing or third world country you would be laughed out of the door.

One woman one midwife is a cause I am fully behind - I suffered during the birth of my daughter due to a badly handled shift change. But even with one midwife to attend a labouring woman from start to finish, they would still be working with the back up, facilities and knowledge that a western hospital provides. For example, a friend of mine had a second very nice home birth, and then was rushed with sirens wailing in an ambulance to the hospital with very serious haemorrhaging, which was successfully treated and she was home again 2 days later. She HAD one midwife and a homebirth, but what saved her life was the hospital. Of course we have no knowledge as to whether her situation would have been better or worse if she had been in hospital from the start, but the fact is that without the hospital at all she would have bled to death. A lot of women are able to labour safely at home these days thanks to observations made in clinical settings, ie hospitals. How else do you go about gathering your info? A woman would be mad to attempt a home birth, for example, with a plancenta praevia - even the celebrated Ina May says this - but these days you would know if you had this situation before the actual birth thanks to your access to a hospital. Even if you go to a private clinic that looks more like a health spa for your scan, you will still be scanned by a doctor who has had training in a hospital setting, and gained their experience in a hospital. To put hospitals down as a place of death and injury is extremely derogatory to the level of care that we as patients of the NHS have avavilable to us.

Yes, I will agree that they could do some things better, and yes, I will agree that there are situations where they mess up with terrible consequences. But the overriding evidence is that hospitals save many, many more lives than they cost, and that we as a nation are very privileged to be able to get medical treatment without money changing hands regardless of who you are. This is a luxury not afforded to many other countries round the world.

I can't believe you have managed to make me actually stick up for the NHS like this! I can't stand hospitals myself, but wouldn't be without them.

foxytocin · 12/02/2010 21:33

I'll like to restate some of my posts but briefly as I can't answer every issue raised but will try to clarify a couple things.

Hospitals are a place for sick people. The vast majority of pregnancies are normal and therefore not necessarily the best place for hospitals. When something goes clinically wrong with a pregnancy, a hospital should be a safe place for women to receive the medical attention they require.

in my own experience in the UK, the lack of treatment I received in a hospital put my own life and my child's in grave danger. It should have been the safest place for me to have been and while we both left without injury, the trauma we suffered over 8 days of hospitalisation should never had occurred but for a human being who would have listened to what I was trying to communicate. I was therefore dangled over a precipice only to be rescued from it. Had I been listened to, I would not have blocked up an HDU suite.

This sort of truama (physical and mental) is the kind of butchery that should not occur in a maternity unit.

Women in the developing world by and large do not need HDU units to improve vastly improve the outcomes for themselves and their babies. By and large they need comparatively cheap services and medical care. Of course all over the world medical emergencies occur and no one would like to not have the care available for them. But incidences like placental abruption are v infrequent and no bush village in Africa can evacuate a woman in this circumstance in time to save her life or that of her baby. OTOH, pre-eclampsia is much more common and very cheap to treat, even in the bush in Africa. I would rather see 200 women treated successfully for PE and at a fraction of the cost of saving one life from placental abruption, any where in the world. Even if it was me or my baby dying from placental abruption.

You can google the morbidity and mortality from eclampsia in this country. I and maybe even my daughter were almost dead in a major teaching hospital in the UK, not because I did not have help or medicine or the latest equipment available. it was because no human being would listen.

unfortunately, this sort of nightmare scenario is not uncommon in medical units in the US or the UK. Midwives and obstetricians often times rely too heavily on listening to machines rather than to the woman. Unfortunately many people like standanddeliver cannot see that the problems were created by not listening to the pregnant woman and her body.

Women in the developing world may view hospitals as a panaecea and in many cases hospitals save lives. They also have also created some bad practices over time which damage lives. That is what I am trying to say. There is no point trading in all the good things about traditional birth attendants who are cheap and in many instances are providing a good service for people who can never afford the financial cost of getting into a hospital or logistically get to one frequently enough for regular antenatal checks or delivery when the alternative would be to train TBAs into best practice in areas where they lack knowledge.

I come from a country where TBAs still practice. Ina May Gaskin learnt the now named '[http://www.inamay.com/?page_id=30 Gaskin Maneouvre]]' from a TBA/midwife who is from my country. She learnt it from TBA in the Guatemalan Highlands from Mayan TBAs. The midwives from The Farm have gone to Central America to share best practice with TBAs there because that is what knowledge is good for: for sharing - and maybe it is a way of paying back what they have learnt. There is will be no other viable alternative for millions of poor women in Guatemala, El Salvador, Belize or Guatemala in my lifetime. I am eternally grateful on their behalf for travelling to my country to enhance the skills of TBAs there at their own cost.

TBAs all over the world have good practice which we can learn from and not so good practice which they can learn for us. Things as simple as cutting the cord with a clean instrument to prevent neonatal tetanus. no vaccination needed. cheap for us but expensive to transport and keep in the forests of northern Laos. (pampers are sponsoring vaccinations against neonatal tetanus to sell pampers - a good thing but ultimately they are only doing it because pampers benefit) passing on the knowledge to midwives in a region is not as glam but it is cheaper and by far more sustainable.

pandora when I tantrummed complained and demanded my choice for a home birth. I can tell you that it was measured, well thought out, articulate and was delivered by hand to the hospital at 28 weeks or so pregnant. Not at the end of a phone, screaming like a banshee to some poor receptionist at 3am when I was actually in labour.

I should think that is the sort of thing women and their partners ought to do when they are denied their choice with that nasty little fob off. Nasty because it is manipulating the very primal urge to protect an unborn child at a time when a mother and her partner are at their most vulnerable. It is a disgusting tactic in my humble opinion.

I am taking my dd1 to bed.

I hope you got to the end of this mammoth post and taht it makes sense. I don't have time to preview it.

Swipe left for the next trending thread